LINCOLN EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORP

Overview

Lincoln Educational Services Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”, “we”, “our” and “us”, as applicable) provide diversified career-oriented postsecondary education to recent high school graduates and working adults. The Company, which currently operates 21 campuses in 12 states, has entered into leases for two new campuses: one in Houston, Texas, with programs expected to begin in the second half of 2025, and one in Hicksville, New York, with programs expected to begin by the end of 2026. Lincoln Educational Services Corporation offers programs in skilled trades (which include Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (“HVAC”), welding and computerized numerical control and electrical and electronic systems technology, among other programs), automotive technology, healthcare services (which include nursing, dental assistant and medical assistant, among other programs) and hospitality services and information technology (which include culinary and aesthetics and information technology programs). The schools operate under the brands Lincoln Technical Institute, Lincoln College of Technology and Nashville Auto Diesel College.

Most of the Company’s campuses serve major metropolitan markets and each typically offers courses in multiple areas of study. Five of the campuses are destination schools, which attract students from across the United States and, in some cases, from abroad. The Company’s other campuses primarily attract students from their local communities and surrounding areas. All of the campuses are nationally accredited and are eligible to participate in federal financial aid programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education (the “DOE”) and applicable state education agencies and accrediting commissions which allow students to apply for and access federal student loans as well as other forms of financial aid. The Company was incorporated in New Jersey in 2003 as the successor-in-interest to various acquired schools including Lincoln Technical Institute, Inc. which opened its first campus in Newark, New Jersey in 1946.

Campus Operations - The Campus Operations segment includes campuses that are continuing in operation and contribute to the Company’s core operations and performance. All of the campuses continuing in operation are classified in this segment. The majority of the campuses offer programs across various areas of study.

Transitional – The Transitional segment refers to campuses that are marked for closure and are currently being taught-out, in addition to campuses that are held-for-sale or sold. As of December 31, 2024, the net assets for the Summerlin, Las Vegas campus were classified as held for sale, with operating results classified within the Transitional segment. The sale of the campus was consummated effective January 1, 2025. In addition, the Company closed the Somerville, Massachusetts campus in the prior year. It was fully taught-out as of December 31, 2023. This campus is classified in the Transitional segment in the prior year’s statement of operations.

As of December 31, 2024, we had 15,138 students enrolled at 21 campuses. Our average enrollment for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 was 14,426 students and our revenues were $440.1 million, which represented an increase of 16.4% over the prior fiscal year. For more information relating to our revenues, profits and financial condition, please refer to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We believe that we provide our students with the highest quality career-oriented training available for our areas of study in our markets thereby serving students, local employers and their communities. The skills gap continues to expand as talent retires faster than new employees are hired and as the need for education and training increases in all careers with the accelerating pace of technological change.

We offer programs in areas of study that we believe are typically underserved by traditional providers of postsecondary education and for which we believe there exists significant demand among students and employers. Furthermore, we believe our convenient class scheduling, career-focused curricula and emphasis on job placement offer our students valuable advantages that have been previously unaddressed by the traditional academic sector. By combining virtual training with traditional classroom-based training led by experienced instructors, we believe we offer our students a unique opportunity to develop practical job skills in many of the key areas of expected job demand. We believe these job skills enable our students to compete effectively for employment opportunities and to pursue salary and career advancement.

In the last several years, we have further implemented our plan of improving the student experience by adding program offerings, enhancing existing program offerings and expanding geographically with new state of the art campuses. See Part II. Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplemental Data - Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – Note 6 Leases and Note 8 Real Estate Transactions.”

Index

Business Strategy

We strive to strengthen our position as a leading provider of career‑oriented postsecondary education by continuing to pursue the following strategy:

Programs and Areas of Study

We structure our program offerings to provide our students with a practical, career-oriented education and position them for attractive entry-level job opportunities in their chosen fields. Our diploma/certificate programs typically take between 27 to 104 weeks to complete, with tuition ranging from $14,500 to $42,000. Our associate degree programs typically take between 69 to 94 weeks to complete, with tuition ranging from $31,000 to $42,000. As of December 31, 2024, all of our schools offer diploma and certificate programs and ten of our schools are currently approved to offer associate degree programs. In order to accommodate the schedules of our students and maximize classroom utilization at some of our campuses, we typically offer courses four to five days a week in three shifts per day and start new classes every month. We update and expand our programs frequently to reflect the latest technological advances in the field, providing our students with the specific skills and knowledge required in the current marketplace. Classroom instruction combines lectures and demonstrations by our experienced faculty with comprehensive hands-on laboratory exercises in simulated workplace environments.

Index

The following table lists the programs offered as of December 31, 2024:

Skilled Trades. For the year ended December 31, 2024, skilled trades were our largest area of study, representing 45% of our total average student enrollment. Our skilled trades programs are 32 to 81 weeks in length, with tuition rates ranging from $21,000 to $36,000. Our skilled trades programs include electrical, heating and air conditioning repair, welding, computerized numerical control and electronic and electronic systems technology. Graduates of our programs are qualified to obtain entry-level employment positions such as electrician, CNC machinist, cable installer, welder, wiring and heating, ventilating and air conditioning, or HVAC installer. Our graduates are employed by a wide variety of employers, including residential and commercial construction, telecommunications installation companies and architectural firms. As of December 31, 2024, we offered skilled trades programs at 17 campuses.

Automotive Technology. Automotive technology is our second largest area of study, with 29% of our total average student enrollment for the year ended December 31, 2024. Our automotive technology programs are 52 to 98 weeks in length, with tuition rates ranging from $27,000 to $42,000. We believe we are a leading provider of automotive technology education in each of our local markets. Graduates of our programs are qualified to obtain entry-level employment ranging from positions as technicians and mechanics to various apprentice level positions. Our graduates are employed by a wide variety of companies, ranging from automotive and diesel dealers, to independent auto body paint and repair shops to trucking and construction companies. As of December 31, 2024, we offered programs in automotive technology at 13 campuses. Our campuses in East Windsor, Connecticut; Nashville, Tennessee; Grand Prairie, Texas; Indianapolis, Indiana; and Denver, Colorado are destination campuses, attracting students throughout the United States and, in some cases, from abroad.

Health Sciences & Information Technology. For the year ended December 31, 2024, 26% of our total average student enrollment was in our health science & information technology programs. Our health science & information technology programs are 27 to 104 weeks in length, with tuition rates ranging from $15,000 to $33,000. Our health sciences graduates are employed by a wide variety of employers, including hospitals, laboratories, insurance companies, and doctors' offices. Our IT graduates obtain entry-level positions with both small and large corporations. As of December 31, 2024, we offered health science programs at 12 of our campuses and IT programs at four campuses.

Marketing and Student Recruitment

We utilize a variety of marketing and recruiting methods to attract students and increase enrollment. Our marketing and recruiting efforts are targeted at prospective students who are high school graduates entering the workforce, or who are currently underemployed or unemployed and require additional training to enter or re-enter the workforce.

Index

Marketing and Advertising. We utilize a fully integrated marketing approach in our lead generation and admissions process that includes the use of traditional media such as television, radio, billboards, direct mail, a variety of print media and event marketing campaigns intended to raise brand awareness. In addition, we continually grow and enhance our digital marketing efforts, which include paid search, paid and organic social media, search engine optimization, online video and display advertising and pay-per-lead channels. These digital channels currently drive the majority of our new student leads and enrollments. Our fully integrated marketing campaigns direct prospective students to contact us directly or visit our website or other customized landing pages on the internet where they will find details regarding our programs and campuses and can request additional information regarding the programs that interest them. Prospective students may also apply for admission online. Our internal systems enable us to closely monitor and track the effectiveness of each marketing executionon a daily or weekly basis and make adjustments accordingly to enhance our efficiency and limit our student acquisition costs.

Referrals. Referrals from current students, high school counselors and satisfied graduates and their employers have historically represented approximately 11.0% of our new student starts. Our school administrators actively work with our current students to encourage them to recommend our programs to prospective students. We endeavor to build and retain strong relationships with high school guidance counselors and instructors by offering annual seminars at our training facilities to further familiarize these individuals on the strengths of our programs.

Recruiting. Our recruiting efforts are conducted by a group of approximately 278 campus-based and field representatives who meet directly with prospective students during presentations conducted at high schools, in the prospective students’ homes or during their visit to one of our campuses. We also recruit adult career-seekers or career-changers through our campus-based representatives.

