On April 8, 2020, the U.S. Department of Education published a Q&A that answers questions related to use of Department grant funds during the novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) with respect to compensation, travel, and conference costs that are otherwise allowable costs under applicable program statutes and regulations. factsheet-fiscal-questions
On April 1, the U.S. Department of Education (“USDE”) published a long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for Distance Education and Innovation in the Federal Register. The proposed regulations are the final part of the consensus negotiated rulemaking that occurred in 2019. This regulation comes at an important time as institutions across the country are transitioning to varying forms of distance education due to COVID-19, albeit temporary or longer term. The NPRM represents the next step in the Department’s agenda to modernize its distance education regulations to promote innovation and reflect technological advancements, while protecting program quality. One key component of the NPRM is the new proposed definition of “regular” and “substantive” interaction between instructors and students for Title IV eligibility purposes. In the past, Title IV institutions have been assessed multi-million dollar fines for violating substantive and regular interaction requirements that were not well-defined in regulation. The NPRM also proposes revised credit and clock hour definitions directly addressing distance education and makes changes to recognize subscription based delivery of online education.
If your institution offers distance education and/or direct assessment programs, you should strongly consider analyzing and commenting on the proposed regulations. The Department has indicated that the Final Rule will be published by November 1, 2020, to allow an effective date of July 1, 2021. Comments are due by May 4, 2020 and must be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or via postal mail, commercial delivery, or hand delivery. The Department will not accept comments submitted by fax or by email or those submitted after the comment period.
Summary of the Major Provisions
As provided in the NPRM, the proposed regulations would:
Late on Friday, April 3, the Department posted updated guidance for institutions that recognizes the regulatory flexibilities authorized by Congress in the CARES Act, but also addresses other areas including Clery Act, Distance Education, Foreign Schools and FERPA, among other issues relevant to the COVID-19 interruption. The guidance is effective through June 30, 2020 unless otherwise extended by the Department. The Higher Education Relief Fund portion of CARES ACT is not addressed and will be the subject of future guidance.
– April 03, 2020
(OPE Announcements) Subject: UPDATED Guidance for interruptions of study related to Coronavirus (COVID-19)
https://ifap.ed.gov/electronic-announcements/040320UPDATEDGuidanceInterruptStudyRelCOVID19
The CARES Act appropriates $30.75 billion for an Education Stabilization Fund available through September 30, 2021, to assist governors and postsecondary institutions with preventing, preparing for and responding to COVID-19. The Act also includes important student relief and temporary regulatory flexibilities.
For more information, please visit the Duane Morris website.
Due to the outbreak of coronavirus (COVID-19), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that institutions of higher education consider postponing or canceling upcoming study abroad or foreign exchange programs. However, this advice has raised pressing questions about how this would affect Title IV, Higher Education Act (HEA) federal financial aid and a student’s ability to finish the term if a program is interrupted or canceled. In response, on March 5, 2020, the U.S. Department of Education’s office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) offered guidance permitting temporary flexibility and clarifying how higher education institutions can continue to comply with Title IV regulations for students whose activities are impacted by COVID-19.
DO NOT BE FOOLED BY “STANDARD FORM LEASES” and
BEWARE OF CHANGING RULE ON TREATMENT OF LEASES IN TITLE IV COMPOSITE SCORE
There is no such thing as a “standard lease,” even if the document has that title at the top.
Julie Mebane, Partner (Real Estate), Duane Morris LLP
If your institution is reviewing a lease form and you are considering signing it for the tenant, make sure that you don’t gloss over it in the belief that its terms cannot be negotiated. Usually, many lease terms can be modified and the tenant’s position can be enhanced if you pay attention to its language, especially a few important provisions:
These provisions of a lease, and many others, can usually be negotiated and improved for the tenant. Don’t consider any lease, even a pre-printed form that says it’s “standard,” to be carved in stone.
New and Extended Lease Rules Are Changing for Title IV Composite Score Purposes
Katherine Brodie, Partner (Education), Duane Morris LLP
On September 23, 2019, the U.S. Department of Education published a Final Rule that applies to all higher education institutions that participate in the federal student financial aid programs under Title IV of the Higher Education Act (“Title IV programs”).
Specifically, the Final Rule amends the annual Title IV financial responsibility composite score to take into account the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standard Update (ASU) 2016-2, which requires that leases be treated as both right-of-use assets and liabilities. Public entities must adopt 2016-2 for leases entered into after fiscal years starting on or after December 15, 2018. Private entities must adopt the new standard starting January 1, 2020. FASB, however, has proposed delaying the private entity implementation date to January 1, 2021.
The Department of Education’s Final Rule exempts all leases entered into before December 15, 2018 from application of 2016-2 for composite score purposes. For leases entered into on or after December 15, 2018 (which the Department states can include extensions or modifications of pre-December 15, 2018 leases), auditors must apply FASB ASU 2016-2 and, as a result, some institutions’ composite scores may be adversely impacted. Since FASB ASU 2016-2 does not subject private entities to the new standard until at least January 1, 2020, there is an argument that the Department should not have an institution’s official composite score calculation reflect the new lease accounting standards until such time as the new standard is required under GAAP, but the Department has not yet clarified its position on this point (despite several pending requests for clarity on that point). Bottom line, as institutions negotiate new leases or seek to extend or modify current leases, they should consult Title IV counsel and their auditors for guidance because certain lease terms may significantly impact the carrying value of a leased asset under the new FASB standard as applied by the Department of Education.
by John M. Simpson.
On October 4, 2019 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed the judgment of a district court dismissing an action brought by an economics professor at the University of Maine at Machias seeking to invalidate, on First Amendment grounds, a Maine statute that governs the collective bargaining process between the University of Maine system and its faculty. Reisman v. Associated Faculties of the Univ. of Maine, No. 18-2201 (1st Cir. Oct. 4, 2019). Continue reading “First Circuit Rejects Professor’s First Amendment Challenge to Maine Law Governing University Collective Bargaining”
Authors: Julie Mebane, Partner (Real Estate) and Katherine Brodie, Partner (Higher Education)
Nothing is more unwelcome than a big surprise after your institution has invested hours and dollars in a new instructional location. Up front due diligence is essential, and it needs to identify issues that may impair your ability to operate at a new location or expose the institution to significant liabilities. Be sure to consider the following and utilize counsel well versed in college and university property acquisitions and applicable regulations to examine any problems you may encounter:
Most of these questions can be answered with the help of a forthcoming landlord when negotiating a new lease and with the assistance of experienced counsel. If the property is being purchased, the seller is likely required by law to make certain representations and warranties and to disclose property-related information and materials during the buyer’s due diligence period.
So don’t be surprised – get the information you need before you commit to a new campus or instructional location.
By John M. Simpson.
On September 20, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed a district court judgment that had dismissed a retaliation case brought by a university veterinarian who was allegedly terminated for making internal and external complaints about the conditions in which laboratory animals were being maintained. Singletary v. Howard University, No. 18-7158 (D.C. Cir. Sept. 20, 2019). The appellate panel deciding the case split on the question of whether plaintiff was engaged in protected activity or was simply doing her job. Continue reading “D.C. Circuit Revives False Claims Act Retaliation Case Against University”
This afternoon the U.S. Department of Education posted the pre-publication notice of the Final Borrowers Defense to Repayment regulation which rewrites the regulations promulgated under the Borrower Defense to Repayment provision of the Higher Education Act (HEA). A summary of the rule can be found here. The official version will be published in the Federal Register. Continue reading “U.S. Department of Education Issues Final Borrowers Defense to Repayment Regulation”
