Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC) ACCSC Summary of Grounds for Probation Action Updated November 2, 2012 Page 1 of 9 Public Notice of Probation as of November 2, 2012 The following institutions are currently on Probation as directed by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC). Institutions that appear on a previous list but not here have had the Probation Order vacated. A summary of the reasons for Probation for each institution follows this list. The specific accreditation standards cited in this document are available for review by downloading the Standards of Accreditation from ACCSC’s website.1 PROBATION ORDER ISSUED Origination School School # City Next Review Date Arizona Automotive Institute MS 000334 Glendale, AZ June 6, 2012 Nov 2012 ATI Career Training Center MS 001576 Ft. Lauderdale, FL June 6, 2012 Nov 2012 North Richland ATI Career Training Center MS 055126 Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Hills, TX ATI Career Training Center BR 072240 Houston, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 South Texas Vocational Technical BR 072291 San Antonio, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Institute ATI Career Training Center MS 055202 Dallas, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 ATI Career Training Center BR 072115 Oklahoma City, OK Sep 2011 Nov 2012 ATI Career Training Center BR 072210 Dallas, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072116 Richardson, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out Completion of ATI Technical Training Center MS 000704 Dallas, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072147 Garland, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072236 Waco, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out ATI Career Training Center* MS 001339 Oakland Park, FL Dec 2011 Under Appeal ATI Career Training Center* BR 001339 Miami, FL Dec 2011 Under Appeal ATI Career Training Center* BR072154 Albuquerque, NM June 2012 Under Appeal Performance Training Institute MS 070399 Toms River, NJ Mar 2012 Feb 2013 Prism Career Institute MS 009027 Upper Darby, PA Aug 2012 Feb 2013 1 http://www.accsc.org/Accreditation/Standards-of-Accreditation.aspx ACCSC Summary of Grounds for Probation Action Updated November 2, 2012 Page 2 of 9 PROBATION ORDER ISSUED Origination School School # City Next Review Date Professional Massage Training Subject to Court MS 070395 Springfield, MO Dec 2011 Center Action UEI College BR 072368 Bakersfield, CA June 2012 Nov 2012 UEI College MS 066364 Fresno, CA June 2012 Nov 2012 UEI College BR 070735 Gardena, CA June 2012 Nov 2012 UEI College BR 072331 Riverside, CA June 2012 Nov 2012 Westech College BR 072283 Moreno Valley, CA June 2012 Nov 2012 *These schools have received a revocation or denial of accreditation action subject to appeal. Per ACCSC Rules, a school remains accredited operating under a Probation Order until the final disposition of an appeal. Click here to see the Public Disclosure of Adverse Actions. What Does Probation Mean? In cases where the Commission has reason to believe that a school is not in compliance with accreditation standards and other requirements, the Commission may, at its discretion, place a school on Probation. A school subject to a Probation Order will be required to demonstrate corrective action and compliance with accrediting standards. The Commission may require a school to submit Commission-directed reports and receive on-site evaluation teams in conjunction with a Probation Order. Failure to demonstrate compliance with accrediting standards or other accrediting requirements by the end of the probationary period may result in the school being removed from the accredited list. When a Probation Order is directed, a written notice is sent promptly to the school. The notice: • States fully the reasons why the Probation Order was issued; • Identifies the standard and other accreditation requirements with which the school may not be in compliance; • Explains the reasons and cite the evidence indicating that the school may not be in compliance with accreditation requirements; and • Advises the school of its obligations under the Probation Order and the deadline for response. ACCSC’s Rules of Process and Procedure require a school subject to a Probation Order to inform current and prospective students that the school has been placed on Probation and that additional information regarding that action can be obtained from the Commission’s website2. A summary of the Probation Order is made public via the Commission’s website in accordance with Section VII (L)(7), Rules of Process and Procedure, Standards of Accreditation. 2 http://accsc.org/Content/CommissionActions/SchoolsonProbation.asp ACCSC Summary of Grounds for Probation Action Updated November 2, 2012 Page 3 of 9 ACCSC DISCLOSURE OF COMMISSION ACTION SUMMARY OF GROUNDS FOR PROBATION ACTION ORIGINATION DATE: AUGUST 9, 20113 UPDATED: JUNE 7, 2011 The following affiliated school are currently operating under an ACCSC Probation Order: ATI Technical Training Center ATI Career Training Center ATI Career Training Center 6627 Maple Avenue 6351 Boulevard 26, Suite 100 10003 Technology Blvd. West Dallas, Texas 75235 North Richland Hills, Texas 76180 Dallas, Texas 75220 ATI Career Training Center ATI Career Training Center ATI Career Training Center 3035 South Shiloh Road 11420 East Freeway, Suite #100 1111 Digital Drive, Ste. 101 Garland, Texas 75041 Houston, Texas 77029 Richardson, Texas 75081 ATI Career Training Center South Texas Vocational Technical Inst. ATI Career Training Center 1417 South Valley Mills Dr. 734 SE Military Dr. 2998 Stemmons Freeway Waco, Texas 75711 San Antonio, Texas 78214 Dallas, Texas 75247 ATI Career Training Center ATI Career Training Center ATI Career