During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, we recruited approximately 21% of our students directly out of high school. Field sales continue to be a large part of our business and developing local community relationships is one of our most important recruiting functions.

Student Admissions, Enrollment and Retention

Admissions. To attend our schools, students must have either a high school diploma or a high school equivalency certificate (or General Education Development Certificate, GED). In addition, students must complete both an admissions interview and learner assessment. We take admissions requirements very seriously as they are the best indicators of our students’ likelihood for program success and completion, leading to successful employment in their chosen industry. The learner assessment is a questionnaire designed to discover challenges and help us to address them prior to the student attending. While each of our programs has different admissions criteria, we screen all applications and counsel prospective students on the most appropriate program to increase the likelihood that they complete the requisite coursework and obtain and sustain employment following graduation.

Enrollment. We enroll students continuously throughout the year, with our largest classes enrolling in late summer or early fall following high school graduation. As of December 31, 2024, we had 15,138 students enrolled at 21 campuses and our average enrollment during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024 was 14,426 students.

Retention. To maximize student retention, the staff at each school is trained to recognize the early warning signs of a potential drop and to assist and advise students on academic, financial and employment matters. We monitor our retention rates by instructor, course, program, and campus. When we become aware that a particular instructor or program is experiencing a higher-than-normal dropout rate, we quickly seek to determine the cause of the problem and attempt to correct it. When we identify that a student is having trouble academically, we offer tutoring. As we moved to online delivery of instruction, we saw a slight decline in our student retention rate, but we believe this is temporary and will improve as our faculty becomes better skilled at hybrid teaching. To ensure that this happens, we have developed online teacher training for all faculty.

Job Placement

We believe that assisting our graduates in securing employment after completing their program of study is critical to our mission as a postsecondary educational institution as well as to our ability to attract high quality students and enhance our reputation in the industry. In addition, we believe that high job placement rates result in low student loan default rates, an important requirement for continued participation in Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (“Title IV Programs”). See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment—Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs.” Accordingly, we dedicate significant resources to maintaining an effective graduate placement program. Our non-destination schools work closely with local employers to ensure that we are training students with skills that local employers seek. Each school has an advisory council comprised of local employers who provide us with direct feedback on how well we are preparing our students to succeed in the workplace. This enables us to tailor our programs to the marketplace. The placement staff in each of our destination schools maintains databases of potential employers throughout the country, allowing us to more effectively assist our graduates in securing employment in their career fields upon graduation. Throughout each year, we hold numerous job fairs at our facilities where we provide the opportunity for our students to meet and interact with potential employers. We also assist students with resume writing, interviewing and other job search skills.

Index

In addition, many of our schools have internship programs that provide our students with opportunities to work with potential employers prior to graduation. For example, some of the students in our automotive programs have the opportunity to complete a portion of their hands-on training in an actual work environment. Also, some of our students in health sciences programs are required to participate in an externship program in which they work in the field as part of their career training. Further, we have formed industry relationships with several Fortune 500 companies to assist them with their hiring needs. We provide these companies with various services including providing graduating student candidates for interviews and providing company-specific training to selected individuals that accelerates their on-boarding. These industry relationships not only provide our students with career opportunities which may include signing bonuses and tuition assistance plans, but also benefit Lincoln by sometimes providing equipment donations, scholarships and advice that enables us to design our curricula to better meet industry needs.

Human Capital Management

Overview

We believe that each of our employees plays an important role in our enterprise. This is particularly true of our faculty. We are focused on attracting and retaining the highly qualified personnel needed to support our objectives of providing superior education in the programs that our schools provide.

As of December 31, 2024, we had approximately 2,475 employees, including approximately 600 full-time instructors and approximately 450 part-time instructors, and approximately 1,425 employees serving in various administrative and management positions. We had no seasonal workers. The number of individuals comprising our workforce increased by approximately 8.0% in the most recently completed fiscal year.

Staffing Our Schools

Our schools typically are staffed by a school president, a director of career services, a director of education, a director of administrative services, a director of admissions and a variety of instructors, all of whom are industry professionals with experience in the areas of study at that particular school.

Our average student to teacher ratio was approximately 16.5 to 1 during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024.

Equal Opportunity

We strive to create a culture of opportunity and excellence through our human capital management practices. Our recruitment practices and outreach efforts are designed to maximize the applicant pool to ensure that we are able to hire the most qualified individuals in the market. The varied perspectives and experiences of our personnel enhance our work. In accordance with our obligations to provide a discrimination-free and harassment-free workplace, we work hard to ensure equal opportunity in hiring, promotions, training and development, working conditions and compensation. In addition, the Company has adopted a Human Rights Policy that reflects, among other things, our commitment to anti-discrimination in hiring and otherwise.

Development, Training and Retention

The Company employs staff to attract and engage talent and applies fully integrated recruiting software to track and manage hiring processes for our campuses and corporate functions. We hire our faculty in accordance with established criteria, including relevant work experience, educational background and accreditation and state regulatory standards. We require meaningful industry experience of our teaching staff to maintain the high quality of instruction in all of our programs that we expect and to address current and industry-specific issues in our course content. In addition, we provide intensive instructional training and continuing education, including quarterly instructional development seminars, annual reviews, technical upgrade training, faculty development plans and weekly staff meetings.

The Company acknowledges the importance of managing productivity and efficiency of its workforce. The Company uses current technology resources for sales and student services tasks, education support, graduate placement services, and internal talent management. Through the application of these technology tools, productivity data is obtained for key positions and used for process improvement, training, and evaluative purposes.

The Company recognizes the value to both the Company and our students of employee knowledge and skill development throughout their careers and of preparing current employees for succession opportunities. Therefore, employees receive position-based training, as well as online access to a multitude of programs designed to support their effectiveness and growth potential. The Company identifies high-performing employee participants for acceleration training programs to develop internal candidates for succession opportunities in key functions.

Index

Labor Relations

We believe that we have good relationships with all of our employees. At seven of our 21 campuses, the teaching professionals are represented by various unions. In 2024, the faculty at one of our campuses voted to be represented through collective bargaining. Approximately 230 employees are now covered by collective bargaining agreements that expire between 2025 and 2027. Those agreements expiring in the short term, as well as the agreement for the additional campus, are in the process of negotiation. We believe thatwe have good relationships with these unions and with the employees covered by these collective bargaining agreements and do not foresee issues with entering into satisfactory new agreements.

Our Management

We believe that our management team has the experience necessary to effectively implement our growth strategy and continue to drive positive educational and employment outcomes for our students. For a discussion of the risks relating to the attraction and retention of management and executive management employees, see Item 1A. “Risk Factors.”

Competition

The for-profit, postsecondary education industry is highly competitive and highly fragmented with no one provider controlling significant market share. Direct competition between career-oriented schools like ours and traditional four-year colleges or universities is limited. Thus, our main competitors are other for-profit, career-oriented schools, not-for-profit public schools and private schools, and public and private two-year junior and community colleges, most of which are eligible to receive funding under the federal programs of student financial aid authorized by Title IV Programs. Competition is generally based on location, the type of programs offered, the quality of instruction, placement rates, reputation, recruiting and tuition rates; therefore, our competition is different in each market depending on, among other things, the availability of other options. Public institutions are generally able to charge lower tuition than our schools, due in part to government subsidies and other financial sources not available to for-profit schools. In addition, some of our other competitors have a more extensive network of schools and campuses, which enables them to recruit students more efficiently from a wider geographic area. Nevertheless, we believe that we are able to compete effectively in our local markets because of the diversity of our program offerings, quality of instruction, the strength of our brands, our reputation and our graduates’ success in securing employment after completing their programs of study.

Our competition differs in each market depending on the curriculum that we offer. For example, a school offering automotive technology, healthcare services and skilled trades programs will have a different group of competitors than a school offering healthcare services and IT technology programs. Also, because schools can add new programs within six to 12 months, competition can emerge relatively quickly. Moreover, with online education becoming more prevalent, the number of competitors in each market has increased because students can now attend classes from an online institution. On average, each of our schools has at least three direct competitors and at least a dozen indirect competitors.

