(Mark One)

OR

For the transition period from __________ to ___________

Commission file number 1-13144

 

 

 

13000 North Meridian Street

 

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

 

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.       x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

 

 

$4,717,334,934

 

Aggregate market value of the voting stock held by nonaffiliates of the registrant based on the last sale price for such stock at June 30, 2007 (assuming solely for the purposes of this calculation that all Directors and executive officers of the registrant are “affiliates”).

39,693,322

 

Number of shares of Common Stock, $.01 par value, outstanding at January 31, 2008.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Portions of the following documents have been incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K:

 

 

of Shareholders to be held May 6, 2008

ITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC.

Carmel, Indiana

 

Annual Report to Securities and Exchange Commission

December 31, 2007

 

 

Table of Contents

 

 

 

PART I

 

 

 

Forward-Looking Statements: All statements, trend analyses and other information contained in this report that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and as defined in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Forward-looking statements are made based on our management’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on us. You can identify those statements by the use of words such as “could,” “should,” “would,” “may,” “will,” “project,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “plan,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “potential,” “intend,” “continue,” and “contemplate,” as well as similar words and expressions. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and do not guarantee future performance. We cannot assure you that future developments affecting us will be those anticipated by our management. Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially are the following:

 

 

Readers are also directed to other risks and uncertainties discussed in “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report and those detailed from time to time in other documents we file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

 

 

 

Background

 

We are a Delaware corporation incorporated in 1946. Our principal executive offices are located at 13000 North Meridian Street, Carmel, Indiana 46032-1404, and our telephone number is (317) 706-9200. From 1966 until our initial public offering on December 27, 1994, we were wholly owned by ITT Corporation, an Indiana corporation, formerly a Delaware corporation and formerly known as ITT Industries, Inc. (“Old ITT”). On September 29, 1995, ITT Corporation, a Nevada corporation (“ITT”), succeeded to the interests of Old ITT in the beneficial ownership of 83.3% of our common stock. Public offerings of our common stock by ITT in June 1998 and February 1999 and our repurchase of 1,500,000 shares of our common stock from ITT in February 1999 completely eliminated ITT’s beneficial ownership of any of our common stock.

 

Overview

 

We are a leading for-profit provider of postsecondary degree programs in the United States based on revenue and student enrollment. As of December 31, 2007, we were offering diploma, associate, bachelor and master degree programs to approximately 53,000 students. As of December 31, 2007, we had 97 institutes and nine learning sites of those institutes located in 34 states. A learning site is an institute location where educational activities are conducted and student services are provided away from the institute’s campus. All of our institutes are authorized by the

applicable education authorities of the states in which they operate, and are accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (“ED”). We design our education programs, after consultation with employers, to help graduates prepare for careers in various fields involving their areas of study. As of December 31, 2007, all of our programs were degree programs, except for a few diploma programs offered at six institutes that are being converted to degree programs. We have provided career-oriented education programs since 1969 under the “ITT Technical Institute” name.

 

In 2007, we began operations at 10 new institutes. In 2008, we plan to begin operations at six to eight new locations. In 2007, we continued our efforts to diversify our program offerings by developing residence and online programs at different levels in technology and non-technology fields of study that we intend to offer at our institutes. Most of our residence associate degree and bachelor degree programs are being taught in residence on campus on a three-day-per-week class schedule or under our hybrid education delivery model, pursuant to which certain program courses are taught in residence on campus and others may be taught either entirely online over the Internet or partially online over the Internet and partially in residence on campus (the “Hybrid Delivery Model”). Our expansion plans include:

 

 

 

Business Strategy

 

Our strategy is to pursue multiple opportunities for growth. We are implementing a growth strategy designed to increase revenue and operating efficiencies by increasing the number and types of program offerings and student enrollment at existing institutes, operating new institutes across the United States and adding learning sites to existing institutes. The principal elements of this strategy include the following:

 

Enhance Results at the Institute Level.

 

Increase Enrollments at Existing Institutes. We intend to increase recruiting efforts that are primarily aimed at enrolling more working adults at our existing institutes, and make our programs more convenient for students. In addition, we believe that current demographic and employment trends will allow us to enroll a greater number of recent high school graduates.

 

Increase the Number of Programs Offered at Existing Institutes. We intend to continue increasing the number of programs that we offer at our existing institutes. Our objective is to offer multiple programs at each institute. Our 97 existing institutes provide significant potential for the introduction of our current programs at a broader number of institutes. We believe that introducing our current programs at additional existing institutes will attract more students. In 2007, we added a total of 246 programs among 85 existing institutes, and in 2008 we intend to add approximately 125 of our current programs among approximately 45 existing institutes. We currently offer one or more of our online programs to students in 48 states and the District of Columbia. We intend to expand the number of our online programs offered in each state in 2008.

 

Develop Additional Programs. In 2007, we continued our efforts to diversify our program offerings by developing new residence and online programs in both technology and non-technology fields of study. In 2008, we plan to continue developing additional residence and online programs in technology and non-technology fields of study. The new programs are expected to involve a variety of disciplines and be at the associate and bachelor degree levels. We intend to develop both a residence and online version of many of the new programs. We believe that offering new programs can attract a broader base of students, motivate current students to extend their studies and help us improve the utilization of our facilities.

 

Extend Total Program Duration. In 2007, we increased the number of our institutes that offer bachelor degree programs from 59 to 73. In 2008, we intend to increase the number of our institutes that offer bachelor degree programs to approximately 80. The average combined total program time that students are enrolled in one or more of our programs has increased over time as a result of:

 

 

We believe that the average combined total program time of our students will increase further as we:

 

 

 

Improve Student Outcomes. We strive to improve the graduation and graduate employment rates of our undergraduate students by providing academic and career services and dedicating administrative resources to these services.

 

Geographically Expand Our Institutes and Learning Sites. We plan to add new institutes and learning sites of existing institutes at locations throughout the United States. Using our proprietary methodology, we determine locations for new institutes and learning sites based on a number of factors, including demographics and population and employment growth. The following table sets forth the number of new institutes and new learning sites that began operations in the years indicated:

 

 

We plan to begin operations at six to eight new locations in 2008. We will also continue to consider acquiring schools.

 

Increase Margins By Leveraging Fixed Costs at Institute and Headquarters Levels. Our efforts to optimize institute capacity and class size have allowed us to increase student enrollment without incurring a proportionate increase in fixed costs at our institutes. In addition, we have realized substantial operating efficiencies by centralizing management functions and implementing operational uniformity among our institutes. We will continue to seek to improve margins by increasing enrollments and revenue without incurring a proportionate increase in fixed costs, and by reducing our variable costs.

 

Programs of Study

 

As of December 31, 2007, we were offering 29 degree programs in various fields of study across the following schools of study:

 

 

We design our programs to help graduates prepare for careers in various fields involving their education by offering students a broad-based foundation in a variety of skills used in those fields. Graduates of our IT programs have obtained a variety of entry-level positions in various fields involving IT, such as network administration, technical support, network technology and systems technology. Graduates of our drafting and design programs have obtained a variety of entry-level positions in various fields involving drafting and design, such as computer-aided drafting, electrical and electronics drafting, mechanical drafting, architectural and construction drafting, civil drafting, interior design, landscape architecture and multimedia communications. Graduates of our electronics technology programs have obtained a variety of entry-level positions in various fields involving electronics, such as electronics product design and fabrication, communications, computer technology, industrial electronics, instrumentation, telecommunications and consumer electronics. There is an insignificant number of graduates of those bachelor degree programs that have been offered for less than five years or associate degree programs that have been offered for less than three years, but we believe that the graduates of our:

 

 

We generally organize the academic schedule for programs of study offered at our institutes on the basis of four 12-week academic quarters in a calendar year, with new students beginning at the start of each academic quarter. Students taking a full-time course load can complete our diploma and associate degree programs in eight academic quarters, bachelor degree programs in 15 academic quarters and master degree program in seven academic quarters. We typically offer classes in most residence programs in:

 

 

Depending on student enrollment, class sessions are generally available in the morning, afternoon and evening. The courses that are taught online over the Internet are delivered through an asynchronous learning network and have a prescribed schedule for completion of the coursework. The class schedule for our residence courses and the coursework completion schedule for our online courses generally provide students with the flexibility to maintain employment concurrently with their studies. Based on student surveys, we believe that a substantial majority of our students work at least part-time during their programs of study.

 

Most of our programs of study blend traditional academic content with applied learning concepts and have the objective of helping graduates begin to prepare for a changing economic and/or technological environment. A significant portion of most programs offered at our institutes involves practical study in a lab environment.

 

The learning objectives of most courses in each program of study are substantially the same among our institutes to provide greater uniformity and to better enable students to transfer, if necessary, to other institutes offering the same programs with less disruption to their education. We regularly review each curriculum to respond to changes in technology and industry needs. Each of our institutes establishes an advisory committee for each field of study, which is comprised of representatives of local employers. These advisory committees assist our institutes in assessing and updating curricula, equipment and laboratory design. In addition to courses directly related to a student's program of study, our programs also include general education courses, such as economics, mathematics, composition and sociology.

 

Tuition for a student entering an undergraduate residence program in December 2007 for 36 quarter credit hours (the minimum course load of a full-time student for an academic year at traditional two- and four-year colleges) is $15,804 for all of our undergraduate residence programs, except as adjusted in some states to reflect applicable taxes and fees. We typically adjust the tuition for our programs of study at least annually. The majority of students attending residence programs at our institutes lived in that institute's metropolitan area prior to enrollment. We do not provide any student housing.

 

Student Recruitment

 

We strive to attract students with the motivation and ability to complete the career-oriented educational programs offered by our institutes. To generate interest among potential students, we engage in a broad range of activities to inform potential students and their parents about our institutes and the programs they offer. These activities include television, Internet and other media advertising, direct mailings and high school presentations. We employ approximately 1,100 full- and part-time recruiting representatives to assist in local recruiting efforts.

 

Local recruiting representatives of an institute pursue expressions of interest from potential students for our residence programs of study by contacting prospective students and arranging for interviews at the campus or any learning site of that institute. Occasionally, we also pursue expressions of interest from students for our residence programs of study by contacting them and arranging for their attendance at a seminar providing information about the institute and its programs. We pursue expressions of interest from potential students for our online programs of study by providing program and resource information on our website and through telephone calls, electronic mail and the mail.

 

Student recruitment activities are subject to substantial regulation at both the state and federal level and by our accrediting commission. Most states have bonding and licensing requirements that apply to many of our representatives and other employees involved in student recruitment. Our Vice President, Student Services, National Director Student Recruitment and Regional Directors of Recruitment oversee the implementation of recruitment policies and procedures. In addition, our compliance department generally reviews student recruiting practices at each of our institutes on at least an annual basis.

 

Student Admission and Retention

 

We strive to admit incoming students who have the ability to complete their chosen programs of study. We require all applicants for admission to any of our institutes' programs of study to have a high school diploma or a

recognized equivalent. Depending on the program of study and the institute, applicants may also be required to pass an admission examination or possess a designated number of credit hours or degree with a specified overall cumulative grade point average from an accredited postsecondary educational institution. Our student demographics as of December 31, 2007, were as follows:

 

 

 

 

The faculty and staff at each of our institutes strive to help students overcome obstacles to the completion of their programs of study. As is the case in other postsecondary institutions, however, students often fail to complete their programs for a variety of personal, financial or academic reasons. Student withdrawals prior to program completion not only affect the students, they also have a negative regulatory, financial and marketing effect on the institute. To minimize student withdrawals, each of our institutes devotes staff resources to assist and advise students regarding academic and financial matters. We encourage academic advising and tutoring in the case of students experiencing academic difficulties. We also offer assistance and advice to students in our residence programs who are looking for part-time employment and housing.

 

Graduate Employment

 

We believe that the success of our graduates who begin their careers in fields involving their programs of study is critical to the ability of our institutes to continue to recruit students. We try to obtain data on the number of students employed following graduation. The reliability of such data depends largely on information that students and employers report to us. Based on this information, we believe that approximately 81% of the Employable Graduates (as defined below) from our institutes' programs during 2006 either obtained employment by April 30, 2007, or were already employed, in positions that required the direct or indirect use of skills taught in their programs of study. Employable Graduates include all of the graduates from our institutes, except for those graduates who:

 

 

The definition of Employable Graduates is based on the information that our institutes are required to report to their accrediting commission, and this information is used, in part, by their accrediting commission to evaluate the student outcomes of our institutes.

 

Each of our institutes employs personnel to offer its students and graduates career services. These persons assist in job searches, solicit employment opportunities from employers and provide information on job search techniques, where to access employer information, writing resumes and how to prepare for, appear at and conduct oneself during job interviews.

 

Based on information from graduates and employers who responded to our inquiries, we estimate that the reported annualized salaries initially following graduation averaged approximately $31,000 for the Employable Graduates of our institutes’ programs who graduated in 2006 and obtained employment by April 30, 2007, or were already employed, in positions that required the direct or indirect use of skills taught in their programs of study. The average annual salary initially following graduation for our Employable Graduates may vary significantly among our institutes depending on local employment conditions and each Employable Graduate’s background, prior work

experience and willingness to relocate. Initial employers of Employable Graduates from our institutes’ programs include small, medium and large companies and governmental agencies.

 

Faculty

 

We hire faculty members in accordance with criteria established by us, the accrediting commission that accredits our institutes and the state education authorities that regulate our institutes. We hire faculty with related work experience and/or academic credentials to teach most technical subjects. Faculty members at each institute typically include the chairperson for each school or program of study and various categories of instructors. As of December 31, 2007, our institutes employed a total of approximately 800 full-time and 2,700 adjunct faculty members.

 

Administration and Employees

 

Each of our institutes is administered by a director who has overall responsibility for the management of the institute. The administrative staff of each institute also includes a director of recruitment, a director of career services, a director of finance, a dean and a registrar. As of December 31, 2007, we:

 

 

None of our employees are represented by labor unions.

 

 

 

In addition, national managers of each of the following major institute functions reside at our headquarters and develop policies and procedures to guide these functions at our institutes:

 

 

Managers located at our headquarters monitor the operating results of each of our institutes and regularly conduct on-site reviews.

 

Competition

 

The postsecondary education market in the United States is highly fragmented and competitive, with no single private or public institution enjoying a significant market share. Our institutes compete for students with associate, bachelor and graduate degree-granting institutions, which include nonprofit public and private colleges and for-profit institutions, as well as with alternatives to higher education such as military service or immediate employment. We believe competition among educational institutions is based on:

 

 

Certain public and private colleges may offer programs similar to those offered by our institutes at a lower tuition cost due in part to government subsidies, foundation grants, tax deductible contributions, tax-exempt status or other financial resources not available to for-profit institutions. Other for-profit institutions offer programs that compete with those of our institutes. Certain of our competitors in both the public and private sectors have greater financial and other resources than we do.

 

Federal and Other Financial Aid Programs

 

In 2007, we indirectly derived approximately 63% of our revenue determined on an accrual accounting basis (or 61% determined on a cash accounting basis as defined by the ED’s regulations) from the federal student financial aid

programs under Title IV (the “Title IV Programs”) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (the “HEA”). Our institutes' students also rely on unaffiliated private loan programs, family contributions, personal savings, employment, state financial aid programs, scholarships and other resources to pay their educational expenses. The primary Title IV Programs from which the students at our institutes receive grants, loans and other aid to fund the cost of their education include:

 

 

The Work-Study program requires our institutions to make a 25% matching contribution for all of the federal funds the institution receives from the ED under that program. In 2007, our 25% matching contribution amounted to approximately $692,000.

 

In 2007, we also indirectly derived approximately 29% of our revenue from unaffiliated private student loan programs. We are financially responsible for certain loans made to students or their parents under the unaffiliated private loan programs. We do not believe that our financial responsibility with respect to those loans will have a material adverse affect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

 

Highly Regulated Industry

 

We are subject to extensive regulation by the ED, the state education and professional licensing authorities (collectively, the “SAs”) and the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (the “ACICS”), the accrediting commission that accredits our institutes. The statutes, regulations and standards applied by the ED, the SAs and the ACICS are periodically revised and the interpretations of existing requirements are periodically modified. We cannot predict with certainty how all of the statutes, regulations and standards applied by the ED, the SAs and the ACICS will be interpreted.

 

At the federal level, the HEA and the regulations promulgated under the HEA by the ED set forth numerous, complex standards that institutions must satisfy in order to participate in Title IV Programs. To participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must:

 

 

The purpose of these standards is to:

 

 

Most of the ED’s requirements are applied on an institutional basis, with an institution defined by the ED as a main campus and its additional locations, if any. Twenty-nine of our 97 institutes are main campuses and the remaining 68 of our institutes are additional locations. Each of the nine learning sites of our institutes is also an additional location under the ED’s regulations. The HEA requires each institution to periodically renew its certification by the ED to continue its participation in Title IV Programs. As of December 31, 2007, 96 of our institutes and all nine learning sites of our institutes participated in Title IV Programs.