Training Center 7265 Northwest 25th Street 3501 Northwest 9th Avenue 4575 San Mateo Blvd., Ste. 130G Miami, Florida 33122 Oakland Park, Florida 33309-5900 Albuquerque, NM 87109 At its May 2011 meeting, the Commission directed all 15 ACCSC-accredited institutions affiliated with ATI Enterprises, Inc. (“ATI”) to show cause as to why accreditation should not be revoked. Subsequent to that action, the Commission received notification that the Texas Workforce Commission (“TWC”) has acted to revoke the approval of 22 programs offered at the ATI campuses in Texas for reasons which appear to align with ACCSC’s concerns and areas of inquiry. In addition to the program approval revocation action there are several conditions which ATI must fulfill and sanctions with which ATI must comply. At the August 2011 meeting based on the original issues set forth in the Commission’s Show Cause Order coupled with the action by the TWC, the Commission acted to place all ATI institutions located in Texas on Probation. At the November 2011 meeting the Commission voted to take the following actions effective December 7, 2011: 1. Continue the Probation Order to February 2012 for all schools in Texas due to ongoing concerns with the schools’ financial structure and compliance with state and federal regulations. 2. Expand the Probation Order for ATI Technical Training Center (M000704) located on Maple Avenue Dallas, Texas to the May 2012 meeting due to the Commission’s findings regarding integrity of records. 3. Place ATI Career Training Center in Miami, Florida and its main school ATI Career Training Center in Oakland Park, Florida on Probation to May 2012 based on the original issues set forth in the Commission’s Show Cause Order and the Commission’s findings regarding the integrity of records. 3 The origination date of the Probation action for ATI-Miami and ATI-Oakland Park is December 7, 2011. ACCSC Summary of Grounds for Probation Action Updated November 2, 2012 Page 4 of 9 At the May 2012 meeting, the Commission voted to revoke the accreditation of ATI Career Training Center located in Oakland Park, Florida and ATI Career Training Center located in Miami, FL. As a result, the branch campus ATI Career Training Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico has also had its accreditation revoked. The Commission also voted to: • Continue the Probation Order for the following schools due to ongoing concerns regarding the school’s financial structure, integrity of records, and low student achievement outcomes: ‐ ATI Career Training Center, Dallas, Texas (M055202); ‐ ATI Career Training Center, Dallas, Texas (B072210); ‐ ATI Career Training Center, North Richland Hills, Texas (M055126); ‐ ATI Career Training Center, Houston, Texas (B072240); ‐ South Texas Vocational Technical Institute San Antonio, TX (B072291); and ‐ ATI Career Training Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (B072115). • Place on Probation the following schools as a result of the Commission’s findings regarding the financial structure of the system, integrity of records, and low student achievement outcomes: ‐ Arizona Automotive Institute (M000334) in Glendale, Arizona (“AAI-Phoenix”) and ‐ ATI Career Training Center (M001576), Ft. Lauderdale, Florida (“ATI-Ft. Lauderdale”). Summary of Grounds for Probation: 1. Financial Soundness: The ATI System of Schools must demonstrate financial soundness with resources sufficient for the proper operation of the schools and discharge of obligations to students (Section I (C)(1), Substantive Standards, Standards of Accreditation). 2. Integrity of Employment Records: ATI must demonstrate that the Commission can place a high level of reliance upon information, data, and statements provided by the ATI system of schools, which is fundamental to the accreditation process, through supplying verifiable records of graduate initial employment that supports reported employment rates (Preamble, Introduction, Rules of Process and Procedure; Section VI (C)(3),
Recommended publications
  • FY 2014 Management Challenges
    U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General FY 2014 Management Challenges November 2013 Office of Inspector General Kathleen S. Tighe Inspector General November 2013 This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Inspector General, FY 2014 Management Challenges. Please Note: The Inspector General’s FY 2014 Management Challenges is available on the ED OIG Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/reports.html. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION The Inspector General November 12, 2013 MEMORANDUM TO: The Honorable Arne Duncan Secretary of Education FROM: Kathleen S. Tighe Inspector General SUBJECT: Management Challenges for Fiscal Year 2014 The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 requires the U.S. Department of Education (Department), Office of Inspector General to identify and report annually on the most serious management challenges the Department faces. The Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 requires the Department to include in its agency performance plan information on its planned actions, including performance goals, indicators, and milestones, to address these challenges. To identify management challenges, we routinely examine past audit, inspection, and investigative work, as well as issued reports where corrective actions have yet to be taken; assess ongoing audit, inspection, and investigative work to identify significant vulnerabilities; and analyze new programs and activities that could post significant challenges because of their breadth and complexity. Last year, we presented four management challenges: improper payments, information technology security, oversight and monitoring, and data quality and reporting.