Environmental Matters

We use limited amounts of hazardous materials at our training facilities and campuses, and generate small quantities of regulated waste such as used oil, antifreeze, paint and car batteries. As a result, our facilities and operations are subject to a variety of environmental laws and regulations governing, among other things, the use, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous substances and waste, and the clean-up of contamination at our facilities or off-site locations to which we send or have sent waste for disposal. We are also required to obtain permits for our air emissions and to meet operational and maintenance requirements at certain of our campuses. In the event we do not maintain compliance with any of these laws and regulations, or are responsible for a spill or release of hazardous materials, we could incur significant costs for cleanup or damages and fines or penalties.

We are committed to sustainability, conserving energy and limiting waste and regularly review our impact on the environment with a view to improvement. In addition, we have adopted an Environmental Policy reflecting our commitment in this regard.

Regulatory Environment

The education industry is highly regulated by a wide range of federal and state agencies as well as institutional and programmatic accrediting agencies including the U.S. Department of Education (“DOE”). The vast regulatory schemes to which our industry is subject cover a significant portion of our operations such as our programs, instructional staff, administrative procedures, marketing and recruiting efforts, third-party servicers, private loan programs, and facilities, among other things. The various regulatory bodies with oversight over our business periodically issue new requirements, revise existing requirements, and modify their interpretations of existing requirements. These regulatory requirements also impact our ability to acquire or open new campuses, change our existing programs and institute new programs.

Index

We also are subject to oversight by other federal agencies including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), and the Departments of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) and Defense (“DOD”). We cannot predict how any of the regulatory requirements to which we are subject will be applied or whether each of our schools will be able to comply with such requirements in the future.

The various approvals granted by the regulatory entities to which we are subject are what collectively allow our schools to operate and to participate in a variety of government-sponsored financial aid programs that assist students in paying for their education, the most significant of which are the federal student aid programs administered by the DOE under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (the “HEA”). See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – State Authorization,” “Regulatory Environment – Accreditation,” “Regulatory Environment – Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs,” and “Regulatory Environment – Other Financial Assistance Programs.” The HEA and the regulations of the DOE specify extensive criteria and numerous standards that we must satisfy in order to participate in federal financial aid programs under Title IV of the HEA (“Title IV Programs”). Generally, to participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must be licensed or otherwise legally authorized to operate in the state where it is physically located, be accredited by an accreditor recognized by the DOE, be certified as an eligible institution by the DOE, offer at least one eligible program of education, and comply with other statutory and regulatory requirements. Students seeking financial aid under Title IV Programs obtain access to federal student financial aid through a DOE-prescribed application and eligibility certification. Each of our schools currently participates in Title IV Programs. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, approximately 82.0% (calculated based on cash receipts) of our revenues were derived from Title IV Programs. Congress periodically revises the HEA and other laws governing Title IV Programs and annually determines the funding level for each Title IV Program. Further, the President could issue executive orders or take other actions and the DOE could establish new regulations that could make it more difficult for our schools to operate and comply with applicable regulations.

Also, all of our schools are currently offering both online and in-person learning. Accrediting agencies and some state bodies require schools to obtain approval and meet certain requirements in order to offer programs via distance education in states where the school does not have a campus. The DOE also generally requires schools that offer a program through distance education to students in a state in which the school is not physically located to meet the requirements of the state in order to offer programs by distance education in the state. All of our schools are currently approved to offer both distance and in-person learning by the DOE, ACCSC, and the states in which they are physically located. In addition, our Indianapolis school is an institutional participant in the National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (“NC-SARA”) which is a voluntary agreement among member states which enables participating schools who are authorized by the state in which they are physically located to offer distance education in other participating states without obtaining additional authorization in those states.

State Authorization

To operate and offer postsecondary educational programs and to be certified to participate in Title IV Programs, each of our schools must be authorized and maintain authorization from the state in which it is physically located. Further, in order for a school to engage in educational or recruiting activities outside of its state of physical location, the school also may be required to obtain and maintain authorization from the states in which it is recruiting students or in which its students are receiving online instruction. The level of regulatory oversight varies substantially from state to state and is extensive in some states. State laws may establish standards for instruction, qualifications of faculty, location and nature of facilities and equipment, administrative procedures, marketing, recruiting, student outcomes reporting, disclosure obligations to students, limitations on mandatory arbitration clauses in enrollment agreements, requirements for distance learning including online and blended courses, financial operations, and other operational matters. Some states prescribe standards of financial responsibility and mandate that institutions post surety bonds. We have posted surety bonds on behalf of our schools and education representatives with multiple states in an aggregate amount of approximately$17.0 million. Currently, each of our schools is authorized by the applicable state education agencies to offer distance and in-person learning in the states in which the school is physically located and is authorized to recruit students in the states in which it recruits students. Our Indianapolis school also is an institutional participant in NC-SARA which enables it to offer distance learning to students located in other states. Our other schools have entered into a consortium agreement with our Indianapolis school that has been approved by ACCSC and applicable state education agencies and that enables students enrolled in one of the other schools to take courses online through the Indianapolis school.

Some of our educational programs prepare students for occupations that require professional licensure in order to work in the occupation. These programs are subject to the requirements of state occupational agencies that require our schools that offer the programs to obtain agency approval of the programs and to comply with the applicable requirements of these boards. For example, each of our schools that offers a nursing program is required to obtain and periodically renew approvals from the applicable occupational agencies that regulate these programs in the state in which the schools are physically located. If we fail to maintain our approvals or comply with applicable requirements, we could lose our authority to offer the impacted programs and could be subject to other sanctions.

The practical nursing program offered at three of our campuses in New Jersey also is subject to the requirements of the New Jersey Board of Nursing (“NJBON”), a state occupational agency. Among the various requirements applicable to the practical nursing program is the requirement that at least 75% of the program’s graduates pass the state licensure examination on their first attempt. On July 12, 2024, the NJBON placed our Paramus, New Jersey campus (the “Paramus campus”) practical nursing program on probation because, for three consecutive calendar years, less than 75% of the program’s graduates passed the state licensure examination on their first attempt. The program also is offered at the Company’s other campuses in Iselin and Moorestown, New Jersey where the licensure pass rate requirement has been successfully achieved by the graduates of the program at these campuses.

Index

As a result of the probationary status of the Paramus campus program, the Paramus campus was required to submit to the NJBON an 18-month action plan demonstrating its plan for improving the licensure pass rate to at least 75% in the next calendar year (or within an extension period if granted by the NJBON). Furthermore, during this probationary period, the NJBON will not allow the Paramus campus to enroll any new students or accept any transfer students in its practical nursing program. If the program does not achieve the required licensure pass rate within one calendar year (or within an extension period if granted by the NJBON), the NJBON rules indicate that the program would not be eligible for restoration to accredited status and, therefore, would lose accreditation permanently for this program.

While the loss of the ability to enroll new students or accept transfer students during the probationary period, or the ultimate loss of accreditation for the practical nursing program at the Paramus campus (should that occur), would not be expected to be material to the Company, it could have a negative reputational impact and have an adverse financial impact on the Paramus campus if we are unable to enroll more students in other existing programs at the Paramus campus and/or to add other programs at this campus. We would expect that the loss in practical nursing students at this location would be offset, at least in part, by increased enrollments at our Iselin and Moorestown, New Jersey campuses.

In general, if any of our schools fail to comply with state licensing requirements, they may be subject to the loss of state licensure or authorization. If any one of our schools lost its authorization from the education agency of the state in which the school is located, or failed to comply with the DOE’s state authorization requirements, that school would lose its eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, the Title IV Program eligibility of its related additional locations could be affected, the impacted schools would be unable to offer its programs, and we could be forced to close the schools. If one of our schools lost its state authorization from a state other than the state in which the school is located, the school would not be able to recruit students or to operate in that state.

Accreditation

Accreditation is a non-governmental process through which a school submits to ongoing qualitative and quantitative review by an organization of peer institutions. Accrediting agencies primarily examine the academic quality of the school’s instructional programs, and a grant of accreditation is generally viewed as confirmation that the school’s programs meet generally accepted academic standards. Accrediting agencies also review the administrative and financial operations of the schools they accredit to ensure that each school has the resources necessary to perform its educational mission.

Accreditation by an accrediting agency recognized by the DOE is required for an institution to be certified to participate in Title IV Programs. In order to be recognized by the DOE, accrediting agencies must adopt specific standards for their review of educational institutions. As of December 31, 2024, 21 of our campuses are institutionally accredited by the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (the “ACCSC”) which is recognized by the DOE.