 

As of December 31, 2007, we operated one or more institutes in 34 states and our institutes recruited students in the remaining 16 states and the District of Columbia. Each of our institutes must be authorized by the applicable SAs to operate and grant degrees or diplomas to their students. The state laws and regulations that we must comply with in order to obtain authorization from the SAs are numerous and complex. As of December 31, 2007, each of our institutes had received authorization from one or more SAs. In addition, some states require an institute to be in operation for a period of up to two years before that institute can be authorized to grant degrees. Institutes that confer bachelor or master degrees must, in most cases, meet additional regulatory standards. Raising the curricula of our existing institutes to the bachelor and/or master degree level requires the approval of the applicable SAs and the ACICS. State education laws and regulations affect our operations and may limit our ability to introduce degree programs or to obtain authorization to operate in some states. If any one of our institutes lost its state authorization, the institute would be unable to offer postsecondary education and we would be forced to close the institute. Closing one

of our institutes for any reason could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

State authorization and accreditation by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED are required for an institution to become and remain eligible to participate in Title IV Programs. In addition, some states require institutions operating in the state to be accredited as a condition of state authorization. All of our institutes are accredited by the ACICS, which is an accrediting commission recognized by the ED. The HEA specifies a series of criteria that each recognized accrediting commission must use in reviewing institutions. For example, accrediting commissions must assess the length of each academic program offered by an institution in relation to the objectives of the degrees or diplomas offered. Further, accrediting commissions must evaluate each institution's success with respect to student achievement, as measured by rates of program completion, passing of state licensing examinations and graduate employment. During 2007, the ACICS evaluated 33 of our institutes for initial grants of accreditation or the renewal of their current grants of accreditation. As of December 31, 2007, of those 33 institutes, the ACICS had granted initial accreditation to 11 institutes and reaccredited 22 institutes. None of our institutes are on probation with the ACICS, but three institutes are subject to an outcomes review with respect to student retention by the ACICS. Under the ACICS standards, an institute that is subject to a financial or outcomes review must periodically report its results in those areas to the ACICS and obtain permission from the ACICS prior to applying to add a new program of study or establish a branch campus or learning site. We do not believe that these limitations will have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans.

 

The statutes, regulations and standards applied by the ED, the SAs and the ACICS cover the vast majority of our operations, including our:

 

 

These requirements also affect our ability to:

 

 

Each of the institutes and learning sites that we added from 2005 through 2007 constitutes an additional location under the ED’s regulations. The HEA requires a for-profit institution to operate for two years before it can qualify to participate in Title IV Programs. If an institution that is certified to participate in Title IV Programs establishes an additional location and receives all of the necessary SA and accrediting commission approvals for that location, that additional location can participate in Title IV Programs immediately upon being reported to the ED, unless the institution will offer at least 50% of an entire educational program at that location and any one of the following restrictions applies, in which case the ED must approve the additional location before it can participate in Title IV Programs:

 

 

The HEA and applicable regulations permit students to use Title IV Program funds only to pay the cost associated with enrollment in an eligible program offered by an institution participating in Title IV Programs. Generally, an institution that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs may add a new educational program without the ED’s approval, if that new program: (a) leads to an associate level or higher degree and the institution already offers programs at that level; or (b) prepares students for gainful employment in the same or a related occupation as an educational program that has previously been designated as an eligible program at the institution and meets minimum length requirements. Otherwise, the institution must obtain the ED’s approval before it may disburse Title IV Program

funds to students enrolled in the new program. If an institution erroneously determines that a new educational program is eligible for Title IV Program funding, the institution would likely be liable for repayment of the Title IV Program funds provided to students in that educational program. Based on our current understanding of how the ED regulations will be applied, we do not believe that these limitations will have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans.

 

The ACICS accreditation standards generally permit an institution’s main campus to establish branch campuses, and both the institution’s main campus and branch campuses to establish learning sites. Our institutes that are treated as branch campuses under the ACICS accreditation standards are treated as additional locations of the main campus under the ED’s regulations. Any locations of one of our main or branch campuses that are located away from the main or branch campus are treated as learning sites of that main or branch campus under the ACICS accreditation standards, but the ED’s regulations treat each learning site as an additional location of the main campus.

 

The laws and regulations in most of the states in which our institutes are located treat each of our institutes as a separate, unaffiliated institution and do not distinguish between main campuses and additional locations or branch campuses, although many states recognize other institute locations within the state where educational activities are conducted and/or student services are provided as learning sites, teaching sites, satellite campuses or otherwise. In some states, the requirements to obtain state authorization limit our ability to establish new institutes, add learning sites and offer new programs.

 

The HEA and its implementing regulations require each institution to periodically reapply to the ED for continued certification to participate in Title IV Programs. The ED recertifies each institution deemed to be in compliance with the HEA and the ED’s regulations for a period of six years or less. Before that period ends, the institution must apply again for recertification. The current ED certifications of our institutes range from four years to six years and expire over the period March 31, 2009 to September 30, 2013.

 

The ED may place an institution on provisional certification for a period of three years or less, if it finds that the institution does not fully satisfy all the eligibility and certification standards. If an institution successfully participates in Title IV Programs during its period of provisional certification but fails to satisfy the full certification criteria, the ED may renew the institution’s provisional certification. The ED may revoke an institution’s provisional certification without advance notice, if the ED determines that the institution is not fulfilling all material requirements. If the ED revokes an institution’s provisional certification, the institution may not apply for reinstatement of its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs for at least 18 months. If the ED does not recertify the institution following the expiration of its provisional certification, the institution loses eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs until the institution reapplies to participate and the ED certifies the institution to participate. The ED may also more closely review an institution that is provisionally certified, if it applies for approval to operate a new location or offer a new program of study that requires approval, or makes some other significant change affecting its eligibility. Provisional certification does not otherwise limit an institution’s access to Title IV Program funds. None of our campus groups are provisionally certified to participate in Title IV Programs.

 

The internal audit function of our compliance department reviews our institutes' compliance with Title IV Program requirements and conducts an annual compliance review of each of our institutes. The review addresses numerous compliance areas, including:

 

 

Each of our institutes’ administration of Title IV Program funds must also be audited annually by an independent accounting firm, and the resulting audit report must be submitted to the ED for review.

 

Due to the highly regulated nature of the postsecondary education industry, we are subject to audits, reviews, inquiries, complaints, investigations, claims of non-compliance or lawsuits by federal and state governmental agencies, the ACICS, present and former students and employees, shareholders and other third parties, which may allege violations of statutes, regulations or accreditation standards or common law causes of action (collectively, “Claims”). If the results of any Claims are unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to fines, penalties, injunctions, operational limitations, loss of eligibility to participate in federal or state financial aid programs, debarments, additional oversight and reporting, other civil and criminal penalties or other censure that could have a

material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Even if we satisfactorily resolve the issues raised by a Claim, we may have to expend significant financial and management resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Adverse publicity regarding a Claim could also negatively affect our business.

 

See "Risk Factors – Risks Related to Our Highly Regulated Industry" for a discussion of particular risks associated with our highly regulated industry.

 

Shareholder Information

 

We make the following materials available free of charge through our website at www.ittesi.com as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC under the Exchange Act:

 

 

We also make the following materials available free of charge through our website at www.ittesi.com:

 

 

We will provide a copy of the following materials without charge to anyone who makes a written request to our Investor Relations Department at ITT Educational Services, Inc., 13000 North Meridian Street, Carmel, Indiana 46032-1404 or by e-mail through our website at www.ittesi.com:

 

 

We also intend to promptly disclose on our website at www.ittesi.com any amendments that we make to, or waivers for our Directors or executive officers that we grant from, the Code.

 

Officer Certifications  

 

Our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer each have made the certifications required to be filed with the SEC regarding the quality of our public disclosure. Those certifications are being filed with the SEC as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition, our Chief Executive Officer submitted the required annual certification to the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) in 2007 that he was not aware of any violation by us of the NYSE’s corporate governance listing standards.

 

 

 

In addition to the other information contained in this report, you should consider carefully the following risk factors in evaluating us and our business before making an investment decision with respect to any shares of our common stock. This report contains certain statements that constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act (and Section 21E of the Exchange Act). These forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs of, as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to, our management. All statements which are not statements of historical fact are intended to be forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements contained in this report reflect our or our management’s current views and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including, but not limited to, those set forth in the following Risk Factors. Should one or more of those risks or uncertainties materialize or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results, performance or achievements in 2008 and beyond could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, those forward-looking statements.

 

Risks Related to Our Highly Regulated Industry

 

Failure of our institutes to comply with the extensive regulatory requirements for school operations could result in financial penalties, restrictions on our operations, loss of federal and state financial aid funding for our students or loss of our authorization to operate our institutes. In 2007, we indirectly derived approximately 63% of our revenue determined on an accrual accounting basis (or approximately 61% determined on a cash accounting basis

as defined by the ED regulations) from Title IV Programs. To participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must receive and maintain authorization by the appropriate SAs, be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED and be certified as an eligible institution by the ED. As a result, our institutes are subject to extensive regulation by the ED, the SAs and the ACICS, which is an accrediting commission recognized by the ED. These regulatory requirements cover the vast majority of our operations, including our:

 

 

Most ED requirements are applied on an institutional basis, with an institution defined by the ED as a main campus and its additional locations, if any. Under the ED’s definition, we have 29 such institutions. We currently operate one or more institutes in 34 states and our institutes recruit students in the remaining 16 states and the District of Columbia. The ED, the SAs and the ACICS periodically revise their requirements and modify their interpretations of existing requirements. We cannot predict with certainty how all of the requirements applied by these agencies will be interpreted or whether all of our institutes will be able to comply with all of the requirements in the future.

 

 

 

Each of these sanctions could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and impose significant operating restrictions on us. If any of our institutes lost its state authorization, the institute would be unable to offer postsecondary education and we would be forced to close the institute. If any of our institutes lost its accreditation, it would lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. If any of our institutes lost its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, and we could not arrange for alternative financing sources for the students attending that institute, we could be forced to close the institute. Closing any of our institutes could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. See “Business – Highly Regulated Industry.”

 

 

Action by the U.S. Congress to revise the laws governing the federal student financial aid programs or reduce funding for those programs could reduce our student population and increase our costs of operation. Political and budgetary concerns significantly affect Title IV Programs. The U.S. Congress enacted the HEA to be reauthorized approximately every six years, which last occurred in 1998. In addition, the U.S. Congress can change the laws affecting Title IV Programs in the annual federal appropriations bills and other laws it enacts between the HEA reauthorizations. From 2004 to 2007, the U.S. Congress temporarily extended most of the provisions of the HEA, pending completion of the formal reauthorization process, and also enacted other laws affecting Title IV Programs. Significantly, in 2007 the U.S. Congress enacted the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which made significant changes to the Title IV Programs, including:

 

 

 

 

We believe these changes will positively impact our students’ ability to fund their educational expenses. The reduction in subsidies and other payments to lenders, however, could cause those lenders to alter the terms of FFEL loans and private student loans that they offer in ways that are not beneficial to our student and parent borrowers. For example, the lenders may:

 

 

In any of those events, our students’ ability to finance their cost of education could be adversely affected, our receivables could increase and/or our student population could decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We believe that, in 2008, the U.S. Congress will either complete its reauthorization of the HEA or further extend the provisions of the HEA. Numerous changes to the HEA are likely to result from any further reauthorization and, possibly, from any other laws that may be passed, but at this time we cannot predict all of the changes that the U.S. Congress will ultimately make. Since a significant percentage of our revenue is indirectly derived from Title IV Programs, any action by the U.S. Congress that significantly reduces Title IV Program funding or the ability of our institutes or students to participate in Title IV Programs could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

If one or more of our institutes lost its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, or if the U.S. Congress significantly reduced the amount of available Title IV Program funding, we would try to arrange or provide alternative sources of financial aid for the students at the affected institutes. We cannot assure you that one or more private organizations would be willing to provide loans to students attending those institutes or that the interest rate and other terms of those loans would be as favorable as for Title IV Program loans. In addition, the private organizations could require us to guarantee all or part of this assistance on terms that are less favorable to us than our current guarantee obligation, and we might incur other additional costs. If we provided more direct financial assistance to our students, we would incur additional costs and assume increased credit risks.

 

Legislative action may also increase our administrative costs and burden and require us to modify our practices in order for our institutes to comply fully with the legislative requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

 

One or more of our institutes may lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, if its student loan default rates are too high. Under the HEA, an institution may lose its eligibility to participate in some or all Title IV Programs, if the rates at which the institution’s students default on their federal student loans exceed specified percentages. The ED calculates these rates on an institutional basis, based on the number of students who have defaulted, not the dollar amount of such defaults. The ED calculates an institution’s cohort default rate on an annual basis as the rate at which borrowers scheduled to begin repayment on their loans in one year default on those loans by the end of the next year. Each institution participating in the FFEL and/or the FDL programs receives a FFEL/FDL cohort default rate for each federal fiscal year based on defaulted FFEL and FDL program loans. A federal fiscal year is October 1 through September 30. An institution whose FFEL/FDL cohort default rate is:

 

 

An institution can appeal this loss of eligibility. During the pendency of any such appeal, the institution remains eligible to participate in the FFEL, FDL and Pell programs. If an institution continues its participation in the FFEL and/or FDL programs during the pendency of any such appeal and the appeal is unsuccessful, the institution must pay the ED the amount of interest, special allowance, reinsurance and any related payments paid by the ED (or which the ED is obligated to pay) with respect to the FFEL and FDL program loans made to the institution’s students or their parents that would not have been made if the institution had not continued its participation (the “Direct Costs”). If a substantial number of our campus groups were subject to losing their eligibility to participate because of their

FFEL/FDL cohort default rates, the potential amount of the Direct Costs for which we would be liable if our appeals were unsuccessful would prevent us from continuing some or all of the affected campus groups’ participation in the FFEL and/or FDL programs during the pendency of those appeals, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

          The following table sets forth the range of our campus groups’ FFEL/FDL cohort default rates for the federal fiscal years indicated:

 

 

If an institution’s FFEL/FDL cohort default rate is 25% or greater in any of the three most recent federal fiscal years, the ED may place that institution on provisional certification status. A federal award year is July 1 through June 30.

 

The servicing and collection efforts of student loan lenders and guaranty agencies help to control our FFEL/FDL cohort default rates. We are not affiliated with any student loan lenders or guaranty agencies. We supplement their efforts by attempting to contact students to advise them of their responsibilities and any deferment or forbearance for which they may qualify.

 

If any of our campus groups lost its eligibility to participate in FFEL, FDL and Pell programs and we could not arrange for alternative financing sources for the students attending the institutes in that campus group, we would probably have to close those institutes, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We may be required to post a letter of credit or accept other limitations in order to continue our institutes’ participation in Title IV Programs, state authorization and accreditation, if we or our institutes do not meet the financial standards of the ED, the SAs or the ACICS. The ED, the SAs and the ACICS prescribe specific financial standards that an institution must satisfy to participate in Title IV Programs, operate in a state and be accredited. The ED evaluates institutions for compliance with its standards each year, based on the institution’s annual audited financial statements, as well as following any change of control of the institution and when the institution is reviewed for recertification by the ED. The most significant financial responsibility measurement is the institution’s composite score, which is calculated by the ED based on three ratios:

 

 

The ED assigns a strength factor to the results of each of these ratios on a scale from negative 1.0 to positive 3.0, with negative 1.0 reflecting financial weakness and positive 3.0 reflecting financial strength. The ED then assigns a weighting percentage to each ratio and adds the weighted scores for the three ratios together to produce a composite score for the institution. The composite score must be at least 1.5 for the institution to be deemed financially responsible by the ED without the need for further oversight. Our campus groups’ composite score, based on our fiscal year consolidated financial statements at the parent company level, was 1.9 in 2007 and 2.2 in 2006. The decrease in our composite score in 2007 was due to our repurchase in 2007 of 2.7 million shares of our common stock for $265.0 million, which has the accounting effect of reducing our shareholders’ equity and results in a lower equity ratio.

 

In evaluating an institution’s compliance with the financial responsibility standards, the ED may examine the financial statements of the individual institution, the institution’s parent company, or any party related to the institution. Historically, the ED has evaluated the financial condition of our institutions on a consolidated basis based on our financial statements at the parent company level. If the ED determines that an institution does not satisfy the ED's financial responsibility standards, the institution may establish its financial responsibility on one of several alternative bases, including posting a letter of credit in an amount equal to a specified percentage of the total Title IV Program funds received by the institution during the institution's most recently completed fiscal year and, in some cases, agreeing to receive Title IV Program funds under an arrangement other than the ED's standard advance funding arrangement while being provisionally certified. The requirement to post a letter of credit or other sanctions by the ED could increase our cost of regulatory compliance and adversely affect our results of operations or cash flows.

 

One or more of our institutes may have to post a letter of credit or be subject to other sanctions, if it does not correctly calculate and return within the required time frame Title IV Program funds for, or refund monies paid by or on behalf of, students who withdraw before completing their program of study. The HEA and its implementing regulations impose limits on the amount of Title IV Program funds withdrawing students can use to pay their education

costs (the “Return Policy”). The Return Policy permits a student to use only a pro rata portion of the Title IV Program funds that the student would otherwise be eligible to use, if the student withdraws during the first 60% of any period of enrollment. For our institutes, a period of enrollment is generally an academic quarter. The institution must calculate and return to the appropriate lenders or the ED any Title IV Program funds that the institution receives on behalf of a withdrawing student in excess of the amount the student can use for such period of enrollment. The institution must return those unearned funds in a timely manner which is generally within 45 days of the date the institution determined that the student had withdrawn. If the unearned funds are not properly calculated and timely returned, we may have to post a letter of credit in favor of the ED or be otherwise sanctioned by the ED. An institution is required to post a letter of credit with the ED in an amount equal to 25% of the total dollar amount of unearned Title IV Program funds that the institution was required to return with respect to withdrawn students during its most recently completed fiscal year, if the institution is found in an audit or program review to have untimely returned unearned Title IV Program funds with respect to 5% or more of the students in the audit or program review sample of withdrawn students, in either of its two most recently completed fiscal years. No audit or review has found that any of our institutes was violating the ED’s standard on the timely return of unearned Title IV Program funds. The requirement to post a letter of credit or other sanctions by the ED could increase our cost of regulatory compliance and adversely affect our results of operations.