    [Show full text]
  • Comments from the Legal Aid Community to the Department of Education Re
    Comments from the Legal Aid Community to the Department of Education re: Proposed Regulations on Program Integrity and Improvement: State Authorization of Distance Education Programs Docket ID ED-2016-OPE-0050 August 24, 2016 Comments submitted on behalf of: East Bay Community Law Center Empire Justice Center Housing and Economic Rights Advocates National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients) LAF (formerly Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago) Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles Legal Aid Society of San Diego, Inc. Legal Services NYC New York Legal Assistance Group Project on Predatory Student Lending of the Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School Public Law Center Margaret Reiter in her individual capacity Introduction These comments, submitted on behalf of organizations across the country that provide free legal assistance to low-income student loan borrowers, address the Department’s proposed regulations regarding the state authorization of distance education programs.1 Our comments are informed by our work as legal aid practitioners. We strive to meet the legal needs of individuals 1 81 Fed. Reg. 48598 (proposed July 25, 2016). 1 and families with limited economic means, who otherwise would be without professional legal assistance. Margaret Reiter also joins in these comments in her individual capacity, not as a representative of any organization or agency. She was a consumer investigator with the Los Angeles County Consumer Affairs Department for four years and worked for 20 years as a consumer prosecutor with the California Attorney General’s Consumer Law Section. She investigated or prosecuted businesses engaged in many types of misrepresentations and unlawful business practices, including postsecondary for-profit schools.
    [Show full text]
  • State Inaction: Gaps in State Oversight of For-Profit Higher
    STATE INACTION GAPS IN STATE OVERSIGHT OF FOR-PROFIT HIGHER EDUCATION NCLC® NATIONAL CONSUMER December 2011 LAW CENTER® © Copyright 2011, National Consumer Law Center, Inc. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Deanne Loonin is a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) and the Director of NCLC’s Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project. She was formerly a legal services attorney in Los Angeles. She is the author of numerous publications and reports, including NCLC publications Student Loan Law and Surviving Debt. Jillian McLaughlin is a research assistant at NCLC. She graduated from Kalamazoo College with a degree in political science. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report is a release of the National Consumer Law Center’s Student Loan Borrower Assis- tance Project [www.studentloanborrowerassistance.org]. The authors thank NCLC colleagues Carolyn Carter, Jan Kruse, and Persis Yu for valuable comments and assistance. We also thank Allen Agnitti, Laura Kirshner, and Kurt Terwilliger for research assistance. The findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the authors alone. NCLC® ABOUT THE NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER The National Consumer Law Center®, a nonprofit corporation founded in 1969, assists NATIONAL consumers, advocates, and public policy makers nationwide on consumer law issues. CONSUMER NCLC works toward the goal of consumer justice and fair treatment, particularly for those whose poverty renders them powerless to demand accountability from the economic LAW marketplace. NCLC has provided model language and testimony on numerous consumer CENTER law issues before federal and state policy makers. NCLC publishes an 18-volume series ® of treatises on consumer law, and a number of publications for consumers.