If the DOE withdraws the recognition of an accrediting agency, the HEA indicates that the DOE may continue the eligibility of qualified institutions accredited by the accrediting agency for a period of up to 18 months from the date of the withdrawal of the DOE’s recognition of the accrediting agency. If provided, this period would allow time for institutions to apply for accreditation from another DOE-recognized accrediting body. The DOE could impose provisional certification status and other conditions and restrictions on such institutions during this time period. If the DOE declines to continue its recognition of ACCSC and if the subsequent period for obtaining accreditation from another DOE-recognized accrediting agency lapses before we obtain accreditation from another DOE-recognized accrediting agency (or if the DOE does not provide such a period for institutions to obtain other accreditation), our schools could lose Title IV eligibility. On May 25, 2023, the DOE notified ACCSC that it would continue the DOE’s recognition of the agency as a nationally recognized accreditor for three years.

Index

The following is a list of the dates on which each campus was accredited by its accrediting commission and the date by which its accreditation must be renewed.

Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges Reaccreditation Dates

If one of our schools fails to comply with accrediting commission requirements, the institution and its main and/or branch campuses are subject to the loss of accreditation or may be placed on probation or a special monitoring or reporting status which, if the noncompliance is not resolved, could result in loss of accreditation or restrictions on the addition of new locations, new programs, or other substantive changes. If any one of our schools loses its accreditation, students attending that school would no longer be eligible to receive Title IV Program funding.

Programmatic accreditation is yet another approval necessary in certain circumstances. Specifically, it is the process through which specific programs are reviewed and approved by industry and program-specific accrediting entities. Although programmatic accreditation is not generally necessary for Title IV Program eligibility, such accreditation may be required to operate the program in the state, to allow students to sit for certain licensure exams, or to work in a particular profession or career or to meet other requirements.

Nature of Federal and State Support for Post-Secondary Education

As noted above, the federal government provides a substantial part of the financial support for postsecondary education through Title IV Programs, in the form of grants and loans to students who can use those funds at any institution that has been certified as eligible by the DOE. Most aid under Title IV Programs is awarded on the basis of financial need, generally defined as the difference between the cost of attending the institution and the expected amount a student and his or her family can reasonably contribute to that cost. A recipient of Title IV Program funds must maintain a satisfactory grade point average and progress in a timely manner toward completion of his or her program of study and must meet other applicable eligibility requirements for the receipt of Title IV Program funds. In addition, each school must ensure that Title IV Program funds are properly accounted for and disbursed in the correct amounts to eligible students and provide reports on recipient data.

Index

Other Financial Assistance Programs

Some of our students receive financial aid from federal sources other than Title IV Programs, such as programs administered by the VA. In addition, some states also provide financial aid to our students in the form of grants, loans or scholarships. The eligibility requirements for state financial aid and these other federal aid programs vary among the funding agencies and by program. States that provide financial aid to our students are facing significant budgetary constraints and some of them have reduced the level of state financial aid available to our students. Due to state budgetary shortfalls and constraints in certain states in which we operate, we believe that the overall level of state financial aid for our students is likely to continue to decrease in the near term, but we cannot predict how significant any such reductions will be or how long they will last. Federal budgetary shortfalls and constraints, or decisions by federal lawmakers to limit or prohibit access by our institutions or their students to federal financial aid, could result in a decrease in the level of federal financial aid for our students.

In fiscal year 2024, we derived approximately 5.5% of our revenues, on a cash basis, from veterans’ benefits programs, which include the Post-9/11 GI Bill and Veteran Readiness and Employment services. To continue participation in veterans’ benefits programs, an institution must comply with certain requirements established by the VA, including that the institution must, among other things, report on the enrollment status of eligible students, maintain student records and make such records available for inspection, follow rules applicable to the individual benefits programs, comply with rules applicable to distance education and hybrid programs, and comply with applicable limits on the percentage of students having a portion of their tuition or other institutional charges paid by the school or with certain veterans’ benefits. If we fail to comply with these or other applicable requirements, we could be subject to liabilities or sanctions including the loss of eligibility to participate in the programs.

The VA shares responsibility for VA benefit approval and oversight with designated State Approving Agencies (“SAAs”). SAAs play a critical role in evaluating institutions and their programs to determine if they meet VA benefit eligibility requirements. Processes and approval criteria, as well as interpretation of applicable requirements, can vary from state to state. Therefore, approval in one state does not necessarily result in approval in all states. Changes in the applicable statutes, regulations, or appropriations applicable to the programs could impact our eligibility or funding under the programs.

The VA imposes limitations on the percentage of students per program who have a portion of their tuition or other institutional charges paid by the school or with certain veterans’ benefits, unless the program qualifies for certain waivers. On January 16, 2024, the VA published new regulations that, among other things, eliminate certain exceptions from these limitations and changed the criteria for obtaining a waiver of these rules. The VA simultaneously issued a bulletin delaying the applicability date to one year after the publication of the regulation to allow institutions to implement any necessary changes in their policies to comply with the new regulations. These new rules could make it more difficult for our programs to comply with these limitations. If the VA determines that a program is out of compliance with these limitations, the VA will continue to provide benefits to current students, but new students will not be eligible to use their veterans’ benefits for an affected program until we demonstrate compliance. Additionally, the VA requires a campus be in operation for two years in certain cases before it can apply to participate in VA benefit programs. All of our campuses that are currently in operation are eligible to participate in VA education benefit programs.

During 2012, President Obama signed an Executive Order directing the U.S. Department of Defense (“DOD”), the VA and DOE to establish “Principles of Excellence” (the “Principles”), based on certain guidelines set forth in the Executive Order, to apply to educational institutions receiving federal funding for service members, veterans and family members. As requested, we provided written confirmation of our intent to comply with the Principles to the VA in June 2012. We are required to comply with the Principles to continue recruitment activities at military installations. Additionally, there is a requirement to execute a memorandum of understanding (“MOU”) with the

DOD as well as with certain individual installations. Each of our institutions has an MOU with the DOD. If our campuses fail to comply with VA, DOD, SAA, and other requirements applicable to financial aid programs for veterans or active military members, our schools and students could lose access to this funding or could be subject to restrictions or conditions on ability to receive such funding.

Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs

As noted above, in order to participate in Title IV Programs, an institution must be authorized to offer its programs by the state education agencies in the state in which it is physically located, be accredited by an accrediting commission recognized by the DOE and be certified as eligible by the DOE. The DOE will certify an institution to participate in Title IV Programs only after reviewing and approving the institution’s application to participate in Title IV Programs. The DOE defines an institution to consist of both a main campus and its additional locations, if any. Under this definition, for DOEpurposes as of December 31, 2024 we had the following three institutions, collectively consisting of three main campuses and 19 additional locations:

Index

Each institution must periodically apply to the DOE for continued certification to participate in Title IV Programs. The institution also must apply for recertification when it undergoes a change in ownership resulting in a change of control and may come under DOE review when it undergoes a substantive change that requires the submission of an application, such as opening an additional location or raising the highest academic credential it offers. All institutions are recertified on various dates for various periods of time. The following table sets forth the expiration dates for each of our institutions’ current Title IV Program participation agreements:

Each of our institutions has submitted an application to the DOE for continued certification to participate in Title IV Programs. The DOE regulations state that an institution’s existing certification will be extended on a month-to-month basis following the expiration of the institution’s period of participation until the end of the month in which the DOE issues a decision on the application for a renewal of certification as long as the institution has submitted a materially complete application by the applicable deadline prior to the expiration date of its current period of participation. Each of our three institutions submitted a materially complete application prior to the applicable expiration date. The DOE has confirmed in writing that each institution remains eligible to participate in Title IV Programs while the DOE reviews its recertification application.