 

The standards of most of the SAs and the ACICS limit a student’s obligation to an institution for tuition and fees, if a student withdraws from the institution (the “Refund Policy”). The specific standards vary among the SAs. Depending on when during an academic quarter a student withdraws and the applicable Refund Policy, in many instances the student remains obligated to the ITT Technical Institute for some or all of the student’s education costs that were paid by the Title IV Program funds returned under the Return Policy. In these instances, many withdrawing students are unable to pay all of their education costs, unless the students have access to other sources of financial aid. We have arranged for an unaffiliated private funding source to offer eligible students loans that can help replace any Title IV Program funds that are returned if any of those students withdraw. We believe that other unaffiliated private funding sources would also be willing to make these types of loans available to our students, but we cannot assure you of this. If these types of loans were unavailable, we could be unable to collect a significant portion of many withdrawing students’ education costs that would have been paid by the Title IV Program funds that were returned, which, in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.

 

One or more of our institutes may lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, if the percentage of its revenue derived from those programs is too high. Under a provision of the HEA commonly referred to as the “90/10” Rule, a for-profit institution becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs if, on a cash accounting basis, the institution derives more than 90% of its applicable revenue for a fiscal year from Title IV Programs. If any of our campus groups violated the 90/10 Rule for any fiscal year, it would be ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs as of the first day of the following fiscal year and would be unable to apply to regain its eligibility until the next fiscal year. Furthermore, if one of our campus groups violated the 90/10 Rule and became ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs but continued to disburse Title IV Program funds, the ED would require the institution to repay, with limited exceptions, all Title IV Program funds disbursed by the institution after the effective date of the loss of eligibility. For our 2007 fiscal year, none of our campus groups derived more than 68% of its revenue on a cash accounting basis from Title IV Programs, with a range from approximately 45% to approximately 68%. We regularly monitor compliance with this requirement to minimize the risk that any of our campus groups would derive more than the maximum allowable percentage of its applicable revenue from Title IV Programs for any fiscal year. If a campus group appeared likely to approach the maximum percentage threshold, we would consider making changes in student financing to comply with the 90/10 Rule, but we cannot assure you that we would be able to do this in a timely manner or at all. If any of our campus groups lost its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs and we could not arrange for alternative financing sources for the students attending the institutes in that campus group, we would probably have to close those institutes, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

Failure by one or more of our institutes to satisfy the ED’s administrative capability requirements could result in financial penalties, limitations on the institute’s participation in Title IV Programs, or loss of the institute’s eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. To participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must satisfy criteria of administrative capability prescribed by the ED. The most significant of these criteria require that the institution:

 

 

If the ED determines that an institution is not capable of adequately administering its participation in any of the Title IV Programs, the ED could:

 

 

Each of these sanctions could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and impose significant operating restrictions on us. In addition, an institution is deemed by the ED to lack administrative capability if its FFEL/FDL cohort default rate equals or exceeds 25% for any of the three most recent federal fiscal years for which such rates have been published. If an institution’s administrative capability is impaired solely because its FFEL/FDL cohort default rates equal or exceed 25%, the institution can continue to participate in Title IV Programs, but the ED may place the institution on provisional certification. See "– We cannot operate new institutes, add learning sites or offer new programs if they are not timely approved by our regulators, and we may have to repay Title IV Program funds disbursed to students enrolled at any of those locations or in any of those programs if we do not obtain prior approval."

 

We are subject to sanctions if we pay impermissible commissions, bonuses or other incentive payments to individuals involved in certain recruiting, admission or financial aid activities. An institution participating in Title IV Programs may not provide any commission, bonus or other incentive payment based directly or indirectly on success in securing enrollments or financial aid to any person or entity engaged in any student recruitment or admission activity or in making decisions regarding the awarding of Title IV Program funds. The ED’s regulations set forth 12 types of activities and payment arrangements that an institution may carry out without violating this HEA provision (the “Safe Harbors”). One of the Safe Harbors permits the payment of fixed compensation, such as a fixed annual salary or hourly wage, so long as the fixed compensation is not adjusted up or down more than twice during any 12-month period, and any adjustment to the fixed compensation is not based solely on the number of students recruited, admitted, enrolled or awarded financial aid. We believe that we have compensated the applicable employees in accordance with this Safe Harbor and other Safe Harbors, but the law and regulations governing this requirement do not establish clear criteria for compliance in all circumstances, and the ED has stated that it will no longer entertain a request by an institution or company for the ED to review and assess its individual compensation plan. If the ED determined that an institution’s compensation practices violated these standards, the ED could subject the institution to monetary fines or penalties or other sanctions. Any substantial fine or penalty or other sanction could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

We cannot operate new institutes, add learning sites or offer new programs if they are not timely approved by our regulators, and we may have to repay Title IV Program funds disbursed to students enrolled at any of those locations or in any of those programs if we do not obtain prior approval. Our expansion plans assume that we will be able to continue to obtain the necessary ED, ACICS and SA approvals to establish new institutes, add learning sites to our existing institutes and expand the program offerings at our existing institutes in a timely manner. If we are unable to obtain the approvals from the ED, the ACICS or the relevant SAs for any new institutes, learning sites or program offerings where such approvals are required, or to obtain such approvals in a timely manner, our ability to operate the new institutes, add the learning sites or offer the new programs as planned would be impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans.

 

The process of obtaining any required state and ACICS authorizations can also delay our operating new institutes, adding learning sites or offering new programs. In certain circumstances, the state laws and regulations in effect in the states where we are located or anticipate establishing a new location or the ACICS standards may limit our ability to establish new institutes and learning sites and expand the programs offered at an institute, which could have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans.

 

In addition, an institution that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs may add a new location or program without the ED's approval only if certain requirements are met. Otherwise, the institution must obtain the ED's approval before it may disburse Title IV Program funds to students in the new location or program. If we were to erroneously determine that a new location or program is eligible for Title IV Program funding, we would likely be liable for repayment of the Title IV Program funds provided to students in that location or program. See "Business – Highly Regulated Industry."

 

A high percentage of the Title IV Program loans that our students receive are made by a small number of lenders. Our students have the right and ability to use any lender of their choice. Historically, our students have received their FFEL program loans from a limited number of lending institutions. The practice of referring a limited number of lenders to students came under scrutiny on a nationwide basis in 2007 as a result of investigations and reviews by various states’ Attorneys General, the U.S. Congress and the ED. We have consistently referred lenders to our students that offer loans on what we believe contain competitive terms for our students, such as those involving

borrower benefits and loan administration. Based on published reports from the ED and other authorities, we have increased the number of lenders that we refer to our students.

 

The ED issued new regulations in November 2007, which require that any institution that recommends FFEL lenders to its students must recommend at least three unaffiliated lenders. Those new regulations take effect July 1, 2008.

 

If we were involved in conflicts of interest with student loan lenders, we could be subject to penalties and otherwise suffer adverse impacts on our business. In 2007, the New York Attorney General, several other attorneys general, the U.S. Congress and the ED all launched investigations of potential conflicts of interest between educational institutions and various lending organizations that provide student loans. Those investigations are ongoing, but several educational institutions and lending organizations have been implicated. Certain lenders and educational institutions that have been implicated have agreed to pay several million dollars in the aggregate to settle conflict of interest claims. While no allegations have been raised concerning our institutes, we have received general requests for information from several state attorneys general and SAs. We have no reason to believe that any of our employees have engaged in improper conduct in this regard. If any such impropriety were found, we could be subject to penalties and other adverse consequences.

 

If regulators do not timely approve a change in control of us or any of our institutes, the ability of the affected institutes to participate in Title IV Programs or operate may be impaired. The ED, the ACICS and most of the SAs have requirements pertaining to the change in ownership and/or control (collectively "change in control") of institutions, but these requirements do not uniformly define what constitutes a change in control and are subject to varying interpretations as to whether a particular transaction constitutes a change in control. If we or any of our institutes experience a change in control under the standards of the ED, the ACICS or any of the SAs, we or the affected institutes must seek the approval of the relevant regulatory agencies. Transactions or events that constitute a change in control for one or more of our regulatory agencies include:

 

 

Some of these transactions or events may be beyond our control. Our failure to obtain, or a delay in obtaining, a required approval of any change in control from the ED, the ACICS or any of the SAs in states in which our institutes are located could impair our ability or the ability of the affected institutes to participate in Title IV Programs. Our failure to obtain, or a delay in obtaining, a required approval of any change in control from the SA in any state in which we do not have an institute but in which we recruit students could require us to suspend our recruitment of students in that state until we receive the required approval. A material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows would result if we had a change in control and a material number of our institutes:

 

 

In addition, the fact that a change in control would require approval of the relevant regulatory agencies could have the effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or discouraging a third party from attempting to acquire, control of us.

 

Government and regulatory agencies and third parties may bring claims or actions against us based on alleged violations of the extensive regulatory requirements applicable to our institutes, which could require us to pay monetary damages, receive other sanctions and expend significant resources to defend those claims or actions. Due to the highly regulated nature of the postsecondary education industry, we are subject to claims of non-compliance with regulatory standards and other actions brought by our regulatory agencies, students, shareholders and other parties. If the results of any of those claims are unfavorable to us, we may be required to pay money damages or be subject to fines, penalties, injunctions, operational limitations, loss of eligibility to participate in federal or state financial aid programs, debarments, additional oversight and reporting, or other civil and criminal sanctions. Those sanctions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Even if we satisfactorily resolve the issues raised by those types of claims, we may have to divert significant financial and management resources from our ongoing business operations to address and defend those claims, which could have a

material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Adverse publicity regarding any of those claims could also negatively affect our business and the market price of our common stock. See “Business – Highly Regulated Industry.”

 

Investigations, claims and actions against companies in our industry could adversely affect our business and stock price. The operations of a number of companies in the postsecondary education industry have been subject to intense regulatory scrutiny, especially over the last few years. In some cases, allegations of wrongdoing have resulted in reviews or investigations by the U. S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), the SEC, the ED, the SAs or other state agencies. These allegations, reviews and investigations and the accompanying adverse publicity could have a negative impact on our industry as a whole and on the market price of our common stock.

 

Budget constraints in states that provide state financial aid to our students could reduce the amount of such financial aid that is available to our students, which could reduce our student population. Some states may provide financial aid to our students, such as California, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York. From time to time, states face budget constraints that may cause them to reduce state appropriations in a number of areas. Some of those states may decide to reduce the amount of state financial aid that they provide to students, but we cannot predict how significant any of those reductions may be or how long they could last. If the level of state funding for our students decreased and our students were not able to secure alternative sources of funding, our student population could decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

If the graduates of some of our programs are unable to obtain licensure in their chosen professional fields of study, the enrollment in and the revenue derived from those programs could decrease and claims could be made against us that could be costly to defend. Future graduates of certain of our programs of study will seek professional licensure in their chosen field following graduation. Their success in obtaining licensure depends on several factors, including:

 

 

Certain SAs have refused to license students who graduate from programs that do not meet specific types of accreditation, residency or other state requirements. In the event that one or more SAs refuses to recognize our graduates for professional licensure in the future based on factors relating to our institutes or their programs, student enrollment in those programs would be negatively impacted which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, we could be exposed to claims that would force us to incur legal and other expenses that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Risks Related to Our Business

 

If we fail to effectively identify, establish and operate new institutes and learning sites, our growth may be slowed. As part of our business strategy, we anticipate operating new institutes and adding learning sites to existing institutes at locations throughout the United States. Establishing new institutes and learning sites poses challenges and requires us to make investments in management and capital expenditures, incur marketing and advertising expenses and devote other resources that are different, and in some cases greater, than those required with respect to the operation of existing institutes. To operate a new institute or add a learning site, we would be required to obtain the appropriate approvals from the SAs and the ACICS, which may be conditioned or delayed in a manner that could significantly affect our growth plans. In addition, to be eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, a new institute or learning site may have to be certified by the ED. We cannot be sure that we will be able to identify suitable expansion opportunities to help maintain or accelerate our current growth rate or that we will be able to successfully integrate or profitably operate any new institutes or learning sites. Any failure by us to effectively identify, establish and manage the operations of newly established institutes or learning sites could slow our growth, make any newly established institutes or learning sites more costly to operate than we had planned and have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans and results of operations. See “Business – Business Strategy – Geographically Expand Our Institutes and Learning Sites.”

 

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to effectively identify, develop, obtain approval to offer and teach new programs at different levels in a cost-effective and timely manner. Part of our business strategy also includes increasing the number and level of programs offered at our institutes. Developing and offering new programs pose challenges and require us to make investments in research and development, management and capital expenditures, to incur marketing and advertising expenses and to devote other resources that are in addition to, and in some cases greater than, those associated with our current program offerings. In order to offer new programs at different levels at our institutes, we may be required to obtain the appropriate approvals from the ED, the SAs, the ACICS and, in certain

circumstances, specialized programmatic accrediting agencies, which may be conditioned or delayed in a manner that could significantly affect our growth plans. We cannot be sure that we will be able to identify new programs to help maintain or accelerate our current growth rate, that we will be able to obtain the requisite approvals to offer new programs at different levels at our institutes or that students will enroll in any new programs that we offer at our institutes. Any failure by us to effectively identify, develop, obtain approval to offer and teach new programs at our institutes could have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans and results of operations. See “Business – Business Strategy – Enhance Results at the Institute Level.”

 

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to keep pace with changing market needs and technology. Increasingly, prospective employers of our graduates demand that their entry-level employees possess appropriate technical skills and also appropriate soft skills, such as communication, critical thinking and teamwork skills. The skills that employees need may evolve rapidly in a changing economic and technological environment. Accordingly, it is important for our programs to evolve in response to those economic and technological changes. The expansion of our existing programs and the development of new programs may not be accepted by prospective students or the employers of our graduates. Even if we are able to develop acceptable new programs, we may not be able to begin offering those new programs as quickly as required by the employers we serve or as quickly as our competitors offer similar programs. If we are unable to adequately respond to changes in market requirements due to regulatory or financial constraints, technological changes or other factors, our ability to attract and retain students could be impaired and the rates at which our graduates obtain jobs involving their fields of study could suffer.

 

Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to continue to develop awareness and acceptance of our programs among working adults and recent high school graduates. The awareness of our programs among working adults and recent high school graduates is important to the success of our institutes. If we were unable to successfully market or advertise our programs, our ability to attract and enroll prospective students in our programs would be adversely affected and, consequently, our ability to increase revenue or maintain profitability would be impaired. The following are some of the factors that could prevent us from successfully marketing or advertising our programs:

 

 

If the lenders who provide private loans to our students were to end or reduce their programs and we were unable to timely identify alternative lenders for our students, our students’ ability to finance their education could be adversely affected, our receivables could increase and our student population could decrease. In 2007, we indirectly derived approximately 29% of our revenue from unaffiliated, private loan programs that were made available to eligible students at our institutes to help fund a portion of the students’ cost of education. The vast majority of these private loan programs were offered by one lender. In February 2008, our agreement with that lender was terminated. Although we had already made arrangements in January 2008 with three other unaffiliated lenders for them to provide private loans to our qualified students, those lenders are not contractually bound to continue offering private loans to our students and could terminate their private student loan programs at any time. If those lenders ended their private student loan programs or reduced the volume of loans made under the programs and we were unable to timely identify other lenders to make private loans to our students and their parents on similar terms, our students’ ability to finance their education could be adversely affected, our receivables could increase and our student population could decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

If we were to provide a significant amount of internally funded student financing to our students and we experienced related losses in excess of the amounts that we had reserved, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We offer a variety of payment plans to help students pay the portion of their cost of education that is not covered by financial aid or other funds. These balances are unsecured and not typically guaranteed. While these balances have not been significant to date, they could grow in the future for our students who do not qualify for private student loans from third parties due to their prior credit history. Although we have reserved for estimated losses related to unpaid student balances, losses in excess of the amount we have reserved for bad debts could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

High interest rates and tightening of the credit markets could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain students and could increase our risk exposure. Since much of the financing our students receive is tied to floating interest rates, higher interest rates cause a corresponding increase in the cost to our existing and prospective students of

financing their education, which could result in a reduction in the number of students attending our institutes and in our revenue. Higher interest rates could also contribute to higher default rates with respect to our students’ repayment of Title IV Program and private loans. High default rates may, in turn, adversely impact our eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, trigger our recourse obligations with respect to private loans guaranteed by us and/or negatively affect the willingness of private lenders to make private loan programs available to our students, which could result in a reduction in the number of students attending our institutes and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

 

In addition, a tightening of credit markets, which has been the case in recent months, could cause lenders to alter the terms of FFEL loans and private student loans that they offer in ways that are not beneficial to our student and parent borrowers. For example, the lenders may:

 

 

In any of those events, our students’ ability to finance their cost of education could be adversely affected, our receivables could increase and/or our student population could decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Further, the credit market tightening could cause lenders to seek additional guarantees from us related to private student loans, which would increase our exposure to credit risk.