    [Show full text]
  • Government Investigations/Lawsuits of For-Profit Schools
    NCLC® ensuring NATIONAL CONSUMER educational LAW integrity CENTER ® 10 STEPS TO IMPROVE STATE OVERSIGHT OF FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS © Copyright 2014, National Consumer Law Center, Inc. GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATIONS AND LAWSUITS INVOLVING FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS1 (2004 – MAY 2014) ©2014 National Consumer Law Center www.nclc.org Ensuring Educational Integrity, In Their Own Words 5 1 Note: Chart is organized alphabetically by government agency. SCHOOLS OUTCOME OR OFFER ONLINE/ SCHOOLS/ GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATION PENDING ACCREDITOR DISTANCE OWNERS AGENCY OR LAWSUIT? DATE ALLEGATIONS OR ISSUES (AS OF JUNE 1, 2014) (IF ANY) PROGRAMS? CREDENTIALS OFFERED Corinthian AGs from AR, Multi-state 1/2014 Organizational information; tuition, loan Pending National— Everest Univ. Certificates, Associate, Colleges, Inc.2 AZ, CO, CT, HI, Investigation and scholarship information; lead generation Everest Colleges (ACCSC); Online; Everest Bachelor’s and Master’s ID, IA, KY, MO, activities; enrollment qualifications Everest Univ. Online (ACICS); College Phoenix Degrees NC, NE, NM, for students; complaints; accreditation; Wyotech (ACCSC); OR, PA, TN, WA completion and placement statistics; graduate Regional— certification and licensing results; student Everest College Phoenix (HLC); lending activities. Heald (WASC Senior College and University Commission)3 ITT Educational AGS from AR, Multi-state 1/2014 Marketing and advertising, recruitment, Pending National (ACICS)5 Yes Associate, Bachelor’s and Services, Inc.4 AZ, CT, ID, IA, Investigation financial aid, academic advising, career Master’s Degrees KY, MO, NE, NC, services, admissions, licensure exam pass OR, PA, TN and rates, accreditation, student retention, WA graduation rates and job placement rates. Career Education AGs from AR, Multi-state 1/2014 Student-recruitment practices, graduate Pending National— Yes Certificate, Associate, Corp.6 AZ, CT, ID, IA, Investigation employment statistics, graduate employment Sanford-Brown.
    [Show full text]
  • False Claims Act Alert
    False Claims Act Alert January 2, 2013 LITIGATION/CONTROVERSY False Claims Act: 2012 Year-In-Review TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Overview of the False Claims Act .............................................................................................................................. 2 Federal Legislative and Regulatory Update .............................................................................................................. 3 Latest Developments in Federal Settlements, Judgments, and Complaints Filed ............................................... 4 Federal Case Law Developments ............................................................................................................................. 11 First Circuit – Retaliation: Burden-Shifting and Settlement Agreement as Protected Activity …..….. 11 Second Circuit – (1) Materiality; Damages for Non-Conforming Goods and Services; (2) Off-Label Marketing and First Amendment ............................................................................................................... 12 Fourth Circuit – (1) Whether a State-Affiliated Entity Is a “Person”; (2) Application of the Excessive Fines Clause to FCA Civil Penalties .......................................................................................................... 14 Fifth Circuit – Government Employees as Relators and as Original Sources
    [Show full text]
  • For-Profit Education and the False Claims Act
    For-Profit Education and the False Claims Act Written by Nick Sanders The United States government has intervened in a qui tam suit brought under the False Claims Act against ATI Enterprises, Inc. (which does business as ATI Technical Training Center, ATI Career Training Center and ATI Career Training) and which “operates career college campuses in Texas, Florida, Oklahoma and New Mexico,” according to this announcement by the Department of Justice. The complaint against ATI alleged that— ATI Enterprises knowingly misrepresented its job placement statistics to the Texas Workforce Commission in order to maintain its state licensure, and therefore its eligibility for federal financial aid under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. On Aug. 9, 2011, the Texas Workforce Commission revoked licenses for several of ATI’s programs at the three campuses after a third party audit of ATI’s reported placement statistics. The DOJ press release provided some more details. It reported— … ATI employees at the three campuses knowingly enrolled students who were ineligible because they did not have high school diplomas or recognized equivalents; falsified high school diplomas, including five Dallas Independent School District diplomas for students who later defaulted on their federal student loans; fraudulently kept students enrolled even though they should have been dropped because they had poor grades or attendance; and made knowing misrepresentations to students about their future employability. [Allegedly.] The alleged misrepresentations included telling students that a criminal record would not prevent them from getting jobs in their fields of study, quoting higher salaries than the students would be likely to earn and reporting inflated job placement statistics both to the students and the 1 / 2 For-Profit Education and the False Claims Act Written by Nick Sanders Texas Workforce Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • For-Profit-Report.Pdf