The DOE typically provides provisional certification status to an institution following a change in ownership resulting in a change of control and also may provisionally certify an institution for other reasons, including, but not limited to, noncompliance with certain standards of administrative capability and financial responsibility. The DOE provisionally certified all of our institutions based on findings in recent audits of each institution’s Title IV Program compliance that the DOE alleges identified deficiencies related to DOE regulations regarding an institution’s level of administrative capability. An institution that is provisionally certified receives fewer due process rights than those received by other institutions in the event the DOE takes certain adverse actions against the institution, is required to obtain prior DOE approvals of new campuses and educational programs, and may be subject to heightened scrutiny by the DOE. Provisional certification status makes it easier for the DOE to revoke or decline to renew our Title IV eligibility if the DOE chooses to take such an action against us and other provisionally certified for-profit schools without undergoing a formal administrative appeal process. The DOE could attempt to use an institution’s provisional certification status as a basis for imposing additional conditions or restrictions on the institution.

Index

On October 31, 2023, the DOE published final regulations on a variety of topics including, but not limited to, regulations to authorize additional conditions and restrictions on provisionally certified institutions. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Negotiated Rulemaking.” The regulations had a general effective date of July 1, 2024 and expand the grounds for placing institutions on provisional certification status, expand the types of conditions the DOE may impose on provisionally certified institutions, and expand the number of requirements contained in the institution’s program participation agreement with the DOE (including, among other requirements, an obligation to comply with all state laws related to closure).

The final regulations allow the DOE to place institutions on provisional certification status if, among other reasons, the institution does not meet financial responsibility factors or administrative capability standards, if the institution is required by the DOE to submit a letter of credit as a result of a mandatory or discretionary triggering event, or if the DOE deems the institution to be at risk of closure. The final regulations also allow the DOE to determine whether to certify or impose conditions on an institution based on consideration of factors including, for example, the institution’s withdrawal rate, the amounts the institution spent on recruiting activities, advertising, and other pre-enrollment activities, and the passage rate for licensure exams for programs that are designed to meet the educational requirements for a professional license required for employment in an occupation.

The final regulations also expand the types of conditions that the DOE can impose on provisionally certified institutions including, for example, restrictions on the addition of new programs or locations, restrictions on the rate of growth or new enrollment of students or of Title IV volume, restrictions on the institution providing a teach-out on behalf of another institution, restrictions on the acquisition of another participating institution (including financial protection requirements), additional reporting requirements, limitations on entering into certain written arrangements with institutions or entities for providing part of an educational program, requirements to submit marketing and recruiting materials to DOE for approval (if the institution is alleged or found to have engaged in substantial misrepresentations to students, engaged in aggressive recruiting practices, or violated incentive compensation rules), reporting requirements for institutions that received a government formal inquiry such as a subpoena related to its marketing or recruitment or its federal financial aid, and other potential conditions imposed by the DOE.

The new regulations increase the possibility that our schools could remain in provisional certification status, be subject to additional reporting requirements and other conditions and sanctions such as letter of credit requirements and be subject to a potential loss of Title IV eligibility if our efforts to comply with the new regulations are unsuccessful.

As noted above, the DOE is responsible for overseeing compliance with Title IV Program requirements. As a result, each of our schools is subject to detailed oversight and review, and must comply with a complex framework of laws and regulations. Additionally, the DOE periodically revises its regulations and changes its interpretation of existing laws and regulations.

Significant factors relating to Title IV Programs that could adversely affect us include the following:

Congressional and Presidential Action. Political and budgetary concerns significantly affect Title IV Programs. Congress periodically revises the HEA and other laws governing Title IV Programs. It is not known if or when Congress will pass final legislation that comprehensively reauthorizes and amends the HEA or other laws affecting U.S. federal student aid.

In addition, Congress reviews and determines federal appropriations for Title IV Programs on an annual basis. Congress can also make changes in the laws affecting Title IV Programs in the annual appropriations bills and in other laws it enacts between the HEA reauthorizations such as its recent amendment to the 90/10 rule in the HEA. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – 90/10 Rule.” Similarly, the President could issue executive orders or take other actions and the DOE could establish new regulations or publish new guidance that could make it more difficult for our schools to operate and comply with applicable regulations. Moreover, Congress, or the President could take action to downsize or eliminate the DOE or transfer some or all of the authority and responsibilities of the DOE to another agency. Because a significant percentage of our revenues are derived from Title IV Programs, any action by Congress, the President or the DOE that significantly reduces Title IV Program funding, that limits or restricts the ability of our schools, programs, or students to receive funding through the Title IV Programs, orthat imposes new restrictions or constraints upon our business or operations could reduce our student enrollment and our revenues, and could increase our administrative costs and require us to arrange for alternative sources of financial aid for our students and require us to modify our practices in order for our schools to comply fully with Title IV Program requirements. Further, current requirements for student or school participation in Title IV Programs may change or one or more of the present Title IV Programs could be replaced by other programs with materially different student or school eligibility requirements. The potential for changes related to the DOE or Title IV Programs that may be adverse to us and other for-profit schools like ours may increase as a result of changes in political leadership. We cannot predict the scope, timing or likelihood of future actions and changes by Congress, the President or the DOE with respect to the operations and existence of the DOE or the laws and regulations applicable to and the funding for the Title IV Programs. If we cannot comply with the provisions of the HEA and the regulations of the DOE as they may be revised or with the terms of an executive order or the Presidential action or if the cost of such compliance is excessive or if funding is materially reduced or disrupted by changes in Title IV Programs or DOE, our revenues or profit margin could be materially adversely affected.

Index

Gainful Employment. On October 10, 2023, the DOE published final new gainful employment and financial value transparency regulations which had a general effective date of July 1, 2024.

The new regulations establish rules for annually evaluating each of our educational programs based on the calculation of debt-to-earnings rates (an annual debt-to-earnings rate and a discretionary debt-to-earnings rate) and an earnings premium measure based on an evaluation of median annual earnings. The DOE will calculate these rates and measures under complex regulatory formulas outlined in the regulations and using data such as student debt (including not only Title IV loans but also certain private loans and extensions of credit), student earnings data, and comparative median earnings data for young working adults with only a high school diploma or GED (including state-by-state annual earnings thresholds for 2024 published by the DOE on December 31, 2024). If one or more of our educational programs were to yield debt-to-earnings rates or an earnings premium measure that do not comply with regulatory benchmarks for two of three consecutive years, we would lose Title IV eligibility for each of the impacted educational programs. The regulations will also require us to provide warnings to current and prospective students for programs in danger of losing of Title IV eligibility (which could deter prospective students from enrolling and current students from continuing their respective programs). The regulations also include provisions for providing certifications and reporting data to the DOE and providing required student disclosures related to gainful employment.

The regulations include gainful employment rates and measures that will be based in part on data that is not readily accessible to us and other institutions, which make it difficult for us to predict with certainty how our educational programs will perform under the new gainful employment benchmarks and the extent to which certain programs could become ineligible for Title IV participation. The DOE released performance data at the time it published the proposed regulations that calculates rates for each school’s program while acknowledging that the methodology used to produce the calculations differs from the methodology in the proposed regulations due to limitations in data availability. Because we do not have access to all of the data that will ultimately be used under the regulations to evaluate our programs and the DOE has not made this data available to us, we cannot predict whether, or the extent to which, our programs could fail to comply with the new gainful employment benchmarks. Moreover, we do not have control over some of the factors that could impact the rates and measures for our programs which will limit our ability to eliminate or mitigate the impact of the regulations on us and our educational programs.

The DOE announced at the time it released the final gainful employment regulations that the first official outcome rates would be published in early 2025 and that programs that fail the gainful employment metric in the first two years the rates are issued would become ineligible in 2026. However, on February 14, 2025, the DOE announced it had extended the deadline for reporting gainful employment and financial value transparency data to the DOE to September 30, 2025, and stated it does not plan to produce any gainful employment and financial value transparency metrics prior to the new September 30, 2025 deadline. Additionally, as part of a consent motion to stay proceedings in a lawsuit in a federal district court in Texas seeking to stop the implementation of the gainful employment regulations, the DOE stated it does not expect to issue any gainful employment metrics before the fall of 2025, and stated the new Presidential administration is evaluating its position regarding the issues in the case. We cannot predict when the DOE will publish the first official outcome rates or what those rates will be. We also cannot predict the outcome of the pending lawsuit and whether it will result in the delay or prevention of the implementation of the new gainful employment regulations. The implementation of new gainful employment regulations could require us to eliminate or modify certain educational programs, could result in the loss of our students’ access to Title IV Program funds for the affected programs, and could have a significant impact on the rate at which students enroll in our programs and on our business and results of operations.