 

If the charge-off rate on private student loans that we have guaranteed is higher than we anticipate, or if the charge offs occur earlier in the life of those loans, our guarantee obligation with respect to those loans may have a material adverse effect on us. In October 2007, we entered into a risk sharing agreement (“RSA”) with an unaffiliated lender for private loans to be provided to our students by or through that lender to help pay the students’ cost of education that student financial aid from federal, state and other sources do not cover. The RSA was terminated effective February 22, 2008, such that no private education loans will be made under the RSA after that date, but loans made under the RSA prior to that date will still be covered by our guarantee obligations. Under the RSA, if more than a certain percentage of the private student loans, based on dollar volume, are charged off by the lender, we guarantee the repayment of any private student loans that the lender charges off above that percentage. Our obligations under the RSA will remain in effect until all private student loans made under the RSA are paid in full or charged off by the lender. The maximum potential future payments that we could be required to make pursuant to our guarantee obligation under the RSA are affected by:

 

 

As a result, we are not able to estimate the maximum potential future payments that we could be required to make under the RSA. Based on the prior repayment history of our students with respect to private student loans, we do not believe that our guarantee obligation under the RSA will have a material adverse effect on us. If, however, the charge-off rate on the loans that are subject to the RSA is higher than we anticipate, or if the charge offs occur earlier in the life of those loans, we could be required to repay many more loans with higher balances than anticipated, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

 

Our loss of key personnel could harm our business. Our success to date has depended, and will continue to depend, largely on the skills, efforts and motivation of our executive officers. Our success also depends in large part on our ability to attract and retain highly qualified faculty, school administrators and corporate management. We face competition in the attraction and retention of personnel who possess the skill sets that we seek. In addition, key personnel may leave us and subsequently compete against us. Furthermore, we do not currently carry “key man” life insurance. The loss of the services of any of our key personnel, or our failure to attract and retain other qualified and experienced personnel on acceptable terms, could impair our ability to successfully manage our business.

 

In order to support revenue growth, we need to hire, retain, develop and train employees who are responsible for student recruiting, financial aid, registration, teaching and career services. Our ability to develop a strong team of employees with these responsibilities may be affected by a number of factors, including:

 

 

 

 

If we are unable to hire, retain, develop and train employees who are responsible for student recruiting, financial aid, registration, teaching and career services, our operations would be adversely affected.

 

Competition could decrease our market share, cause us to reduce tuition or force us to increase spending. The postsecondary education market in the United States is highly fragmented and competitive, with no single private or public institution enjoying a significant market share. Our institutes compete for students with degree- and nondegree-granting institutions, which include nonprofit public and private colleges and for-profit institutions, as well as with alternatives to higher education such as military service or immediate employment. We believe competition among educational institutions is based on:

 

 

Certain public and private colleges offer programs similar to those offered by our institutes at a lower tuition cost due in part to government subsidies, foundation grants, tax deductible contributions or other financial resources not available to for-profit institutions. Other for-profit institutions offer programs that compete with those of our institutes. Certain of our competitors in both the public and private sectors have greater financial and other resources than we do. All of these factors could affect the success of our marketing efforts and enable our competitors to recruit prospective students more effectively.

 

We may be required to reduce tuition or increase spending in response to competition in order to retain or attract students or pursue new market opportunities. As a result, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows may be negatively affected. We cannot be sure that we will be able to compete successfully against current or future competitors or that competitive pressures faced by us will not adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

 

Our quarterly results of operations are likely to fluctuate based on our seasonal student enrollment patterns. In reviewing our results of operations, you should not focus on quarter-to-quarter comparisons. Our results in any quarter may not indicate the results we may achieve in any subsequent quarter or for the full year. Our quarterly results of operations have tended to fluctuate as a result of seasonal variations in our business, principally due to changes in our total student population. Our student population varies as a result of new student enrollments, graduations and student attrition. Historically, our revenue in our third and fourth fiscal quarters has generally benefited from increased student matriculations. The number of new students entering our institutes is typically higher in September. Our institutes’ academic schedule generally does not affect our incurrence of most of our costs, however, and our costs do not fluctuate significantly on a quarterly basis. We believe that quarterly fluctuations in results of operations should continue as a result of seasonal enrollment patterns. These patterns may change, however, as a result of increased enrollment of adult students. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Variations in Quarterly Results of Operations.”

 

We may be unable to successfully complete or integrate future acquisitions. We may consider selective acquisitions in the future. We may not be able to complete any acquisitions on favorable terms or, even if we do, we may not be able to successfully integrate the acquired businesses into our business. Integration challenges include, among others:

 

 

 

 

The successful integration of future acquisitions may also require substantial attention from our senior management and the senior management of the acquired business, which could decrease the time that they devote to the day-to-day management of our business. If we do not successfully address risks and challenges associated with acquisitions, including integration, future acquisitions could harm, rather than enhance, our operating performance.

 

In addition, if we consummate an acquisition, our capitalization and results of operations may change significantly. A future acquisition could result in:

 

 

These results could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition or result in dilution to current stockholders.

 

Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war could have an adverse effect on our operations. Terrorist attacks and other acts of violence or war could disrupt our operations. Attacks or armed conflicts that directly impact our physical facilities or ability to recruit and retain students and employees could adversely affect our ability to deliver our programs of study to our students and, thereby, impair our ability to achieve our financial and operational goals. Furthermore, violent acts and threats of future attacks could adversely affect the U.S. and world economies. Finally, future terrorist acts could cause the United States to enter into a wider armed conflict that could further impact our operations and result in prospective students, as well as our current students and employees, entering military service. These factors could cause significant declines in the number of students who attend our institutes and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Natural disasters and other acts of God could have an adverse effect on our operations. Hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, tornados and other natural disasters and acts of God could disrupt our operations. Natural disasters and other acts of God that directly impact our physical facilities or ability to recruit and retain students and employees could adversely affect our ability to deliver our programs of study to our students and, thereby, impair our ability to achieve our financial and operational goals. Furthermore, natural disasters could adversely affect the economy and demographics of the affected region, which could cause significant declines in the number of students who attend our institutes in that region and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of us more difficult. Certain provisions of Delaware law, our Restated Certificate of Incorporation and our By-Laws could have the effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or discouraging a third party from attempting to acquire, control of us. Those provisions could:

 

 

Certain of those provisions authorize us to:

 

 

 

 

If we are unable to conclude successfully litigation against us, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. In the ordinary conduct of our business, we are subject to various lawsuits, investigations and claims, covering a wide range of matters, including, but not limited to, claims involving students or graduates and routine employment matters. It is possible that we may be required to pay substantial damages or settlement costs in excess of our insurance coverage to resolve those matters, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operation. See “Legal Proceedings.”

 

The personal information that we collect may be vulnerable to breach, theft or loss that could adversely affect our reputation and operations. Possession and use of personal information in our operations subjects us to risks and costs that could harm our business. Our institutes collect, use and retain large amounts of personal information regarding our students and their families, including social security numbers, tax return information, personal and family financial data and credit card numbers. We also collect and maintain personal information of our employees in the ordinary course of our business. Some of this personal information is held and managed by certain of our vendors. Although we use security and business controls to limit access and use of personal information, a third party may be able to circumvent those security and business controls, which could result in a breach of student or employee privacy. In addition, errors in the storage, use or transmission of personal information could result in a breach of student or employee privacy. Possession and use of personal information in our operations also subjects us to legislative and regulatory burdens that could require notification of data breaches and restrict our use of personal information. We cannot assure you that a breach, loss or theft of personal information will not occur. A major breach, theft or loss of personal information regarding our students and their families or our employees that is held by us or our vendors could have a material adverse effect on our reputation and results of operations and result in further regulation and oversight by federal and state authorities and increased costs of compliance.

 

Capacity constraints, security breaches or system interruptions to our computer networks could disrupt our operations, damage our reputation, limit our ability to attract and retain students and require us to expend significant resources. The performance and reliability of our computer systems are critical to our information management, reputation and ability to attract and retain students. Any system error or failure, or a sudden and significant increase in traffic, could disrupt the provision of education to students attending our institutes. We cannot assure you that we will be able to expand the infrastructure of our computer systems on a timely basis sufficient to meet demand. Our computer systems and operations could be vulnerable to interruption or malfunction due to events beyond our control, including natural disasters and telecommunications failures. Any interruption to our computer systems could have a material adverse effect on our operations and ability to attract and retain students. These factors could affect the number of students who attend our institutes and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Our computer systems may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer hackers, computer viruses and other security problems. A user who circumvents security measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions or malfunctions in operations. As a result, we may be required to expend significant resources to protect against the threat of those security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by those breaches. These factors could affect the number of students who attend our institutes and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

We rely on exclusive proprietary rights and intellectual property that may not be adequately protected under current laws, and we may encounter disputes from time to time relating to our use of intellectual property of third parties. Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our proprietary rights. We rely on a combination of copyrights, trademarks, service marks, trade secrets, domain names and agreements to protect our proprietary rights. We rely on service mark and trademark protection in the United States to protect our rights to distinctive marks associated with our services. We rely on agreements under which we obtain rights to use our name and related marks and course content developed by our faculty, our other employees and third party content experts. We cannot assure you that those measures will be adequate, that we have secured, or will be able to secure, appropriate protections for all of our proprietary rights, or that third parties will not infringe upon or violate our proprietary rights. Despite our efforts to protect those rights, unauthorized third parties may attempt to duplicate or copy the proprietary aspects of our name, curricula and other content. Our management's attention may be diverted by those attempts and we may need to use funds in litigation to protect our proprietary rights against any infringement or violation.

We may encounter disputes from time to time over rights and obligations concerning intellectual property, and we may not prevail in those disputes. In certain instances, we may not have obtained sufficient rights in the content of a course or a program of study. Third parties may raise a claim against us alleging an infringement or violation of the intellectual property of that third party. Some third party intellectual property rights may be extremely broad, and it may not be possible for us to conduct our operations in such a way as to avoid those intellectual property rights. Any such intellectual property claim could subject us to costly litigation, regardless of whether the claim has merit. Our insurance coverage may not cover potential claims of this type adequately or at all, and we may be required to alter the content of our courses or programs of study, or pay significant monetary damages, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

 

Risk Related to Our Common Stock

 

The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially in the future. The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially as a result of a number of factors, some of which are not within our control. Those factors include, among others:

 

 

Those factors could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock and could prevent an investor from selling shares of our common stock at or above the price at which those shares were purchased.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our facilities are located in 34 states. None of the facilities owned by us is subject to a mortgage or other indebtedness.

 

We generally locate our institutes in suburban areas near major population centers. We generally house our campus facilities in modern, air conditioned buildings, which include classrooms, laboratories, student break areas and administrative offices. Our institutes have accessible parking facilities and are generally near a major highway. The facilities of a typical institute range in size from approximately 10,000 to 58,000 square feet of office space. The initial lease terms of our institutes’ leased facilities range from three to 15 years. The average remaining lease term of our leased facilities is approximately four years. If desirable or necessary, an institute may be relocated to a new facility reasonably near the existing facility at the end of the lease term.

 

We own our headquarters building in Carmel, Indiana, which represents approximately 43,000 square feet of office space. In addition, we lease approximately 9,000 square feet of office space for our headquarters personnel in one nearby building for a lease term expiring in April 2010.

 

 

 

We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of our business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, among others. We cannot assure you of the ultimate outcome of any litigation involving us. Any litigation alleging violations of education or consumer protection

laws and/or regulations, misrepresentation, fraud or deceptive practices may also subject our affected institutes to additional regulatory scrutiny.

 

 

 

 

PART II

 

   

 

Our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the “ESI” trading symbol. The prices set forth below are the high and low sale prices of our common stock during the periods indicated, as reported in the NYSE's consolidated transaction reporting system.

 

 

 

We did not pay a cash dividend in 2007 or 2006. We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. The declaration and payment of dividends on our common stock are subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and compliance with applicable law. Our decision to pay dividends in the future will depend on general business conditions, the effect of such payment on our financial condition and other factors our Board of Directors may in the future consider to be relevant.

 

We did not sell any of our securities during the three months ended December 31, 2007 that were not registered under the Securities Act.  In January 2008, we credited 703 treasury shares of our common stock to the deferred share accounts of each of six non-employee directors under the ESI Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation Plan (the "Directors Deferred Compensation Plan") in payment of their annual retainer for 2008. These shares of our common stock will be issued upon the termination of the non-employee director’s service as a non-employee director for any reason, including retirement or death. In January 2008, we also issued 703 treasury shares of our common stock to one non-employee director under the Directors Deferred Compensation Plan in payment of his annual retainer for 2008. The transactions described in this paragraph are exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act pursuant to Section 4(2) thereof.

 

The following table sets forth information regarding purchases made by us of shares of our common stock on a monthly basis during the fourth quarter of 2007:

 

 

_____________

 

 

 

 

 

The shares that remained available for repurchase under the Repurchase Program were 5,021,800 as of December 31, 2007. The terms of the Repurchase Program provide that we may repurchase shares of our common stock, from time to time depending on market conditions and other considerations, in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Exchange Act. Unless earlier terminated by our Board of Directors, the Repurchase Program will expire when we repurchase all shares authorized for repurchase thereunder.

 

The performance graph set forth below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the S&P 500 Index and a Peer Issuer Group Index for the period from December 31, 2002 through December 31, 2007. The peer issuer group consists of the following companies selected on the basis of the similar nature of their business: Apollo Group, Inc., Capella Education Company, Career Education Corp., Corinthian Colleges, Inc., DeVry, Inc., Lincoln Educational Services Corporation, Strayer Education, Inc. and Universal Technical Institute, Inc. (the “Peer Issuer Group”). We believe that, including us, the Peer Issuer Group represents a significant portion of the market value of publicly traded companies whose primary business is postsecondary education. The Peer Issuer Group includes all of the peer issuers in the former peer issuer group, except for Laureate Education, Inc. ("LEI"). LEI became a private company in 2007.

Cumulative Total Return

(Based on $100 invested on December 31, 2002 and assumes

the reinvestment of all dividends)

 

 

 

The preceding stock price Performance Graph and related information shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference into such filing.

Item 6.  Selected Financial Data.

 

The following selected financial data are qualified by reference to and should be read with our Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and other financial data included elsewhere in this report.

 

 

_____________________________

 

 

 

See Notes 1 and 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of our stock-based compensation.

 

 

 

The following discussion should be read with the Selected Financial Data and the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this report.

 

General

 

As of December 31, 2007, we operated 97 institutes and nine learning sites in 34 states, which were providing postsecondary education to approximately 53,000 students. We derive our revenue from tuition, the sale of tool kits and laptop computers, and fees charged to and paid by, or on behalf of, our students. Most students at our institutes pay a substantial portion of their tuition and other education-related expenses with funds received under various government-sponsored student financial aid programs, especially Title IV Programs. In 2007, we indirectly derived approximately 63% of our revenue determined on an accrual accounting basis (or 61% of our revenue, determined on a cash accounting basis as defined by the ED’s regulations) from Title IV Programs.

 

Our revenue varies based on the aggregate student population, which is influenced by the number of students attending our institutes at the beginning of a fiscal period and student retention rates.

 

New students generally enter our institutes at the beginning of an academic quarter that begins for most programs of study in early March, mid-June, early September and late November or early December. Our establishment of new institutes and the introduction of additional program offerings at our existing institutes have been significant factors in increasing the aggregate student population in recent years.

 

In order to participate in Title IV Programs, a new institute must be authorized by the state in which it will operate, accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the ED, and certified by the ED to participate in Title

IV Programs. The accrediting commission that accredits our institutes grants accreditation to a new institute prior to its first class start date. The ED’s certification process cannot commence until the institute receives its state authorization and accreditation. In the last few years, we have experienced minimal delay in obtaining ED certification of our new institutes and learning sites.

 

We earn tuition revenue on a straight-line basis over the length of each of four, 12-week academic quarters in each fiscal year. State regulations, accrediting commission criteria and our policies generally require us to refund a portion of the tuition and fee payments received from a student who withdraws from one of our institutes during an academic quarter. We recognize immediately the amount of tuition and fees, if any, that we may retain after payment of any refund.

 

We incur expenses throughout a fiscal period in connection with the operation of our institutes. The cost of educational services includes salaries of faculty and institute administrators, cost of course materials, occupancy costs, depreciation and amortization of equipment costs, facilities and leasehold improvements, and other miscellaneous costs incurred by our institutes.

 

Student services and administrative expenses include direct marketing costs (which are marketing expenses directly related to new student recruitment), indirect marketing expenses, an expense for uncollectible accounts and administrative expenses incurred at our corporate headquarters. Direct marketing costs include salaries and employee benefits for recruiting representatives and direct solicitation expenses. We capitalize our direct marketing costs (excluding advertising expenses) using the successful efforts method and amortize them on a cost-pool-by-cost-pool basis over the period that we expect to receive revenue streams associated with those assets. We expense as incurred our marketing costs that do not relate to the direct solicitation of potential students.

 

In 2007, we continued to add program offerings among existing institutes and began operations at new institutes. We also continued our efforts to diversify our program offerings by developing residence and online programs at different degree levels in both technology and non-technology fields of study.

 

 

 

In 2008, we intend to add approximately 125 of our current program offerings among approximately 45 existing institutes. We also plan to continue developing additional residence and online programs at different degree levels in technology and non-technology fields of study to be offered at our institutes. The new degree programs are expected to involve a variety of disciplines and be at the associate and bachelor degree levels. We intend to develop both a residence and online version of many of the new programs. In 2008, we intend to increase the number of our institutes that offer bachelor degree programs to approximately 80. We plan to begin operations at six to eight locations in 2008. Our new institutes generally incur a loss up to 24 months after the first class start date.

 

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

 

This management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is based on our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities, revenue and expenses and contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from those estimates and judgments under different assumptions or conditions.