    ENSURING EDUCATIONAL INTEGRITY 10 STEPS TO IMPROVE STATE OVERSIGHT OF FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS NCLC® NATIONAL CONSUMER June 2014 LAW CENTER® © Copyright 2014, National Consumer Law Center, Inc. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Robyn Smith is Of Counsel for the National Consumer Law Center, where she concentrates on student loan and proprietary school issues. She also focuses on these issues as a staff attorney at the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles. From 2001 to 2010, she worked in the Consumer Law Section of the California Attorney General’s office, where she investigated and prosecuted businesses engaged in deceptive business practices, including for-profit colleges. Prior to joining the AG’s office, Smith represented low-income consumers in a wide range of consumer law matters as the Directing Attorney of the Consumer Law Project at Public Counsel in Los Angeles and as the Managing Attorney of the Windward Branch of the Legal Aid Society of Hawaii on the island of Oahu. She received her J.D. from University of Southern California. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author thanks NCLC colleagues Deanne Loonin, Carolyn Carter, and Jan Kruse for valuable comments and assistance. She also thanks Emily Green Kaplan, Juala Smythe, and Shirlron Williams for research assistance. The findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the author alone. NCLC’s Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project provides information about student loan rights and responsibilities for borrowers and advocates. We also seek to increase public understanding of student lending issues and to identify policy solutions to promote access to education, lessen student debt burdens, and make loan repayment more manageable.
    [Show full text]
  • List of For-Profit Universities and Colleges
    List of for-profit universities and colleges This is a list of for-profit institutions of higher education. Contents In the United States Closed Outside the United States Distance education (online) See also References In the United States Academy of Art University – San Francisco, California American Career College – Los Angeles, California American College of Education – online American InterContinental University – more than 90% online, a subsidiary of Career Education Corporation American Military University – online, a division of American Public University System American National University – distance education and multiple locations in Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, and West Virginia; not to be confused with American University American Public University – online American Sentinel University – online Antilles College of Health – Puerto Rico Antonelli College – multiple locations Arizona Summit Law School – a subsidiary of InfiLaw System ASA College – campuses in Brooklyn, midtown Manhattan, and Miami Ashford University – Clinton, Iowa (campus closed in 2016), a subsidiary of Bridgepoint Education, includes Forbes School of Business Aspen University – Denver, Colorado Atenas College – multiple locations, Puerto Rico Bay State College – Boston, Massachusetts Beckfield College – a subsidiary of Quad Partners Berkeley College – New York and New Jersey; not to be confused with University of California, Berkeley, Berklee School of Music or the Berkeley College at Yale University Blair College – Colorado Springs, Colorado - Now Everest
    [Show full text]
  • FY 2016 Management Challenges for U.S. Department of Education
    FY 2016 Management Challenges October 2015 U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General Office of Inspector General Kathleen S. Tighe Inspector General October 2015 This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Inspector General, FY 2016 Management Challenges. Please Note: The Inspector General’s FY 2016 Management Challenges is available on the ED OIG Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/ reports.html. Cover image by Jannis Tobias Werner/Shutterstock.com. All other images used under license from Shutterstock.com. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL The Inspector General October 9, 2015 TO: The Honorable Arne Duncan Secretary of Education FROM: Kathleen S. Tighe Inspector General SUBJECT: Management Challenges for Fiscal Year 2016 The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 requires the U.S. Department of Education (Department), Office of Inspector General to identify and report annually on the most serious management challenges the Department faces. The Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of 2010 requires the Department to include in its agency performance plan information on its planned actions, including performance goals, indicators, and milestones, to address these challenges. To identify management challenges, we routinely examine past audit, inspection, and investigative work, as well as issued reports where corrective actions have yet to be taken; assess ongoing audit, inspection, and investigative work to identify significant vulnerabilities; and analyze new programs and activities that could post significant challenges because of their breadth and complexity.