Borrower Defense to Repayment Regulations. The DOE’s Borrower Defense to Repayment (“BDR”) regulations establish processes for borrowers to receive from the DOE a discharge of the obligation to repay certain Title IV Program loans based on certain acts or omissions by the institution or a covered party. The regulations also establish processes for the DOE to seek recovery from the institution of the amount of discharged loans.

On November 1, 2022, the DOE published new final BDR regulations with a general effective date of July 1, 2023 that also addressed other topics. The final regulations are extensive and generally make it easier for borrowers to obtain discharges of student loans and for the DOE to assess liabilities and other sanctions on institutions based on the loan discharges. The final regulations are currently under an injunction ordered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and currently under appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, the challenged amendments to the BDR regulations that were to take effect on July 1, 2023 are not in effect, but the previous BDR regulations generally remain in effect in the meantime and apply different substantive standards and procedures based on when a BDR claimant’s loans were disbursed. We cannot predict the duration of the injunction, the ultimate outcome of the lawsuit, whether the DOE under the new administration will continue to defend against the lawsuit, or if and when the revised BDR regulations might take effect.

Between April 2021 and February 2024, the Company received three separate notifications from the DOE that the DOE was in receipt of borrower defense claims containing allegations concerning our schools and requiring that the DOE undertake a fact-finding process pursuant to DOE regulations. The three separate notifications contained a total of approximately 3,000 borrower defense claims. Among other things, the communication outlined a process by which the DOE would provide the applications and allow us the opportunity to submit responses to them. Based upon publicly available information, it appears that the DOE has undertaken similar reviews of other educational institutions which have also been the subject of various borrower defense applications. We have received the borrower application claims and have completed the process of thoroughly reviewing and responding to each borrower application as well as providing information in response to the DOE’s requests.

Index

In January 2025, the DOE published a press release announcing the discharge of a large number of loans at a large number of schools which included loans totaling approximately $1.4 million for 280 borrowers who attended our Massachusetts schools between 2010 and 2013. The notice does not acknowledge or evaluate our prior responses to those applications. The DOE may attempt to impose liability on the Company for reimbursement for the discharged loans. If the DOE seeks reimbursement from us for the discharged loan amounts, we would consider our options for challenging the legal and factual bases for such actions. In the event that the DOE were to prevail in any efforts seeking reimbursement for the discharged loans, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

As previously reported, on June 22, 2022, the DOE and the plaintiff student loan borrowers in a class action against the DOE initiated on June 25, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Sweet v. Cardona, No. 3:19-cv-3674 (N.D. Cal.)) announced a proposed settlement agreement to resolve claims that the DOE had failed to timely decide Borrower Defense to Repayment applications submitted to the DOE. The proposed settlement included three categories of relief for student loan borrowers. First, the DOE would agree to discharge loans and refund prior loan payments to the class members with loan debt associated with an institution on the list included in the proposed settlement (which includes Lincoln institutions). The class action plaintiffs and the DOE stated that the DOE had determined that attendance at one of the listed institutions justifies presumptive relief allegedly based on strong indicia regarding substantial misconduct by the institutions, whether credibly alleged or in some instances proven, and the purportedly high rate of class members with applications related to the listed schools. Second, the proposed settlement included new procedures for the DOE to resolve pending borrower defense claims associated with other schools not on the list. Third, for any student loan borrower who submitted a borrower defense application after June 22, 2022 and before the final approval of the settlement, the proposed settlement would require the DOE to review the applications under the DOE’s 2016 regulatory standards and issue decisions within 36 months, or else the applications would be discharged in full.

At the time that the class action plaintiffs and the DOE announced the proposed settlement, Lincoln was not a party to the lawsuit and none of the named plaintiffs had attended a Lincoln institution. In August 2022, Lincoln and three other schools were granted permission to intervene in the lawsuit to protect their interests in the finalization and implementation of any settlement agreement that the court might approve. On November 16, 2022, the federal district court approved the settlement as proposed and the DOE began implementing the settlement relief while Lincoln and other parties appealed the settlement’s final approval to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On November 5, 2024, the Ninth Circuit upheld the settlement on appeal. One or more parties are expected to continue to appeal the final approval of the settlement, but Lincoln does not intend to continue participating in the appeal. See Part I, Item I. “Business – Regulatory Environment – Borrower Defense to Repayment Regulations.”

The settlement provides automatic debt forgiveness and refunds, or a streamlined review process, for former students of over 150 schools, including our institutions, who had submitted borrower defense claims or before June 22, 2022. Based upon publicly available information, approximately 264,000 borrower defense claims associated with all schools were eligible for automatic relief or a streamlined review process as of June 22, 2022. The settlement also provides a 36-month deadline for the DOE to decide borrower defense claims submitted between June 23, 2022 and November 16, 2022, the date of the court’s final approval of the settlement, under the DOE’s 2016 regulatory standards. If the DOE does not decide those claims within 36 months, the applicants will receive automatic debt forgiveness and refunds without considering the merits of the claims. As a result of publicity about the opportunity afforded by the settlement, approximately 206,000 additional student borrowers submitted 250,000 applications prior to November 16, 2022.

On January 13, 2023, Lincoln appealed the settlement’s final approval to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Two of the three other intervener schools also appealed on the same date. The three schools appealing also sought to stay the implementation of the settlement while their appeals were being decided, but the requested stay was denied by the district court, the Ninth Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. As a result, the DOE began implementing the settlement relief while the three schools appeal the settlement’s final approval. The Ninth Circuit issued a panel decision on November 5, 2024, denying the appeal. Although the other appealing schools may continuing efforts to appeal this matter (including to the U.S. Supreme Court), we do not intend to continue to participate in the appeal process.

It is not possible at this time to predict whether the settlement will continue to be upheld on appeal, what additional actions the DOE might take as the settlement continues to be upheld on appeal, or whether the DOE or other agencies might take actions against Lincoln institutions. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

It also remains unclear what loan discharge applications the DOE may receive and grant in the future and whether the DOE will assert repayment claims against us. As a result, we are not able to predict the ultimate outcome of the DOE’s review of these applications at this time. If the DOE disagrees with our legal and factual grounds for contesting the applications, or if the DOE fails to adjudicate the claims within 36 months, the DOE could discharge the loans associated with the applications and award refunds to student borrowers. We believe that the DOE already may have discharged loans associated with some of the pending applications, but the DOE has not furnished definitive data to us necessary to determine the extent to which applications have been granted. The DOE may attempt to seek recoupment from applicable schools relating to loan discharges. If the DOE seeks reimbursement from us for the discharged loan amounts in any or all approved applications, we would consider our options for challenging the legal and factual bases for such actions. We cannot predict the outcome of any challenges we might make to such actions. In the event that the DOE were to prevail in any efforts seeking reimbursement for the discharged loans, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Index

The "90/10 Rule." Under the HEA, a proprietary institution that derives more than 90% of its total revenue from Title IV Programs (its “90/10 Rule percentage”) for two consecutive fiscal years becomes immediately ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs and may not reapply for eligibility until the end of at least two fiscal years. An institution with revenues exceeding 90% for a single fiscal year will be placed in provisional certification status and may be subject to other enforcement measures, including a potential requirement to submit a letter of credit. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Financial Responsibility Standards.” If an institution violated the 90/10 Rule and became ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs but continued to disburse Title IV Program funds, the DOE would require the institution to repay all Title IV Program funds received by the institution after the effective date of the loss of eligibility. A loss of eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs for any of our institutions would have a significant impact on the rate at which our students enroll in our programs and on our business and results of operations.

We have calculated that for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages ranged from approximately 80% to 84%. For fiscal year 2024, none of our existing institutions derived more than 90% of its revenues from Title IV Programs. Our calculations are subject to review by the DOE.

In March 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (“ARPA”) was signed into law. Among other provisions, the ARPA includes a provision that amends the 90/10 Rule by treating other “federal funds that are disbursed or delivered to or on behalf of a student to be used to attend such institution” in the same way as Title IV Program funds are currently treated in the 90/10 Rule calculation. This means that our institutions are now required to limit the combined amount of Title IV Program funds and applicable “federal funds” revenue in a fiscal year to no more than 90% in a fiscal year as calculated under the rule. Consequently, the ARPA change to the 90/10 Rule is expected to increase the 90/10 Rule calculations at our institutions. The ARPA does not identify the specific federal funding programs that will be covered by this provision, but it is expected to include funding from federal student aid programs such as the veterans’ benefits programs, which include the Post-9/11 GI Bill and Veterans Readiness and Employment services, from which we derived approximately 5.5% of our revenues on a cash basis in fiscal year 2024.