 

We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant estimates and judgments used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. These policies should be read in conjunction with Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Recognition of Revenue. Tuition revenue is recorded on a straight-line basis over the length of the applicable course. If a student withdraws from an institute, the standards of most state education authorities that regulate our institutes, the accrediting commission that accredits our institutes and our own internal policy limit a student’s obligation for tuition and fees to the institute depending on when a student withdraws during an academic quarter (“Refund Policies”). The terms of the Refund Policies vary by state, and the limitations imposed by the Refund Policies are generally based on the portion of the academic quarter that has elapsed at the time the student withdraws.

The greater the portion of the academic quarter that has elapsed at the time the student withdraws, the greater the student’s obligation is to the institute for the tuition and fees related to that academic quarter. We record revenue net of any refunds that result from any applicable Refund Policy. On an individual student basis, tuition earned in excess of cash received is recorded as accounts receivable, and cash received in excess of tuition earned is recorded as deferred revenue.

 

Tuition revenue includes textbooks students use in their programs of study. We record the cost of these textbooks in prepaid expenses and other current assets and amortize the cost on a straight-line basis over the applicable course length. Laptop computer sales and the related cost of the laptop computers are recognized when the student receives the laptop computer. Tool kit sales and the related cost of the tool kits are recognized when the student receives the kit. Academic fees (which are charged only one time to students on their first day of class attendance) are recognized as revenue on a straight-line basis over the average program length. Deferred revenue is recorded for fees collected in excess of revenue recognized. If a student withdraws from an institute, all unrecognized revenue relating to his or her fees, net of any refunds that result from any applicable Refund Policy, is recognized upon the student’s departure. An administrative fee is charged to a student and recognized as revenue when the student withdraws or graduates from a program of study at an institute.

 

In the year ended December 31, 2007, approximately 97% of our revenue represented tuition charges and approximately 3% of our revenue represented laptop computer sales, tool kit sales and student fees. In the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, approximately 96% of our revenue represented tuition charges and approximately 4% of our revenue represented laptop computer sales, tool kit sales and student fees. The amount of tuition earned depends on:

 

 

Each of these factors is known at the time our tuition revenue is calculated.

 

Equity-Based Compensation. Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123R, which prescribes the accounting for equity instruments exchanged for employee and director services. Under SFAS No. 123R, stock-based compensation cost is measured at the date of grant, based on the calculated fair value of the grant, and is recognized as an expense over the period of time that the grantee must provide services to us before the stock-based compensation is fully vested. The vesting period is generally the period set forth in the agreement granting the stock-based compensation. Under the terms of our stock-based compensation plans, some grants immediately vest in full when the grantee’s employment or service terminates, or when he or she is eligible to retire. As a result, in certain circumstances, the period of time that the grantee must provide services to us in order for that stock-based compensation to fully vest may be less than the vesting period set forth in the agreement granting the stock-based compensation. In these instances, compensation expense will be recognized over this shorter period. We recognize stock-based compensation expense on a straight-line basis over the service period applicable to the grantee.

 

We adopted SFAS No. 123R using the modified prospective transition method. Under this transition method, the financial statement amounts for periods before 2006 have not been restated to reflect the fair value method of expensing the stock-based compensation. The compensation expense recognized on and after January 1, 2006 includes the compensation cost based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with: (a) SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” as amended by SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation – Transition and Disclosure” (“SFAS No. 123”) for all stock-based compensation that was granted prior to, but vested on or after, January 1, 2006; and (b) SFAS No. 123R for all stock-based compensation that was granted on or after January 1, 2006.

 

We use a binomial option pricing model to determine the fair value of all stock options granted on or after January 1, 2005, and we use the market price of our common stock to determine the fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) granted. Various assumptions are used in the model to determine the fair value of the stock options. These assumptions are discussed in Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

Prior to January 1, 2006, we accounted for stock-based compensation to employees and directors in accordance with the intrinsic value method under APB Opinion No. 25 and related interpretations. Under the intrinsic value method, minimal compensation expense was recognized in our financial statements, because the vast majority of the stock-based compensation that we granted was in the form of nonqualified stock options and all of the stock options granted had exercise prices equivalent to the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant.

 

In the year ended December 31, 2007, we granted stock options and RSUs to certain employees and directors. In 2006, we began granting restricted stock and RSUs, instead of stock options, to:

 

 

Stock-based compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2007 was $5.1 million, or approximately $3.1 million, net of tax, and in the year ended December 31, 2006 was $3.1 million, or approximately $1.9 million, net of tax. No stock-based compensation expense was recorded in the year ended December 31, 2005. As of December 31, 2007, we estimated that pre-tax compensation expense for unvested stock-based compensation grants in the amount of approximately $7.8 million, net of estimated forfeitures, will be recognized in future periods. We expect to recognize this expense over the remaining service period applicable to the grantees which, on a weighted average basis, is approximately 2.5 years.

 

On October 24, 2005, the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors accelerated the vesting of all unvested, nonqualified stock options granted to our employees and directors that had exercise prices greater than the closing price of our common stock on that date. As a result of the vesting acceleration, all of those stock options were fully exercisable as of October 24, 2005. The purpose for accelerating the vesting of those stock options was to reduce our compensation costs associated with those stock options upon our adoption of SFAS No. 123R in 2006.

 

On October 28, 2005, the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors awarded certain of our executives nonqualified stock options to purchase a total of 276,340 shares of our common stock as of November 2, 2005. The stock options awarded were fully vested and immediately exercisable. The full vesting of the stock options was conditioned upon each optionee agreeing not to sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of any shares obtained upon exercising the option until:

 

 

The purpose for accelerating the award and vesting of those stock options was to reduce our compensation costs associated with those stock options upon our adoption of SFAS No. 123R in 2006.

 

See also Notes 1 and 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of stock-based compensation and SFAS No. 123R.

 

Income Taxes. Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted FASB Interpretation Number 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (“FIN 48”), which prescribes a single, comprehensive model for how a company should recognize, measure, present and disclose in its financial statements uncertain tax positions that the company has taken or expects to take on a tax return. This interpretation requires the evaluation of whether it is more likely than not, based on the technical merits of a tax position, that the benefits resulting from the position will be realized by the company. Upon adoption of FIN 48, we recognized a decrease of approximately $3.4 million in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits, which was accounted for as an increase in retained earnings of $2.2 million as of January 1, 2007 and a reduction of federal tax benefits of $1.2 million.

 

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. We extend unsecured credit to our students for tuition and fees and we record a receivable for the tuition and fees earned in excess of the payment received from or on behalf of a student. The individual student balances of these receivables are insignificant. We record an allowance for doubtful accounts with respect to accounts receivable on an institute-by-institute basis. We review the historical collection experience for each institute, consider other facts and circumstances related to an institute and record an allowance for doubtful accounts based on that review and consideration. If our current collection trends were to differ significantly from our historic collection experience, however, we would make a corresponding adjustment to our allowance. We write-off the accounts receivable due from former students when we conclude that collection is not probable.

 

Property and Equipment. We include all property and equipment in the financial statements at cost and make provisions for depreciation of property and equipment using the straight-line method. The following table sets forth the general ranges of the estimated useful lives of our property and equipment:

 

Changes in circumstances, such as changes in our curricula and technological advances, may result in the actual useful lives of our property and equipment differing from our estimates. We regularly review and evaluate the estimated useful lives of our property and equipment. Although we believe that our assumptions and estimates are reasonable, deviations from our assumptions and estimates could produce a materially different result.

 

We regularly review our long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of those assets may not be recoverable. If the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair market value, we recognize an impairment loss equal to the difference. We base our impairment analyses of long-lived assets on our current business strategy, expected growth rates and estimates of future economic and regulatory conditions.

 

Direct Marketing Costs. Direct costs incurred relating to the enrollment of new students are capitalized using the successful efforts method. The direct costs subject to capitalization are readily quantifiable and are not subject to estimation. Direct marketing costs subject to capitalization include salaries and employee benefits of recruiting representatives and other direct costs. Successful efforts is the ratio of students enrolled to prospective students interviewed. The higher the rate of interviewed students who enroll, the greater the percentage of our direct marketing costs that are capitalized. We amortize our direct marketing costs on a cost-pool-by-cost-pool basis over the period that we expect to receive revenue streams associated with those assets. The amortization method and period are based on historical trends of student enrollment and retention activity and are not subject to significant assumptions. We regularly evaluate the factors used to determine the amounts to be deferred and amortized and the future recoverability of those deferred costs.

 

Contingent Liabilities. We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of our business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, among others. When we are aware of a claim or potential claim, we assess the likelihood of any loss or exposure. If it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we record a liability for the loss. The liability recorded includes probable and estimable legal costs associated with the claim or potential claim. If the loss is not probable or the amount of the loss cannot be reasonably estimated, we disclose the claim if the likelihood of a potential loss is reasonably possible and the amount involved is material. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, deviations from our estimates could produce a materially different result.

 

Guarantees. In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 45, “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others, an interpretation of FASB Statements No. 5, 57 and 107 and rescission of FASB Interpretation No. 34” (“FIN 45”), we recognize a liability for the fair value of a guarantee obligation upon its issuance. The fair market value of our guarantee of the payment of private loans made to our students by an unaffiliated lender was estimated based on historical charge off experience with respect to private loans made to our students and the present value of the expected cash flows that may result from the settlement of the guarantee obligation in the future. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, deviations from our estimates could produce a materially different result.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements

 

In December 2007, the FASB issued the following statements:

 

 

Both of these statements are effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008. In November 2007, FASB’s Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) issued EITF 07-01, “Accounting for Collaborative Arrangements” (“EITF 07-01”). EITF 07-01 is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2008 and applies to arrangements in existence as of the effective date. We do not expect that SFAS No. 141(R), SFAS No. 160 or EITF 07-01 will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“SFAS No. 159”), which permits companies to choose to measure certain financial instruments and other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value.  SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We adopted SFAS No. 159 as of January 1, 2008. The adoption of this pronouncement did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, which requires a company to measure the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan as of the date of the company’s year-end balance sheet. This provision of SFAS No. 158 is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2008 and will be adopted by us no later than December 31, 2008. We do not believe that the adoption of this provision of SFAS No. 158 will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

Also in September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS No. 157”), which provides guidance on the use of fair value to measure assets and liabilities and expands the disclosure required in a company’s financial statements for fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 will apply whenever other accounting pronouncements require or permit fair value measurements for assets and liabilities and is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We adopted SFAS No. 157 as of January 1, 2008. The adoption of this pronouncement did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

Variations in Quarterly Results of Operations

 

Our quarterly results of operations have tended to fluctuate within a fiscal year due to the timing of student matriculations. Each of our four fiscal quarters have 12 weeks of earned tuition revenue. Revenue in our third and fourth fiscal quarters generally benefits from increased student matriculations. The number of new students entering our institutes tends to be higher in September, which is the time that the public has traditionally associated with the start of a new school year. The academic schedule generally does not affect our incurrence of most of our costs, however, and costs do not fluctuate significantly on a quarterly basis.

 

 

 

Results of Operations

 

The following table sets forth the percentage relationship of certain statement of income data to revenue for the periods indicated:

 

 

The following table sets forth our total student enrollment as of the dates indicated:

 

 

Total student enrollment includes all new and continuing students. A continuing student is any student who, in the academic quarter being measured, is enrolled in a program of study at an ITT Technical Institute and was enrolled in the same program at any ITT Technical Institute at the end of the immediately preceding academic quarter. A new student is any student who, in the academic quarter being measured, enrolls in and begins attending any program of study at an ITT Technical Institute:

 

 

 

 

 

 

We generally organize the academic schedule for programs of study offered at our institutes on the basis of four 12-week academic quarters in a calendar year that typically begin in early March, mid-June, early September and late November or early December. To measure the persistence of our students, the number of continuing students in any academic quarter is divided by the total student enrollment in the immediately preceding academic quarter.

 

 

 

Student retention is typically lower in the courses that we teach online over the Internet compared to the courses that we teach on campus. As a result of the use of the Hybrid Delivery Model, our students’ persistence decreased. In the second quarter of 2006, we began modifying the Hybrid Delivery Model such that, by the third quarter of 2006, students were no longer required to take one course online each academic quarter. As modified, the Hybrid Delivery Model provides qualifying students with the option of taking one course online each academic quarter. Nonqualifying students are required to take all of their courses in residence at the institute each academic quarter. We consider a number of factors in determining whether a student qualifies, including his or her previous academic performance and success in courses taught online. We believe that increasing our students’ face-to-face interaction with their instructors has contributed to the improvement in our students’ persistence.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2007 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2006. Revenue increased $111.7 million, or 14.7%, to $869.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $757.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to:

 

 

The increase in revenue was partially offset by lower sales of laptop computers. The increase in student enrollment was primarily due to:

 

 

Cost of educational services increased $1.7 million, or 0.5%, to $358.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $356.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to:

 

 

Most of the increase in cost of educational services was offset by:

 

 

Cost of educational services as a percentage of revenue decreased 580 basis points to 41.3 % in the year ended December 31, 2007 from 47.1% in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to operating efficiencies arising from the utilization of existing facilities to accommodate increases in resident student enrollment resulting from the modifications made to the Hybrid Delivery Model. In addition, improved student persistence resulted in increased revenue without a corresponding increase in costs. The decrease in cost of educational services as a percentage of revenue was partially offset by the costs associated with operating new institutes and learning sites.

 

Student services and administrative expenses increased $49.1 million, or 22.3%, to $268.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $219.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2006. The principal causes of this increase included:

 

 

Student services and administrative expenses increased to 30.9% of revenue in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to 29.0% of revenue in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to an increase in media advertising costs for the promotion of new institutes and programs and an increase in bad debt expense. Bad debt expense as a percentage of revenue increased to 2.1% in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to 1.4% in the year ended December 31, 2006. We believe that our bad debt expense as a percentage of revenue will increase in the year ended December 31, 2008, primarily due to anticipated increases in internally funded student financing.

 

Operating income increased $60.5 million, or 33.3%, to $242.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $181.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2006. The operating margin was 27.8% in the year ended December 31, 2007 and 24.0% in the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Interest income, net, decreased $5.6 million, or 69.7%, to $2.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $8.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to interest expense of $8.2 million associated with borrowings under our revolving credit agreement.

 

Our combined federal and state effective income tax rate was 38.0% in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to 37.5% in the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2006 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2005. Revenue increased $69.8 million, or 10.1%, to $757.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $688.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily due to:

 

 

The increase in student enrollment was primarily due to:

 

 

The increase in revenue was partially offset by an increase in the number of students who were enrolled part-time and, therefore, taking less than a full course load, as well as a decrease in our student persistence rate in the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Cost of educational services increased $28.6 million, or 8.7%, to $356.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $328.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily due to:

 

 

Cost of educational services as a percentage of revenue decreased to 47.1% in the year ended December 31, 2006 from 47.7% in the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily due to a decrease in compensation and benefit expense arising from the freeze of our pension plans and greater efficiencies in the operation of our institutes, which was partially offset by the costs associated with 18 new institutes and learning sites which began operations in the last 24 months.

 

Student services and administrative expenses increased $26.8 million, or 13.9%, to $219.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $193.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2005. The principal causes of this increase included:

 

 

 

Student services and administrative expenses increased to 29.0% of revenue in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to 28.1% of revenue in the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily due to an increase in media advertising costs for the promotion of new institutes and programs.

 

Special legal and other investigation costs decreased $1.6 million to $(0.4) million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2005. In the year ended December 31, 2006, we reduced the accrual of estimated legal costs associated with the DOJ investigation of us, the inquiry initiated by the SEC into the allegations investigated by the DOJ, and the securities class action, shareholder derivative and books and records inspection lawsuits filed against us and certain of our current and former executive officers and Directors (collectively, the “Actions”) by $0.4 million. We recorded a charge of $1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2005 for estimated legal costs associated with the Actions.

 

Operating income increased $16.1 million, or 9.7%, to $181.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $165.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2005. The operating margin was 24.0% in both of the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2006.

 

Interest income, net, decreased $0.8 million, or 8.5%, to $8.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $8.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2005. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease in invested funds during 2006, offset by an increase in the rate of return on our investments.

 

Our combined federal and state effective income tax rate was 37.5% in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to 37.1% in the year ended December 31, 2005.

 

Financial Condition, Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

Cash and cash equivalents were $7.2 million as of December 31, 2007 compared to $161.9 million as of December 31, 2006. The December 31, 2006 cash and cash equivalents balance included a $150.0 million certificate of deposit which represented the short-term investment of proceeds from borrowings under our revolving credit facility. We also had investments in marketable debt and auction rate preferred equity securities, which are classified as available-for-sale or held-to-maturity, depending on our investment intentions with regard to those securities. Our investments increased $108.4 million to $303.4 million as of December 31, 2007 compared to $195.0 million as of December 31, 2006, primarily due to the investment of the proceeds from the maturity of the certificate of deposit.

 

We are required to recognize the funded status of our defined benefit postretirement plans on our balance sheet. We recorded an asset of $14.7 million for the ESI Pension Plan, a non-contributory defined benefit pension plan commonly referred to as a cash balance plan, and a liability of $1.9 million for the ESI Excess Pension Plan, a nonqualified, unfunded retirement plan, on our Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2007. In order to determine those amounts, we performed an actuarial valuation of the ESI Pension Plan and ESI Excess Pension Plan (the "Pension Plans"), and reviewed and updated our key assumptions as part of each valuation, including the discount rate and expected long-term rate of return on the investments.