    [Show full text]
  • South Texas Vocational Technical Institute 2021 School Catalog Version 1 Effective: January 4, 2021
    South Texas Vocational Technical Institute 2021 School Catalog Version 1 Effective: January 4, 2021 Campus Locations South Texas Vocational Technical Institute – Weslaco Campus 1600 N. Westgate Drive, Suite 400 Weslaco, Texas 78599 Phone: 956-969-1564 Fax: 956-969-1887 South Texas Vocational Technical Institute – Brownsville Campus (a branch of the Weslaco Campus) 1900 N. Expressway, Suite O Satellite Facility – CDL Range Brownsville, Texas 78521 2800 Robindale Road Phone: 956-554-3515 Brownsville, TX 78521 Fax: 956-554-3542 South Texas Vocational Technical Institute – McAllen Campus (a branch of the Platt College ‐ Tulsa Campus) 1800 S. Main Street, Suite 500 Satellite Facility – CDL Range McAllen, TX 78503 901 E Military Highway Phone: 956-631-1107 Pharr, TX 78503 Fax 956-630-1650 South Texas Vocational Technical Institute – Corpus Christi Campus (a branch of the Platt College ‐ Tulsa Campus) 2000 South Padre Island Drive Corpus Christi, TX 78416 Phone: 361-232-5057 Fax: 361-851-5051 South Texas Vocational Technical Institute – San Antonio, TX (a branch of Platt College – Tulsa Campus) 734 S.E. Military Drive Extension Building Satellite Facility – CDL Range San Antonio, TX 78214 6714 S Flores Street 9333 Southwest Loop 410 Phone: 210-782-8000 San Antonio, TX 78214 San Antonio, TX 78242 Fax: 210-921-0513 www.stvt.edu Page 1 of 163 Table of Contents Campus Locations ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Public Notice of Probation As of September 19, 2012
    ACCSC Summary of Grounds for Probation Action Updated September 19, 2012 Page 1 of 9 Public Notice of Probation as of September 19, 2012 The following institutions are currently on Probation as directed by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC). Institutions that appear on a previous list but not here have had the Probation Order vacated. A summary of the reasons for Probation for each institution follows this list. The specific accreditation standards cited in this document are available for review by downloading the Standards of Accreditation from ACCSC’s website.1 PROBATION ORDER ISSUED Origination School School # City Next Review Date Arizona Automotive Institute MS 000334 Glendale, AZ June 6, 2012 Nov 2012 ATI Career Training Center MS 001576 Ft. Lauderdale, FL June 6, 2012 Nov 2012 Completion of ATI Technical Training Center MS 000704 Dallas, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072147 Garland, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072236 Waco, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out North Richland ATI Career Training Center MS 055126 Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Hills, TX ATI Career Training Center BR 072240 Houston, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 South Texas Vocational Technical BR 072291 San Antonio, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Institute ATI Career Training Center MS 055202 Dallas, TX Sep 2011 Nov 2012 Oklahoma City, ATI Career Training Center BR 072115 Sep 2011 Nov 2012 OK Completion of ATI Career Training Center BR 072116 Richardson, TX Sep 2011 Teach Out ATI Career Training Center BR 072210
    [Show full text]
  • Department of Education OIG SAR 67 (4-1-13 Through 9
    U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General Semiannual Report to Congress, No. 67 April 1, 2013–September 30, 2013 Office of Inspector General Kathleen S. Tighe Inspector General December 2013 This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Inspector General, Semiannual Report to Congress, No. 67. Please Note: The Inspector General’s Semiannual Report to Congress, No. 67 is available on the ED OIG Web site at http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oig/sarpages.html. Message to Congress On behalf of the U.S. Department of Education (Department) Office of Inspector General (OIG), I present this Semiannual Report on the activities and accomplishments of this office from April 1, 2013, through September 30, 2013. The audits, investigations, and related work highlighted in the report are products of our continuing commitment to promoting accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness in our oversight of the Department’s programs and operations. Over the last 6 months, we closed 74 investigations involving fraud or corruption related to the Department’s programs and operations, securing more than $44.8 million in settlements, fines, restitutions, recoveries, and savings. In addition, as a result of our investigative work, criminal actions were taken against a number of individuals, including school officials—people who cheated the students they were in positions to serve. We also issued 15 audit-related reports, making recommendations to improve program operations. For example and as highlighted in this report: A 2012 OIG audit identified a possible conflict involving the Alabama State Department of Education’s Director of Federal Programs’ participation in the selection process that awarded $24 million to three local educational agencies that listed her husband’s employer as a contractor.
    [Show full text]