The ARPA states that the amendments to the 90/10 Rule apply to institutional fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023 and are subject to the HEA’s negotiated rulemaking process. Beginning in January 2022, the DOE convened negotiated rulemaking committee meetings on a variety of topics including the 90/10 Rule. The committee reached consensus on proposed 90/10 Rule regulations during meetings in March 2022. On July 28, 2022, the DOE published proposed regulations regarding the 90/10 Rule among other topics. The DOE published final regulations on October 28, 2022 with a general effective date of July 1, 2023.

The new 90/10 Rule regulations contain several new and amended provisions on a variety of topics including, among other things, confirming that the rules apply to fiscal years ending on or after January 1, 2023; noting that the DOE plans to identify the types of federal funds to be included in the 90/10 Rule in a notice in the Federal Register (which the DOE subsequently confirmed in a published notice on December 21, 2022 includes a wide range of federal student aid programs including VA and DOD programs); requiring institutions to disburse funds that students are eligible to receive for a fiscal year before the end of the fiscal year rather than delaying disbursements until a subsequent fiscal year; updating requirements for counting revenues generated from certain educational activities associated with institutional programs, from certain non-Title IV eligible educational programs, and from institutional aid programs such as institutional loans, scholarships, and income share agreements; updating technical rules for the 90/10 Rule calculation; including rules for sanctions for noncompliance with the 90/10 Rule and for required notifications to students and the DOE by the institution of noncompliance with the 90/10 Rule. The new regulations under the 90/10 Rule could have a material adverse effect on us and other schools like ours.

We continue to evaluate the impact of the new 90/10 Rule regulations on our business. We continue to make changes to our operations in order to address the provisions in the 90/10 Rule and in order to maintain the 90/10 Rule percentages at our institutions below the 90% threshold as calculated under DOE regulations. However, we do not have significant control over the amount of Title IV Program funds that our students may receive and borrow. Our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages can be increased by increases in Title IV Programs aid availability (including, for example, increases in Pell Grant funds) and can be decreased by decreases in the availability of state grant program funding and other sources of student aid that do not count as Title IV Programs funds in the 90/10 Rule calculation. Our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages also will continue to increase when the ARPA amendments to the 90/10 Rule take effect to the extent that students eligible to receive military and veteran education assistance enroll and use their financial assistance at our institutions. We cannot be certain that the changes we continue to make to comply with the amended 90/10 Rule will succeed in maintaining our institutions’ 90/10 Rule percentages below the required levels or that the changes will not materially impact our business operations, revenues, and operating costs. It also is possible that Congress or the DOE could amend the 90/10 Rule in the future to lower the 90% threshold, change the calculation methodology, or make other changes to the 90/10 Rule that could make it more difficult for our institutions to comply with the 90/10 Rule.

Index

As noted above, if any of our institutions lose eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, that loss would also adversely affect our students’ access to various government-sponsored student financial aid programs, and would have a significant impact on the rate at which our students enroll in our programs and on our business and results of operations.

Student Loan Defaults. The HEA limits participation in Title IV Programs by institutions whose former students defaulted on the repayment of federally guaranteed or funded student loans above a prescribed rate (the “cohort default rate”). The DOE calculates these rates based on the number of students who have defaulted, not the dollar amount of such defaults. The cohort default rate is calculated on a federal fiscal year basis and measures the percentage of students who enter repayment of a loan during the federal fiscal year and default on the loan on or before the end of the federal fiscal year or the subsequent two federal fiscal years.

Under the HEA, an institution whose Federal Family Education Loan, or FFEL, and Federal Direct Loan, or FDL, cohort default rate is 30% or greater for three consecutive federal fiscal years loses eligibility to participate in the FFEL, FDL, and Pell programs for the remainder of the federal fiscal year in which the DOE determines that such institution has lost its eligibility and for the two subsequent federal fiscal years. An institution whose FFEL and FDL cohort default rate for any single federal fiscal year exceeds 40% loses its eligibility to participate in the FFEL and FDL programs for the remainder of the federal fiscal year in which the DOE determines that such institution has lost its eligibility and for the two subsequent federal fiscal years. If an institution’s three-year cohort default rate equals or exceeds 30% in two of the three most recent federal fiscal years for which the DOE has issued cohort default rates, the institution may be placed on provisional certification status and could be required to submit a letter of credit to the DOE. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Financial Responsibility Standards.”

In September 2024, the DOE released the final cohort default rates for the 2021 federal fiscal year. These are the most recent final rates published by the DOE. The rates for our existing institutions for the 2021 federal fiscal year were zero. None of our institutions had a cohort default rate equal to or greater than 30% for the 2020 federal fiscal year. The DOE implemented a temporary suspension of repayment obligations and interest accruals on federal student loans during the COVID-19 pandemic for a period of over three years which contributed to a substantial reduction in our cohort default rates. We expect borrower defaults to increase during periods after the expiration of the temporary suspension which we expect will result in higher cohort default rates in the future particularly if borrowers do not successfully resume timely repayment of their federal student loans. We cannot predict how high our cohort default rates will increase in the future.

In February 2025, the DOE released draft three-year cohort default rates for the 2022 federal fiscal year. The draft cohort default rates are subject to change pending receipt of the final cohort default rates, which the DOE is expected to publish in September 2025. The draft rates for our institutions for the 2022 federal fiscal year were zero.

Financial Responsibility Standards.

All institutions participating in Title IV Programs must satisfy specific standards of financial responsibility. The DOE evaluates institutions for compliance with these standards each year, based on the institution's annual audited financial statements, as well as following a change in ownership resulting in a change of control of the institution.

The most significant financial responsibility measurement is the institution's composite score, which is calculated by the DOE based on three ratios:

The DOE 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 DOE 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 without the need for further oversight.

If an institution's composite score is below 1.5, but is at least 1.0, it is in a category denominated by the DOE as "the zone." Under the DOE regulations, institutions that are in the zone typically may be permitted by the DOE to continue to participate in the Title IV Programs by choosing one of two alternatives: 1) the “Zone Alternative” under which an institution is required to make disbursements to students under the Heightened Cash Monitoring 1 (“HCM1”) payment method, or a different payment method other than the advance payment method, and to notify the DOE within 10 days after the occurrence of certain oversight and financial events or 2) submit a letter of credit to the DOE equal to 50 percent of the Title IV Program funds received by the institution during its most recent fiscal year. The DOE permits an institution to participate under the “Zone Alternative” for a period of up to three consecutive fiscal years. Under the HCM1 payment method, the institution is required to make Title IV Program disbursements to eligible students and parents before it requests or receives funds for the amount of those disbursements from the DOE. As long as the student accounts are credited before the funding requests are initiated, an institution is permitted to draw down funds through the DOE’s electronic system for grants management and payments for the amount of disbursements made to eligible students. Unlike the Heightened Cash Monitoring 2 (“HCM2”) and the reimbursement payment methods, the HCM1 payment method typically does not require schools to submit documentation to the DOE and wait for DOE approval before drawing down Title IV Program funds. A school under HCM1, HCM2 or reimbursement payment methods must also pay any credit balances due to a student before drawing down funds for the amount of those disbursements from the DOE, even if the student or parent provides written authorization for the school to hold the credit balance.

Index

If an institution's composite score is below 1.0, the institution is considered by the DOE to lack financial responsibility. If the DOE determines that an institution does not satisfy the DOE's financial responsibility standards, depending on its composite score and other factors, that institution may establish its eligibility to participate in the Title IV Programs on an alternative basis by, among other things:

For the 2024 fiscal year, we calculated our composite score to be 2.5. Composite scores are subject to determination by the DOE based on its review of our consolidated audited financial statements, but we believe it is likely that the DOE will determine that our institutions comply with the composite score requirement.

On October 31, 2023, the DOE published final regulations with a general effective date of July 1, 2024, that, among other things, modify and substantially expand the existing list in the regulations of triggering events that could result in the DOE determining that an institution lacks financial responsibility and must submit to the DOE a letter of credit or other form of acceptable financial protection and accept other conditions on the institution’s Title IV Program eligibility. The regulations create lists of mandatory triggering events and discretionary triggering events.