 

Effective March 31, 2006, the benefit accruals under the Pension Plans were frozen, such that no further benefits accrue under those plans after March 31, 2006. Participants in the Pension Plans will, however, continue to be credited with vesting service and interest according to the terms of the Pension Plans. As a result of the freeze, total pension costs decreased $7.6 million to $0.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to $7.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2005. Total pension benefit in 2007 was $1.1 million. In 2008, we expect the pension benefit to remain at approximately the same amount as in 2007.

 

In January 2006, we contributed $15.0 million to the ESI Pension Plan. No contributions were made in 2007 and we do not expect to make any contribution to the ESI Pension Plan in 2008, because the plan was fully funded as of December 31, 2007.

 

See Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed discussion of the Pension Plans.

 

Capital Resources. Our cash flows are highly dependent upon the receipt of Title IV Program funds. In 2007 and 2006, we indirectly derived our revenue, determined on an accrual basis of accounting, from the following sources:

 

 

On a cash accounting basis, as defined by the ED’s regulations, we indirectly derived approximately 61% of our revenue from Title IV Programs in 2007 compared to 57% in 2006 and 61% in 2005.

 

Under a provision of the HEA commonly referred to as the “90/10” Rule, a for-profit institution, such as each of our campus groups, becomes ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs if, on a cash accounting basis, the institution derives more than 90% of its applicable revenue for a fiscal year from Title IV Programs. For our 2007 fiscal year, none of our campus groups derived more than approximately 68% of its revenue, on a cash accounting basis, from Title IV Programs.

 

Under the HEA, an institution may also lose its eligibility to participate in some or all Title IV Programs if the rates at which the institution’s students default on their federal student loans exceed specified percentages. An institution whose FFEL/FDL cohort default rate is 25% or greater for three consecutive federal fiscal years or greater than 40% for one federal fiscal year loses its eligibility to participate in certain Title IV Programs for at least two federal fiscal years. The following table sets forth the range of our campus groups’ FFEL/FDL cohort default rates for the federal fiscal years indicated:

 

 

Federal regulations affect the timing of our receipt and disbursements of Title IV Program funds. These regulations require institutions to disburse all Title IV Program funds by payment period. For our institutes, the payment period is an academic quarter. Prior to February 2006, institutions were not allowed to disburse the first installment of an FFEL or FDL program loan to a first-year undergraduate student who was a first-time borrower until 30 days after the student began his or her course of study. Beginning in February 2006, this 30-day period was eliminated for institutions whose FFEL/FDL cohort default rates are less than 10% for the three most recent federal fiscal years for which the ED has published those rates. The majority of our campus groups fulfilled this requirement in 2007 and 2006, which resulted in an acceleration of our receipt and disbursement of Title IV Program funds in 2006 compared to prior years. We continued to disburse Title IV Program funds to other students ten days before the start of each academic quarter.

 

Operations. Cash from operating activities increased $14.4 million to $178.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $163.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2006, primarily due to an increase in net income which was partially offset by delays in the receipt of certain student loan funds.

 

Accounts receivable less allowance for doubtful accounts was $15.1 million as of December 31, 2007 compared to $9.4 million as of December 31, 2006. Days sales outstanding increased 1.8 days to 6.0 days at December 31, 2007 compared to 4.2 days at December 31, 2006. Both increases were primarily due to delays in the receipt of certain student loan funds. We expect our days sales outstanding to increase in 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to anticipated increases in internally funded student financing.

 

In the year ended December 31, 2006, cash from operating activities increased $9.7 million to $163.9 million compared to $154.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2005, primarily due to:

 

 

The excess tax benefit from stock option exercises in the year ended December 31, 2005 was presented under cash flows from operating activities. Beginning in 2006, SFAS No. 123R requires us to present the excess tax benefit from stock option exercises under cash flows from financing activities which resulted in an $8.7 million decrease in reported cash flows from operating activities in the year ended December 31, 2006 compared to the year ended December 31, 2005.

 

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2007, we leased two facilities that we negotiated to purchase for approximately $6.9 million. We also negotiated to purchase a parcel of land for $1.5 million on which we intend to build a facility. All of these transactions are expected to be completed in early 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

Capital expenditures, excluding facility and land purchases and facility construction, totaled $15.5 million in 2007, $23.7 million in 2006 and $21.3 million in 2005. These expenditures consisted primarily of classroom and laboratory equipment (such as computers and electronic equipment), classroom and office furniture, software and leasehold improvements. We plan to continue to upgrade and expand current facilities and equipment during 2008. Cash generated from operations is expected to be sufficient to fund our capital expenditure requirements.

 

Financing. We entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of December 17, 2007 (the “Restated Credit Agreement”) with a single lender (the “Lender”). The Restated Credit Agreement amends and restates in its entirety the Credit Agreement dated December 22, 2006 between us and the Lender (the “Prior Credit Agreement”). The Restated Credit Agreement provides for two lines of credit: one in the maximum principal amount of $50 million; and the other in the initial maximum principal amount of $100 million, but increasing to $110 million on February 20, 2008. The $150 million of borrowings outstanding under the Prior Credit Agreement were transferred to the lines of credit under the Restated Credit Agreement as of December 17, 2007. Borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement are used to allow us to continue repurchasing shares of our common stock while maintaining compliance with certain financial ratios required by the ED, SAs and the ACICS.

 

Both lines of credit under the Restated Credit Agreement mature on July 1, 2010. The borrowings under each line of credit may be secured or unsecured at our election, provided that we have not defaulted under the Restated Credit Agreement, in which case, any borrowings made on a secured basis must remain secured. Investments held in a pledged account serve as the collateral for any secured borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement.

 

The Restated Credit Agreement contains, among other things, covenants, representations and warranties and events of default customary for credit facilities. The availability of borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement is subject to our ability at the time of borrowing to satisfy certain specified conditions. These conditions include the absence of default by us, as defined in the Restated Credit Agreement, and that certain representations and warranties contained in the Restated Credit Agreement continue to be true and accurate. We are also required to maintain a certain maximum leverage ratio and a minimum ratio of cash and investments to outstanding indebtedness at the end of each of our fiscal quarters. We were in compliance with those ratio requirements as of December 31, 2007.

 

Borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement bear interest at the London Interbank Offered Rate (the “LIBOR”), plus an applicable margin based on our indebtedness to net worth ratio, adjusted quarterly. We pay a commitment fee of 0.15% per annum of the average daily unused amount of the credit facilities. As of December 31, 2007, the borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement were $150.0 million, all of which were secured, and bore interest at a rate of 4.93% per annum. Approximately $158.0 million of our investments served as collateral for the secured borrowings as of December 31, 2007.

 

Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Exchange Act. Pursuant to the Board’s stock repurchase authorization, we plan to repurchase additional shares of our common stock from time to time in the future depending on market conditions and other considerations.

 

 

From January 31, 2008 through February 15, 2008, we repurchased 810,000 outstanding shares of our common stock pursuant to our existing repurchase authorization at a total cost of $68.4 million or at an average cost per share of $84.51.

 

Proceeds from the exercise of stock options were $31.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to $23.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2006 and $11.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2005.

 

We believe that cash generated from operations and our investments will be adequate to satisfy our working capital and capital expenditure requirements for the foreseeable future. We also believe that any reduction in cash and cash equivalents or investments that may result from their use to repurchase shares of our common stock, purchase facilities or construct facilities will not have a material adverse effect on our expansion plans, planned capital expenditures, ability to meet any applicable regulatory financial responsibility standards or ability to conduct normal operations.

 

Contractual Obligations

 

 

 

The long-term debt represents our revolving credit facilities under the Restated Credit Agreement and assumes that the full amount of the facilities will be outstanding at all times through the date of maturity. The amounts shown include the principal payments that will be due upon maturity as well as interest payments. Interest payments have been calculated based on their scheduled payment dates using the interest rate charged on our borrowings as of December 31, 2007.

 

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

As of December 31, 2007, we leased our non-owned facilities under operating lease agreements. A majority of the operating leases contain renewal options that can be exercised after the initial lease term. Renewal options are generally for periods of one to five years. All operating leases will expire over the next 16 years and management believes that:

 

 

There are no material restrictions imposed by the lease agreements, and we have not entered into any significant guarantees related to the leases. We are required to make additional payments under the terms of certain operating leases for taxes, insurance and other operating expenses incurred during the operating lease period.

 

As part of our normal course of operations, one of our insurers issues surety bonds for us that are required by various education authorities that regulate us. We are obligated to reimburse our insurer for any of those surety bonds that are paid by the insurer. As of December 31, 2007, the total face amount of those surety bonds was approximately $19.6 million.

 

In October 2007, we entered into a risk sharing agreement (“RSA”) with an unaffiliated lender for private education loans to be provided to our students by or through that lender to help pay the students’ cost of education that

student financial aid from federal, state and other sources do not cover. Under the RSA, if more than a certain percentage of the private education loans, based on dollar volume, are charged off by the lender, we guarantee the repayment of any private education loans that the lender charges off above that percentage. The RSA was terminated effective February 22, 2008, such that no private education loans will be made under the RSA after that date. Our recorded liability related to the RSA as of December 31, 2007 was not material. Based on the prior repayment history of our students with respect to private education loans, we do not believe that our guarantee obligation under the RSA will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. See Note 11 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the RSA.

 

 

 

In the normal course of our business, we are subject to fluctuations in interest rates that could impact the return on our investments and the cost of our financing activities. Our primary interest rate risk exposure results from changes in short-term interest rates and the LIBOR.

 

Our investments consist primarily of marketable debt securities, variable rate demand notes, and auction rate debt and equity securities. We estimate that the market risk associated with these investments can best be measured by a potential decrease in the fair value of these investments from a hypothetical 10% increase in interest rates. If such a hypothetical increase in rates were to occur, the reduction in the market value of our portfolio of marketable securities would not be material.

 

Changes in the LIBOR would affect the borrowing costs associated with our revolving credit facilities. We estimate that the market risk can best be measured by a hypothetical 100 basis point increase in the LIBOR. If such a hypothetical increase in the LIBOR were to occur, the effect on results from operations and cash flow would not have been material for the year ended December 31, 2007.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

We are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (“DCP”) that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports filed or submitted by us under the Exchange Act is: (a) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms; and (b) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and principal financial officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. In designing and evaluating our DCP, we recognize that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and implemented, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and that our management’s duties require it to make its best judgment regarding the design of our DCP. As of December 31, 2007, we conducted an evaluation, under the supervision (and with the participation) of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our DCP pursuant to Rule 13a-15 of the Exchange Act. Based on that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our DCP were effective as of December 31, 2007.

 

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our management’s report on internal control over financial reporting appears on page F-1 of this Annual Report and is incorporated herein by reference.

 

The effectiveness of our internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act, (“ICFR”) as of December 31, 2007 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in its report dated February 20, 2008, which appears on page F-2 of this Annual Report and is incorporated herein by reference.

 

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting. There were no changes in our ICFR that occurred during our most recently completed fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our ICFR.

 

 

 

 

 

PART III

 

 

 

The information required by this Item concerning our audit committee members and financial expert, code of ethics and disclosure of delinquent filers is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which will be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of our last fiscal year.

 

The following is the current biographical information with respect to our directors, our nominees for director and our executive officers. Unless otherwise specified, the occupation of each individual has been the same for the past five years.

 

Kevin M. Modany, age 41, has served as our Chairman since February 1, 2008 and as our Chief Executive Officer since April 1, 2007. He has also served as our President since April 2005. From April 2005 until his promotion to our Chief Executive Officer on April 1, 2007, Mr. Modany also served as our Chief Operating Officer. From January 2003 through May 2005, he served as our Chief Financial Officer. From July 2002 through April 2005, Mr. Modany served as a Senior Vice President of ours. Mr. Modany has been a Director of ours since July 2006.

 

John F. Cozzi, age 46, has served as a managing director of AEA Investors LLC, a private equity firm, since January 2004. Mr. Cozzi served as a managing director of Arena Capital Partners, LLC, a private equity firm, from May 1999 through December 2003. Mr. Cozzi has been a Director of ours since October 2003.

 

John E. Dean, age 57, is an attorney who has specialized in higher education law since April 1985. Mr. Dean has been a partner at the Law Offices of John E. Dean since June 2005. He was a partner of the Dean Blakey law firm from June 2002 through May 2005. Mr. Dean has also served as a principal of Washington Partners, LLC, a public affairs firm, since June 2002. Mr. Dean has been a Director of ours since December 1994.

 

James D. Fowler, Jr., age 63, served as senior vice president and director, human resources of ITT Industries, Inc., an industrial, commercial machinery and equipment company now known as ITT Corporation, from November 2000 until his retirement in October 2002. Mr. Fowler has been a Director of ours since April 1994.

 

Joanna T. Lau, age 49, has served as chairperson and chief executive officer of Lau Acquisition Corporation (doing business as LAU Technologies), a management consulting and investment firm, since March 1990. Ms. Lau has been a Director of ours since October 2003.

 

Thomas I. Morgan, age 54, served as chief executive officer of Hughes Supply, Inc. (“Hughes”), a diversified wholesale distributor of construction, repair and maintenance-related products, from May 2003 until his retirement in March 2006. Mr. Morgan also served as president of Hughes from March 2001 through April 2003. He is also a director of Rayonier, Inc., Waste Management, Inc. and Tech Data Corporation. Mr. Morgan has been a Director of ours since May 2006.

 

Samuel L. Odle, age 58, has served as president and chief executive officer of Methodist Hospital (“MH”) and Indiana University Hospital (“IUH”) and executive vice president of Clarian Health Partners (“Clarian”), an Indianapolis-based private, non-profit healthcare organization comprised of MH, IUH and Riley Hospital for Children, since July 2004. Mr. Odle served as chief administrative officer of MH and senior vice president of Clarian from January 1997 through June 2004. Mr. Odle has been a Director of ours since January 2006.

 

Vin Weber, age 55, has been a partner at Clark & Weinstock Inc. (“C&W”), a management and public policy consulting firm, since 1994 and was named chief executive officer of C&W in 2007. He is also chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy, a public interest group. Mr. Weber is a senior fellow at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs and co-director of the Institute's Policy Forum. He is also a director of Lenox Group, Inc. Mr. Weber has been a Director of ours since December 1994.

 

John A. Yena, age 67, has served as chairman of the board of Johnson & Wales University (“J&W”), a postsecondary educational institution, since June 2004. Mr. Yena served as president and chief executive officer of J&W from June 1989 through May 2004. He is also a director of Bancorp Rhode Island, Inc. Mr. Yena has been a Director of ours since May 2006.

 

David E. Catalano, age 42, has served as our Senior Vice President, Business Development since November 2007. Mr. Catalano served as chief executive officer of Midwest Bankers Holdings, Inc., a commercial lending and advisory firm, from September 1996 through October 2007.

Jeffrey R. Cooper, age 56, has served as our Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer since November 2004. Mr. Cooper served as vice president of Great American Financial Resources, Inc. (“GAFRI”), the annuity and life insurance operations of American Financial Group, from June 1999 through October 2004, and as chief compliance officer of GAFRI from June 1997 through October 2004.

 

Clark D. Elwood, age 47, has served as a Senior Vice President of ours since December 1996, as our Secretary since October 1992 and as our General Counsel since May 1991.

 

Nina F. Esbin, age 51, has served as our Senior Vice President, Human Resources since January 2004. From January 2003 through December 2003, she served as our Vice President, Director Human Resources.

 

Eugene W. Feichtner, age 52, has served as our Senior Vice President, Operations since March 2004. From March 2002 through February 2004, he served as our Vice President, National Operations Director.

 

Daniel M. Fitzpatrick, age 48, has served as our Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer since June 2005. From July 1998 through May 2005, he served as senior vice president and controller of Education Management Corporation, a provider of postsecondary education.

 

Glenn E. Tanner, age 60, has served as Senior Vice President, Marketing since April 2007. From October 2002 through March 2007, he served as our Vice President, Marketing.

 

 

 

The information required by this Item concerning remuneration of our executive officers and directors, material transactions involving such executive officers and directors and Compensation Committee interlocks, as well as the Compensation Committee Report, are incorporated herein by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders which will be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of our last fiscal year.

 

   

 

The information required by this Item concerning the stock ownership of management, five percent beneficial owners and securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders which will be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of our last fiscal year.

 

 

 

The information required by this Item concerning certain relationships and related person transactions, and director independence is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders which will be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of our last fiscal year.

 

 

 

The information required by this Item concerning the fees and services of our independent registered public accounting firm and our Audit Committee actions with respect thereto is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders which will be filed with the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of our last fiscal year.

 

PART IV

 

 

 

 

This Filing  

 

 

 

Schedule II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 appear on page F-24 of this Annual Report.

 

 

 

A list of exhibits required to be filed as part of this report is set forth in the Index to Exhibits appearing on pages S-2 through S-4 of this Annual Report, which immediately precedes such exhibits, and is incorporated herein by reference.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

 

We are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over our financial reporting, as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act (“ICFR”). Our ICFR is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

 

 

Reasonable assurance, as defined in Section 13(b)(7) of the Exchange Act, is the level of detail and degree of assurance that would satisfy prudent officials in the conduct of their own affairs in devising and maintaining a system of internal accounting controls.

 

Due to its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. In addition, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we assessed the effectiveness of our ICFR as of December 31, 2007. Our assessment included extensive documenting, evaluating and testing of the design and operating effectiveness of our ICFR. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria for Internal Control-Integrated Framework set forth by The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. These criteria are in the areas of control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring. Based on our assessment using these criteria, our management concluded that we maintained effective ICFR as of December 31, 2007.

 

The effectiveness of our ICFR as of December 31, 2007 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in its accompanying report.

 

 

 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of

ITT Educational Services, Inc.:

 

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15.1 present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of ITT Educational Services, Inc. and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15.2 presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting appearing on page F-1. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

 

As described in Notes 1 and 9 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts for uncertain tax positions in 2007 and employee pension benefits and share based compensation in 2006.

 

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

 

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

February 20, 2008

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F-6

ITT EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data and unless otherwise stated)

 

 

Business. We are a leading for-profit provider of postsecondary education in the United States based on revenue and student enrollment. As of December 31, 2007, we were offering diploma and associate, bachelor and master degree programs to approximately 53,000 students and had 97 institutes and nine learning sites located in 34 states. All of our institutes are authorized by the applicable educational authorities of the states in which they operate and are accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the United States Department of Education (“ED”). We have provided career-oriented programs since 1969 under the “ITT Technical Institute” name. Our corporate headquarters are located in Carmel, Indiana.

 

Basis of Presentation. The consolidated financial statements include our wholly-owned subsidiaries’ accounts and have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”). All significant intercompany balances and transactions are eliminated upon consolidation. Certain reclassifications have been made in the consolidated financial statements of prior years to conform to the current year presentation.

 

During the fourth quarter of 2007, we revised the classification for “losses” from the sale of treasury stock. In accordance with Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 6, “Status of Accounting Research Bulletins,” we now record “losses” that exceed previous net “gains” from the sale of treasury stock as a charge to retained earnings. Accordingly, we:

 

 

The revised classification did not have an effect on our total shareholders’ equity, results of operations or cash flows.

 

Use of Estimates. The preparation of these consolidated financial statements, in accordance with GAAP, includes estimates and assumptions that are determined by our management. Actual results could differ materially from the estimates.

 

Cash Equivalents. Highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less are considered cash equivalents.

 

Restricted Cash. Title IV Program funds and certain other monies transferred to us by electronic funds transfer are subject to holding restrictions, generally from three to seven days, before they can be drawn into our cash account. The funds subject to these holding periods are identified as restricted cash and classified as other current assets until they are applied to the students' accounts. Restricted cash in other current assets was $6,061 as of December 31, 2007 and $0 as of December 31, 2006. In addition, a Maryland education regulation requires us to maintain an escrow account as a condition to operating our institute in Owings Mills, MD. The funds in this escrow account are considered restricted cash and classified as other assets. The balance of this escrow account was $553 as of December 31, 2007 and $527 as of December 31, 2006.

 

Investments. We classify our investments in marketable securities as available-for-sale or held-to-maturity depending on our investment intentions with regard to those securities on the date of acquisition. Investments are classified as either current or non-current based on the maturity date of each security. Auction rate debt securities and variable rate demand notes classified as available-for-sale, however, are included in current assets despite the long-term contractual maturity if we have the ability to liquidate these investments within one year.

 

 

Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. We extend unsecured credit to our students for tuition and fees and we record a receivable for the tuition and fees earned in excess of the payment received from or on behalf of a student. The individual student balances of these receivables are insignificant. We record an allowance for doubtful accounts with respect to accounts receivable on an institute-by-institute basis. We review the historical collection experience for each institute, consider other facts and circumstances related to an institute and record an allowance for doubtful accounts based on that review and consideration. If our current collection trends were to differ

 

F - 7

significantly from our historic collection experience, however, we would make a corresponding adjustment to our allowance. We write-off the accounts receivable due from former students when we conclude that collection is not probable.

 

Property and Equipment. Property and equipment is recorded in our consolidated financial statements at cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred.

 

Expenditures that extend the useful lives of our assets are capitalized. Developed or purchased software is capitalized in accordance with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position 98-1, “Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use.” Facility construction costs are capitalized as incurred, with depreciation commencing when the facility is placed in service. We capitalize interest on our real estate construction projects in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 34, “Capitalization of Interest Cost.”

 

Provisions for depreciation and amortization of property and equipment have generally been made using the straight-line method over the following ranges of useful lives:

 

 

We amortize leasehold improvements using the straight-line method over the shorter of the life of the improvement or the term of the underlying lease.

 

In accordance with SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” we regularly review our long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. If we determine that the carrying amount of a long-lived asset exceeds the total amount of the estimated undiscounted future cash flows from that asset, we would determine the fair value of that asset using a discounted cash flows model. If the amount of discounted cash flows is less than the net book value of the long-lived asset, we recognize an impairment loss in the amount of the difference. We base our impairment analyses of long-lived assets on our current business strategy, expected growth rates and estimates of future economic and regulatory conditions.

 

Direct Marketing Costs. Direct costs incurred relating to the enrollment of new students are capitalized using the successful efforts method. The direct costs subject to capitalization are readily quantifiable and are not subject to estimation. Direct marketing costs subject to capitalization include salaries and employee benefits of recruiting representatives and other direct costs. Successful efforts is the ratio of students enrolled to prospective students interviewed. The higher the rate of interviewed students who enroll, the greater the percentage of our direct marketing costs that are capitalized. We amortize our direct marketing costs on a cost-pool-by-cost-pool basis over the period that we expect to receive revenue streams associated with those assets. We define a cost pool as the group of students that begin each academic quarter (“Class”). The direct marketing costs that are capitalized with respect to a particular Class are amortized using a method that corresponds to the amount of tuition revenue that will be recognized in each academic quarter for that Class. Since we recognize tuition revenue for a Class on a straight-line basis over the program length, we also recognize the amortization of the capitalized direct marketing costs with respect to that Class on a straight-line basis over the same period. If a student withdraws, however, any remaining amount of the capitalized direct marketing costs related to that student is expensed immediately, because the realizability of the remaining capitalized direct marketing costs related to that student is impaired. The amortization method and period are based on historical trends of student enrollment and retention activity and are not subject to significant assumptions.

 

We review the carrying amount of the capitalized direct marketing costs on a regular basis in order to compare the recorded amounts with the estimated remaining future revenue streams associated with those assets. If we determine that the value of the capitalized direct marketing costs recorded exceeds the remaining future revenue estimated to be generated from those assets, the excess amount is written off and recorded as an expense for the related period. We regularly evaluate the factors used to determine the amounts to be deferred and amortized and the future recoverability of those deferred costs.

 

Direct marketing costs on the balance sheet totaled $48,058 at December 31, 2007 and $46,706 at December 31, 2006, less accumulated amortization of $27,491 at December 31, 2007 and $25,078 at December 31, 2006.

 

Insurance Liabilities. We record liabilities and related expenses for health, workers compensation and other insurance in accordance with the contractual terms of the insurance policies. We record the total liabilities that are estimable and probable as of the reporting date for our insurance liabilities that we self-insure. The accounting for our self-insured arrangements involves estimates and judgments to determine the liability to be recorded for reported

 

F - 8

claims and claims incurred but not reported. We consider our historical experience in determining the appropriate insurance reserves to record. If our current insurance claim trends were to differ significantly from our historic claim experience, however, we would make a corresponding adjustment to our insurance reserves.

 

Contingent Liabilities. We are subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of our business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, among others. When we are aware of a claim or potential claim, we assess the likelihood of any loss or exposure. If it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we record a liability for the loss. The liability recorded includes probable and estimable legal costs associated with the claim or potential claim. If the loss is not probable or the amount of the loss cannot be reasonably estimated, we disclose the claim if the likelihood of a potential loss is reasonably possible and the amount involved is material.

 

Guarantees. In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 45, “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others, an interpretation of FASB Statements No. 5, 57 and 107 and rescission of FASB Interpretation No. 34” (“FIN 45”), we recognize a liability for the fair value of a guarantee obligation upon its issuance. The fair market value of our guarantee of the payment of private loans made to our students by an unaffiliated lender was estimated based on historical charge off experience with respect to private loans made to our students and the present value of the expected cash flows that may result from the settlement of the guarantee obligation in the future.

 

Treasury Stock. Repurchases of outstanding shares of our common stock are recorded at cost. Treasury stock issued in fulfillment of stock-based compensation awards or other obligations is accounted for under the last in, first out method.

 

Fair Value and Credit Risk of Financial Instruments. The carrying amounts for cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, other accrued liabilities and deferred revenue approximate fair value because of the immediate or short-term maturity of these financial instruments. Investments classified as available-for-sale are recorded at their market value.

 

The fair market value of our long-term debt is estimated based on current market conditions and rates for debt that have the same characteristics and remaining maturities. As of December 31, 2007, the carrying value and estimated fair market value of our long-term debt was $150,000.

 

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to credit risk consist primarily of accounts receivable and interest-bearing investments. The credit risk of our accounts receivable is minimal, due to the small individual amounts owed by a large number of students which make up this balance. Our interest-bearing investments generally consist of high-quality securities issued by various entities and major financial institutions.

 

Recognition of Revenue. Tuition revenue is recorded on a straight-line basis over the length of the applicable course. If a student withdraws from an institute, the standards of most state education authorities that regulate our institutes, the accrediting commission that accredits our institutes and our own internal policy limit a student’s obligation for tuition and fees to the institute depending on when a student withdraws during an academic quarter (“Refund Policies”). The terms of the Refund Policies vary by state, and the limitations imposed by the Refund Policies are generally based on the portion of the academic quarter that has elapsed at the time the student withdraws. The greater the portion of the academic quarter that has elapsed at the time the student withdraws, the greater the student’s obligation is to the institute for the tuition and fees related to that academic quarter. We record revenue net of any refunds that result from any applicable Refund Policy. On an individual student basis, tuition earned in excess of cash received is recorded as accounts receivable, and cash received in excess of tuition earned is recorded as deferred revenue.

 

Tuition revenue includes textbooks students use in their programs of study. We record the cost of these textbooks in prepaid expenses and other current assets and amortize the cost of textbooks on a straight-line basis over the applicable course length. Laptop computer sales and the related cost of the laptop computers are recognized when the student receives the laptop computer. Tool kit sales and the related cost of the tool kits are recognized when the student receives the kit. Academic fees (which are charged only one time to students on their first day of class attendance) are recognized as revenue on a straight-line basis over the average program length. Deferred revenue is recorded for fees collected in excess of revenue recognized. If a student withdraws from an institute, all unrecognized revenue relating to his or her fees, net of any refunds that result from any applicable Refund Policy, is recognized upon the student’s departure. An administrative fee is charged to a student and recognized as revenue when the student withdraws or graduates from a program of study at an institute.

 

We report 12 weeks of tuition revenue in each of our four fiscal quarters. We standardized the number of weeks of revenue reported in each fiscal quarter, because the timing of student breaks in a calendar quarter can fluctuate from quarter to quarter each year. The total number of weeks of school during each year is 48.

 

F - 9

 

Equity-Based Compensation. Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS No. 123R”), which prescribes the accounting for equity instruments exchanged for employee and director services. We followed the SEC’s guidance in Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) No. 107, “Share-Based Payment,” when we adopted SFAS No. 123R. Under SFAS No. 123R, stock-based compensation cost is measured at the date of grant, based on the calculated fair value of the grant, and is recognized as an expense on a straight-line basis over the period of time that the grantee must provide services to us before the stock-based compensation is fully vested. The vesting period is generally the period set forth in the agreement granting the stock-based compensation. Under the terms of our stock-based compensation plans, some grants immediately vest in full when the grantee’s employment or service terminates, or when he or she is eligible to retire. As a result, in certain circumstances, the period of time that the grantee must provide services to us in order for that stock-based compensation to fully vest may be less than the vesting period set forth in the agreement granting the stock-based compensation. In these instances, compensation expense will be recognized over this shorter period.

 

We adopted SFAS No. 123R using the modified prospective transition method. Under this transition method, the financial statement amounts for periods before 2006 have not been restated to reflect the fair value method of expensing the stock-based compensation. The compensation expense recognized on and after January 1, 2006 includes the compensation cost based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with: (a) SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” as amended by SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation – Transition and Disclosure” (“SFAS No. 123”) for all stock-based compensation that was granted prior to, but vested on or after, January 1, 2006; and (b) SFAS No. 123R for all stock-based compensation that was granted on or after January 1, 2006.

 

We use an option pricing model to determine the fair value of stock options and we use the market price of our common stock to determine the fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units (“RSUs”). The fair value of the stock options granted prior to January 1, 2005 was determined using the Black-Scholes model. For all stock options granted on or after January 1, 2005, we used a binomial option pricing model which, similar to the Black-Scholes model, takes into account the variables defined below:

 

 

Prior to January 1, 2006, we accounted for stock-based compensation using the intrinsic value method in accordance with APB Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (“APB Opinion No. 25”), and related interpretations. Under the intrinsic value method, minimal compensation expense was recognized in our financial statements, because the vast majority of the stock-based compensation that we granted was in the form of nonqualified stock options and all of the stock options granted had exercise prices equivalent to the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant.

 

Under SFAS No. 123R, the tax benefit of tax deductions in excess of the compensation expense resulting from the exercise of stock options is presented under cash flows from financing activities in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Prior to adopting SFAS No. 123R, we presented the tax benefit resulting from the exercise of stock options under cash flows from operating activities in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

 

We generally issue shares of our common stock from treasury shares upon the exercise of stock options. As of December 31, 2007, 14,375,582 shares of our common stock were held in treasury. Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase outstanding shares of our common stock, but we are unable to determine at this point how many shares we will repurchase over the next 12 months. See Note 3 for additional disclosures regarding our stock repurchases.

 

Operating Leases. We lease our non-owned facilities under operating lease agreements. Common provisions within our operating lease agreements include:

 

 

 

F - 10

 

 

We record the rent expense associated with each operating lease agreement evenly over the term of the lease in accordance with SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases.” The difference between the amount of rent expense recorded and the amount of rent actually paid is recorded as accrued rent on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.

 

Income Taxes. In accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” we account for income taxes using the asset and liability method, which requires the recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for expected future tax consequences of temporary differences that currently exist between the tax bases and financial reporting bases of our assets and liabilities.

 

Effective January 1, 2007, we adopted FASB Interpretation Number 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (“FIN 48”), which prescribes a single, comprehensive model for how a company should recognize, measure, present and disclose in its financial statements uncertain tax positions that the company has taken or expects to take on its tax returns. This interpretation requires the evaluation of whether it is more likely than not, based on the technical merits of a tax position, that the benefits resulting from the position will be realized by the company. Upon adoption of FIN 48, we recognized a decrease of approximately $3,391 in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits, which was accounted for as an increase in retained earnings of $2,169 as of January 1, 2007 and a reduction of federal tax benefits of $1,222.

 

We record interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.

 

Earnings Per Common Share. Earnings per common share for all periods have been calculated in conformity with SFAS No. 128, “Earnings Per Share.” This data is based on historical net income and the weighted average number of shares of our common stock outstanding during each period as set forth in the following table:

 

 

A total of 14,146 shares for fiscal year 2007, 30,000 shares for fiscal year 2006 and 1,000 shares for fiscal year 2005 have been excluded from the calculation of our diluted earnings per common share because the effect was anti-dilutive.

 

New Accounting Pronouncements.

 

In December 2007, the FASB issued the following statements:

 

 

Both of these statements are effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008. In November 2007, FASB’s Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) issued EITF 07-01, “Accounting for Collaborative Arrangements” (“EITF 07-01”). EITF 07-01 is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2008 and applies to arrangements in existence as of the effective date. We do not expect that SFAS No. 141(R), SFAS No. 160 or EITF 07-01 will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“SFAS No. 159”), which permits companies to choose to measure certain financial instruments and other items at fair value that are not currently required to be measured at fair value.  SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We adopted SFAS No. 159 as of January 1, 2008. The adoption of this pronouncement did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans – an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106 and 132(R)” (“SFAS No. 158”), which requires a company to measure the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan as of the date of the

 

F - 11

company’s year-end balance sheet. This provision of SFAS No. 158 is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2008, and will be adopted by us no later than December 31, 2008. We do not believe that the adoption of this provision of SFAS No. 158 will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

Also in September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS No. 157”), which provides guidance on the use of fair value to measure assets and liabilities and expands the disclosure required in a company’s financial statements for fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 will apply whenever other accounting pronouncements require or permit fair value measurements for assets and liabilities and is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We adopted SFAS No. 157 as of January 1, 2008. The adoption of this pronouncement did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

 

 

 

No additional awards have been or will be granted after May 9, 2006 under the 1999 Directors Stock Plan or the 1997 Stock Plan.

 

The stock-based compensation expense and related income tax benefit recognized in our Consolidated Statements of Income in the periods indicated were as follows:

 

 

We did not capitalize any stock-based compensation cost in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.

 

In the year ended December 31, 2005, we did not recognize any stock-based compensation expense in our Consolidated Statements of Income in accordance with APB Opinion No. 25. If the compensation expense related to the stock-based compensation for the year ended December 31, 2005 had been determined based on the fair value of the stock-based compensation at grant date consistent with SFAS No. 123, our compensation expense would have increased and our net income and earnings per share would have been reduced to the pro forma amounts indicated below:

 

F - 12

 

The compensation expense related to the stock-based compensation granted to employees and directors included in the pro forma disclosure above was calculated on a straight-line basis over the full vesting period of the grants and reflects forfeitures as they occurred. If we had reflected the stock-based compensation for retirement-eligible grantees over the applicable service period in accordance with SFAS No. 123R, the pro forma net income for the year ended December 31, 2005 would have been approximately $95,300, instead of $92,005. The total stock-based compensation expense ultimately incurred under SFAS No. 123 and SFAS No. 123R would have been the same but the timing of when the expense would have been realized would have differed.

 

On October 24, 2005, the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors accelerated the vesting of all unvested, nonqualified stock options granted to our employees and directors that had exercise prices greater than the closing price of our common stock on that date. In addition, certain of our executives were awarded nonqualified stock options during 2005 that were fully vested and immediately exercisable. The purpose for accelerating the vesting and award of those stock options was to reduce our compensation costs associated with those stock options upon our adoption of SFAS No. 123R in 2006.

 

As of December 31, 2007, we estimated that pre-tax compensation expense for unvested stock-based compensation grants in the amount of approximately $7,814, net of estimated forfeitures, will be recognized in future periods. This expense will be recognized over the remaining service period applicable to the grantees which, on a weighted-average basis, is approximately 2.5 years.

 

Stock Options. Under the Plans, the stock option exercise price may not be less than 100% of the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant. The maximum term of any stock option granted under the 2006 Equity Compensation Plan may not exceed seven years from the date of grant, and those stock options will be exercisable at such times and under conditions as determined by the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, subject to the limitations contained in the plan.

 

Under the 1999 Directors Stock Plan, the stock options granted typically vested and became exercisable on the first anniversary of the grant. The maximum term of any stock option granted under the 1999 Directors Stock Plan was: (a) 10 years from the date of grant for any stock options granted prior to January 25, 2005; and (b) seven years from the date of grant for any stock options granted on or after January 25, 2005.

 

Under the 1997 Stock Plan, the stock options granted typically vest and become exercisable in three equal annual installments commencing with the first anniversary of the date of grant. The maximum term of any stock option granted under the 1997 Stock Plan was 10 years and 2 days from the date of grant.

 

 

F - 13

The stock options granted, forfeited, exercised and expired in the period indicated were as follows:

 

 

_____________________________

(1) The aggregate intrinsic value of the stock options was calculated by multiplying the number of shares subject to the options outstanding or exercisable, as applicable, by the closing market price of our common stock on December 31, 2007, and subtracting the applicable aggregate exercise price.

 

The following table sets forth information regarding the stock options granted and exercised in the periods indicated:

 

 

The intrinsic value of a stock option is the difference between the fair market value of the stock and the option exercise price.

 

 

 

Restricted Stock and RSUs. Under the 1997 Stock Plan, restricted shares awarded were subject to a restriction period set by the Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, during which time the shares may not be sold, transferred, assigned or pledged. For restricted stock awards issued under the 1997 Stock Plan, the restriction period ends on the third anniversary of the date of grant. Under the 2006 Equity Compensation Plan, restricted shares and RSUs awarded are subject to a restriction period of at least: (a) three years in the case of a time-based period of restriction; and (b) one year in the case of a performance-based period of restriction. All restricted shares and RSUs awarded under the 2006 Equity Compensation Plan as of December 31, 2007 have a time-based restriction period that ends on the third anniversary of the date of grant, except for one grant of 18,249 RSUs made in 2007 which has a time-based restriction period that ends on the fifth anniversary of the date of grant.

 

The following table sets forth the number of shares of restricted stock and RSUs that were granted, forfeited and vested in the period indicated:

 

F - 14

 

The total fair market value of the shares vested during the year ended December 31, 2007 was $56.

 

 

Our Board of Directors has authorized us to repurchase the following number of shares of our common stock pursuant to our share repurchase program (the “Repurchase Program”):

 

 

As of December 31, 2007, 5,021,800 shares remained available for repurchase under the Repurchase Program. The terms of the Repurchase Program provide that we may repurchase shares of our common stock, from time to time depending on market conditions and other considerations, in the open market or through privately negotiated transactions in accordance with Rule 10b-18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). Unless earlier terminated by our Board of Directors, the Repurchase Program will expire when we repurchase all shares authorized for repurchase thereunder.

 

The following table sets forth information regarding the shares of our common stock that we repurchased in the periods indicated:

 

 

From January 31, 2008 through February 15, 2008, we repurchased 810,000 outstanding shares of our common stock pursuant to our existing repurchase authorization at a total cost of $68,412 or at an average cost per share of $84.51.

 

 

We entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated as of December 17, 2007 (the “Restated Credit Agreement”) with a single lender (the “Lender”). The Restated Credit Agreement amends and restates in its entirety the Credit Agreement dated December 22, 2006 between us and the Lender (the “Prior Credit Agreement”). The Restated Credit Agreement provides for two lines of credit: one in the maximum principal amount of $50,000; and the other in the initial maximum principal amount of $100,000, but increasing to $110,000 on February 20, 2008. The $150,000 of borrowings outstanding under the Prior Credit Agreement were transferred to the lines of credit under the Restated Credit Agreement as of December 17, 2007. Borrowings under the Restated Agreement are used to allow us to continue repurchasing shares of our common stock while maintaining compliance with certain financial ratios required by various education authorities that regulate us.

 

Both lines of credit under the Restated Credit Agreement mature on July 1, 2010. The borrowings under each line of credit may be secured or unsecured at our election, provided that we have not defaulted under the Restated Credit Agreement, in which case, any borrowings made on a secured basis must remain secured. Investments held in a pledged account serve as the collateral for any secured borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement.

 

The Restated Credit Agreement contains, among other things, covenants, representations and warranties and events of default customary for credit facilities. The availability of borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement is subject to our ability at the time of borrowing to satisfy certain specified conditions. These conditions include an absence of default by us, as defined in the Restated Credit Agreement, and that certain representations and warranties

 

F - 15

contained in the Restated Credit Agreement continue to be true and accurate. We are also required to maintain a certain maximum leverage ratio and a minimum ratio of cash and investments to outstanding indebtedness at the end of each of our fiscal quarters. We were in compliance with those ratio requirements as of December 31, 2007.

 

Borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement bear interest at the London Interbank Offered Rate (the “LIBOR”), plus an applicable margin based on our indebtedness to net worth ratio, adjusted quarterly. We pay a commitment fee of 0.15% per annum of the average daily unused amount of the credit facilities. As of December 31, 2007, the borrowings under the Restated Credit Agreement were $150,000, all of which were secured and bore interest at a rate of 4.93% per annum. Approximately $157,950 of our investments served as collateral for the secured borrowings as of December 31, 2007.

 

We recognized $8,208 of interest expense on our borrowings in the year ended December 31, 2007 and $214 in the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

 

We participate in various federal student financial aid programs under Title IV (“Title IV Programs”) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (“HEA”). Approximately 61% of our 2007 revenue, determined on a cash accounting basis as defined by the ED regulations, was indirectly derived from funds distributed under these programs.

 

We administer the Title IV Programs in separate accounts as required by government regulation. We are required to administer the funds in accordance with the requirements of the HEA and the ED’s regulations and must use due diligence in approving and disbursing funds and servicing loans. In the event we do not comply with federal requirements, or if student loan default rates rise to a level considered excessive by the federal government, we could lose our eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs or could be required to repay funds determined to have been improperly disbursed. Our management believes that we are in substantial compliance with the federal requirements.

 

 

The following table sets forth how our investments were classified on our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the dates indicated:

 

 

The following table sets forth the aggregate fair market value of our available-for-sale investments and aggregate amortized cost of our held-to-maturity investments as of the dates indicated:

 

 

We had no material gross unrealized holding or realized gains (losses) from our investments in auction rate securities and variable rate demand notes in the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005. All income generated from those investments was recorded as interest income.

 

The following table sets forth the components of investment income included in interest income, net in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the periods indicated:

 

F - 16

 

The following table sets forth the contractual maturities of our debt securities classified as available-for-sale and held-to-maturity as of December 31, 2007:

 

 

 

 

 

Software includes purchased and internally developed software.

 

The following table sets forth the amortization expense for software and the depreciation and amortization expense for furniture and equipment, buildings and building improvements and leasehold improvements for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

 

 

 

F - 17

The following table sets forth the components of our deferred income tax assets (liabilities) as of the dates indicated:

 

 

The difference between the U.S. federal statutory income tax rate and our effective income tax rate as a percentage of income for the periods indicated is reconciled in the following table:

 

 

The following table sets forth the activity with respect to our unrecognized tax benefits in the period indicated:

 

 

The amount of unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would have affected our effective tax rate as of December 31, 2007 was $6,913. We do not expect the amount of our unrecognized tax benefits to significantly increase or decrease during the next 12 months. As of December 31, 2007, we had $666 accrued for the payment of interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. In the year ended December 31, 2007, the amount of interest expense and penalties related to our unrecognized tax benefits that we recognized in our Consolidated Statement of Income was not material.

 

We file income tax returns in the United States (federal) and in various state and local jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2007, we were no longer subject to federal, state or local income tax examinations for tax years prior to 2004, except in eight states where we are still subject to income tax examinations for tax years 2000 through 2003.

 

 

Employee Pension Benefits. Our ESI Pension Plan, a non-contributory defined benefit pension plan, commonly referred to as a cash balance plan, covers substantially all of our employees who began their employment with us prior to June 2, 2003. This plan provides benefits based on an employee’s annual earnings times an established percentage of pay determined by the employee’s age and years of benefit service. Effective June 2, 2003, we closed participation

 

F - 18

in the ESI Pension Plan to all new employees. Employees who begin their employment with us on or after June 2, 2003 do not participate in the ESI Pension Plan.

 

Our ESI Excess Pension Plan, a nonqualified, unfunded retirement plan, covers a select group of our management. This plan provides for payment of those benefits at retirement that cannot be paid from the ESI Pension Plan due to federal statutory limits on the amount of benefits that can be paid and compensation that can be recognized under a tax-qualified retirement plan. The purpose of the ESI Excess Pension Plan is to restore benefits earned, but not available, to eligible employees under the ESI Pension Plan due to federal limitations on the amount of benefits that can be paid and compensation that may be recognized under a tax-qualified retirement plan.

 

The benefit accruals under the ESI Pension Plan and the ESI Excess Pension Plan for all participants in those plans were frozen effective March 31, 2006, such that no further benefits accrue under those plans after March 31, 2006. Participants in those plans, however, continue to be credited with vesting service and interest according to the terms of the ESI Pension Plan and the ESI Excess Pension Plan.

 

 

 

The following table sets forth the change in projected benefit obligation for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

 

The following table sets forth the fair value of total plan assets by major asset category as of the measurement date used for the periods indicated:

 

 

We adopted the recognition provisions of SFAS No. 158 effective December 31, 2006. SFAS No. 158 requires that the funded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan be recognized on a company’s balance sheet, and that any changes in the funded status of that type of plan be recognized through comprehensive income. Retrospective application of SFAS No. 158 is not permitted and, therefore, prior period balances and activity related to the ESI Pension Plan and ESI Excess Pension Plan have not been changed.

 

F - 19

          The following table sets forth the amounts recognized in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the dates indicated:

 

 

The following table sets forth the amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as of the dates indicated:

 

 

 

 

During 2008, we do not expect to recognize any net actuarial loss or prior service cost in accumulated other comprehensive income as components of net periodic pension cost.

 

The weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit obligations as of September 30, 2007 and 2006 are as follows:

 

 

The weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic pension cost in the years ended September 30, 2007, 2006 and 2005 are as follows:

 

 

The amortization of any prior service cost is determined using a straight-line amortization of the cost over the average remaining service period for employees expected to receive benefits under the pension plans, as permitted under Paragraph 26 of SFAS No. 87, “Employers’ Accounting for Pensions.”

 

The following table sets forth the benefit payments that we expect to pay from the pension plans in the periods indicated:

 

 

 

F - 20

We invest plan assets based on a total return on investment approach, pursuant to which the plan assets include a diversified blend of equity and fixed income investments toward a goal of maximizing the long-term rate of return without assuming an unreasonable level of investment risk. We determine the level of risk based on an analysis of plan liabilities, the extent to which the value of the plan assets satisfies the plan liabilities and our financial condition. Our investment policy includes target allocations ranging from 30% to 70% for equity investments, 20% to 60% for fixed income investments and 0% to 50% for cash equivalents. The equity portion of the plan assets represents growth and value stocks of small, medium and large companies. We measure and monitor the investment risk of the plan assets both on a quarterly basis and annually when we assess plan liabilities.

 

We use a building block approach to estimate the long-term rate of return on plan assets. This approach is based on the capital market principle that the greater the volatility, the greater the return over the long term. An analysis of the historical performance of equity and fixed income investments, together with current market factors such as the inflation and interest rates, are used to help us make the assumptions necessary to estimate a long-term rate of return on plan assets. Once this estimate is made, we review the portfolio of plan assets and make adjustments thereto that we believe are necessary to reflect a diversified blend of equity and fixed income investments that is capable of achieving the estimated long-term rate of return without assuming an unreasonable level of investment risk. We also compare the portfolio of plan assets to those of other pension plans to help us assess the suitability and appropriateness of the plan investments.

 

We determine our discount rate by using the Moody’s Aa corporate bond rate as of our actuarial valuation date. The average lives of the bonds used to determine this benchmark rate approximate the periods represented in our pension plan actuarial valuation.

 

We made no contribution to the ESI Pension Plan in 2007 and do not expect to make any contribution to the ESI Pension Plan in 2008.

 

During 2006, prior to adopting SFAS No. 158, we decreased our minimum pension liability by $9,899 as a result of:

 

 

We also recorded a corresponding $6,016 increase in shareholders’ equity, which was net of a $3,883 deferred tax asset.

 

Retirement Savings Plan. Our ESI 401(k) Plan, a defined contribution plan, covers substantially all of our employees. Prior to March 19, 2004, our contributions under the ESI 401(k) Plan were made in cash to a fund that invested in our common stock, which a plan participant could not redirect to other plan investment options until the participant reached age 55. All of our contributions under the ESI 401(k) Plan that we have made on and after March 19, 2004 have been in the form of cash to plan investment options directed by the participant.

 

Our ESI Excess Savings Plan, a nonqualified, unfunded deferred compensation plan, covers a select group of our management. The plan provided for salary deferral of contributions that the participants were unable to make under the ESI 401(k) Plan and our contributions that cannot be paid under the ESI 401(k) Plan due to federal statutory limits on the amount that an employee can contribute under a defined contribution plan. Effective for plan years beginning on and after January 1, 2008, we froze the ESI Excess Savings Plan, such that employees may no longer make salary deferrals and we will no longer make contributions under the ESI Excess Savings Plan. Amounts previously credited to an employee under the ESI Excess Savings Plan will, however, continue to accrue interest in accordance with the terms of the ESI Excess Savings Plan until those amounts are distributed pursuant to the plan’s terms.

 

The costs of providing the benefits under the ESI 401(k) Plan and ESI Excess Savings Plan (including certain administrative costs of the plans) were:

 

 

 

As part of our normal operations, one of our insurers issues surety bonds for us that are required by various education authorities that regulate us. We are obligated to reimburse our insurer for any of those surety bonds that are paid by the insurer. As of December 31, 2007, the total face amount of those surety bonds was approximately $19,600.

 

F - 21

We are also subject to various claims and contingencies in the ordinary course of our business, including those related to litigation, business transactions, employee-related matters and taxes, among others. We cannot assure you of the ultimate outcome of any litigation involving us. Any litigation alleging violations of education or consumer protection laws and/or regulations, misrepresentation, fraud or deceptive practices may also subject our affected institutes to additional regulatory scrutiny.

 

Lease Commitments. We lease our non-owned facilities under operating lease agreements. A majority of the operating leases contain renewal options that can be exercised after the initial lease term. Renewal options are generally for periods of one to five years. All operating leases will expire over the next 16 years and we expect that:

 

 

There are no material restrictions imposed by the lease agreements, and we have not entered into any significant guarantees related to the leases. We are required to make additional payments under the operating lease terms for taxes, insurance and other operating expenses incurred during the operating lease period.

 

Rent expense under our operating leases was:

 

 

Future minimum rental payments required under our operating leases that have initial or remaining non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2007 are as follows:

 

 

 

Future minimum rental payments related to equipment leases are not significant.

 

 

In October 2007, we entered into a risk sharing agreement (“RSA”) with an unaffiliated lender for private education loans to be provided to our students by or through that lender to help pay the students’ cost of education that student financial aid from federal, state and other sources do not cover. Under the RSA, if more than a certain percentage of the private education loans, based on dollar volume, are charged off by the lender, we guarantee the repayment of any private education loans that the lender charges off above that percentage. Our obligations under the RSA will remain in effect until all private education loans made under the RSA are paid in full or charged off by the lender. We will have the right to pursue repayment from the borrowers for those charged off private education loans under the RSA that we pay to the lender pursuant to our guarantee obligation. The RSA was terminated effective February 22, 2008, such that no private education loans will be made under the RSA after that date.

 

The RSA requires that we comply with certain covenants, including that we maintain certain financial ratios which are measured as of December 31 in each year. If we are not in compliance with those ratios at any measurement date, we are obligated to provide the lender with a letter of credit in an amount based on a percentage of the outstanding private education loans under the RSA that have not been paid in full or charged off from time to time. We were in compliance with the covenants as of December 31, 2007.

 

The maximum potential future payments that we could be required to make pursuant to our guarantee obligation under the RSA are affected by:

 

 

 

F - 22

 

 

As a result, we are not able to estimate the undiscounted maximum potential future payments that we could be required to make under the RSA. Our recorded liability related to the RSA as of December 31, 2007 was not material.

 

F - 23

SCHEDULE II

 

 

 

 

 

 

F - 24

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F - 25

SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

ITT Educational Services, Inc.

 

By: /s/ Kevin M. Modany

Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

 

 

 

 

S - 1

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

 

 

 

 

 

S - 2

 

 

________

 

*The indicated exhibit is a management contract, compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

 

 

 

 

S - 3