Examples of mandatory triggering events under the final rules include a lawsuit by a federal or state authority or a qui tam lawsuit in which the Federal government has intervened, where the suit has been pending for 120 days as measured under the regulation; an action where the DOE seeks to recover the cost of adjudicated claims in favor of borrowers under the Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations and the claims would lower the institution’s composite score below 1.0; certain judgments, awards, or settlements in certain lawsuits, mediations, or administrative or arbitration proceedings; certain withdrawals of owner’s equity including by dividend; gainful employment issues; accreditor requirements to submit a teach-out plan for reasons related to financial concerns; certain actions taken against a publicly-traded company or failure to timely file certain annual or quarterly reports; 90/10 Rule issues; cohort default rate issues; contributions and distributions occurring near the fiscal year end that materially impact the composite score; certain defaults or other adverse events under a financing arrangement; or certain financial exigencies or receiverships.

Examples of discretionary triggering events under the final regulations include certain accrediting agency actions, certain accreditor events, fluctuations in Title IV volume, high annual dropout rates, indicators of significant change in the financial condition of the institution, the formation by DOE of a group process to consider borrower defense claims against the institution, the institution’s discontinuation of education programs affecting at least 25 percent of enrolled students receiving Title IV funds, the institution’s closure of locations that enroll more than 25 percent of its students who receive Title IV funds, certain state licensing agency actions, the loss of institutional or program eligibility in another federal educational assistance program, a requirement to disclose in a public filing that the company is under investigation for possible violations of law, or if the institution is cited and faces loss of education assistance funds from another federal agency if it does not comply with agency requirements. The final regulations also establish new rules for evaluating financial responsibility during a change in ownership.

The final regulations increase the likelihood that the DOE could impose a financial protection requirement and other conditions on us and our institutions. The final rules require the institution to notify the DOE of a triggering event and provide information demonstrating why the event does not warrant the submission of a letter of credit or imposition of other requirements. The final rules state that, if the DOE requires financial protection as a result of more than one mandatory or discretionary trigger, the DOE will require separate financial protection for each individual trigger, which could substantially increase the amount of financial protection we and other institutions could be required to provide to the DOE.

The expanded financial responsibility regulations could result in the DOE recalculating and reducing our composite score to account for DOE estimates of potential losses under one or more of the extensive list of triggering circumstances and also could result in the imposition of conditions and requirements, including a requirement to provide one or more letters of credit or other forms of financial protection.

Index

Return of Title IV Program Funds. An institution participating in Title IV Programs must calculate the amount of unearned Title IV Program funds that have been disbursed to students who withdraw from their educational programs before completing them, and must return those unearned funds to the DOE or the applicable lending institution in a timely manner, which is generally within 45 days from the date the institution determines that the student has withdrawn.

If an institution is cited in an audit or program review for returning Title IV Program funds late for 5% or more of the students in the audit or program review sample, or if the regulatory auditor identifies a material weakness in the institution’s report on internal controls relating to the return of unearned Title IV Program funds, the institution may be required to post a letter of credit in favor of the DOE in an amount equal to 25% of the total amount of Title IV Program funds that should have been returned for students who withdrew in the institution's prior fiscal year.

On January 11, 2018, the DOE sent letters to our then existing Columbia, Maryland and Iselin, New Jersey institutions requiring each institution to submit a letter of credit to the DOE based on findings of late returns of Title IV Program funds in the annual Title IV Program compliance audits submitted to the DOE for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016. Accordingly, we submitted letters of credit in the amounts of $0.5 million and $0.1 million to the DOE by the February 23, 2018, deadline and we continue to comply with the letter of credit requirement. By letter dated February 16, 2021, the DOE notified us that our Columbia and Iselin institutions failed to comply with the refund requirements based on their 2017, 2018, and 2019 audits. Consequently, the DOE has required us to maintain with the DOE a letter of credit in the amount of $600,020. The DOE extended the expiration date of this letter of credit until January 31, 2026 based on its conclusion that the compliance audits for the three institutions for 2020 through 2022 contained compliance findings related to refunds even though many of the audits did not contain late refund findings.

More recently, the DOE commenced a negotiated rulemaking process and conducted meetings from January through March 2024 for a negotiated rulemaking committee to discuss proposed regulations on a number of topics including plans to amend the regulations on the requirements for institutions to return unearned Title IV funds to students who withdraw from their educational programs before completing them. The DOE published final regulations on January 3, 2025 with a general effective date of July 1, 2026 on topics including, among others, refunds for students who do not begin attendance at the school or who withdraw from school, the requirement to determine the date a student withdrew from school, the refund calculations for clock hour programs, and the calculation of withdrawal dates and refunds for programs provided in modules The DOE did not include a proposal regarding attendance requirements for distance education programs. We are in the process of reviewing these new regulations and their potential impact on our business and results of operations. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Negotiated Rulemaking.”

Negotiated Rulemaking. The DOE initiated rulemaking on several topics in January 2022 and, after delaying the process, announced in January 2023 its intention to reinitiate the rulemaking process on topics including gainful employment, financial responsibility, administrative capability, certification procedures, ability to benefit, and improving income-driven repayment of loans. On May 19, 2023, the DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that included proposed regulations on topics including gainful employment, financial responsibility, administrative capability, certification, and ability to benefit. On October 10, 2023, the DOE published the final gainful employment regulations which had a general effective date of July 1, 2024. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Gainful Employment.” On October 31, 2023, the DOE published final regulations regarding financial responsibility, administrative capability, certification standards and procedures, and ability to benefit. The regulations had a general effective date of July 1, 2024. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Financial Responsibility,” “Regulatory Environment – Administrative Capability,” and “Regulatory Environment – Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs.”

The final regulations impose a broad range of additional requirements on institutions and especially on for-profit institutions like our schools, which increase the possibility that our schools could be subject to additional reporting requirements, potential liabilities and sanctions, and potential loss of Title IV eligibility if our efforts to modify our operations to comply with the new regulations are unsuccessful, which could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations.

The DOE also commenced a new negotiated rulemaking process with meetings conducted from January through March 2024 on several topics including state authorization, accreditation, return of unearned Title IV Program funds for students who withdraw from school without completing their educational programs, cash management, and distance education. See Part I, Item 1. “Business – Regulatory Environment – State Authorization,” “Regulatory Environment – Accreditation,” and “Regulatory Environment – Return of Title IV Program Funds.”

On July 24, 2024, the DOE published a notice of proposed rulemaking on distance education, return of Title IV funds, and other topics. The DOE published the final rule on January 3, 2025 with a general effective date of July 1, 2026. The distance education rules, among other changes, add a definition of ‘‘distance education course’’ and require institutions to report information about which Title IV students are enrolled in distance education courses. The DOE did not move forward with other distance education proposals such as expanding the definition of additional location to include virtual locations for programs offered entirely online or through correspondence or disallowing asynchronous distance education in clock hour programs for Title IV purposes. The final regulations also amended certain portions of the return of Title IV funds regulations. See Part I, Item I. “Business – Regulatory Environment – Return of Title IV Funds.”

Index

The DOE could issue new regulations and guidance in the future. For example, the DOE previously announced its intention to conduct negotiated rulemaking at a date to be determined to consider regulations related to third-party servicers on topics including, for example, the definition of third-party servicers, audit requirements for servicers, an application process for servicers, and reporting, financial, past performance, and other compliance requirements. The DOE also previously announced that it plans to issue revised guidance on how institutions of higher education may compensate their recruiters. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Restrictions on payment of Commissions, Bonuses and Other Incentive Payments.” We cannot predict the timing and scope of any regulations or guidance the DOE might issue on these or other topics (or whether the DOE under the new administration will issue such regulations or guidance), but new regulations or guidance on these or other topics could increase the possibility that our schools could be subject to additional reporting requirements, to potential liabilities and sanctions such as letter of credit requirements, and to potential loss of Title IV eligibility if our efforts to modify our operations to comply with any new requirements are unsuccessful which could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations.

Substantial Misrepresentation. The DOE’s regulations prohibit an institution that participates in Title IV Programs from engaging in substantial misrepresentation of the nature of its educational programs, financial charges, graduate employability or its relationship with the DOE. A “misrepresentation” includes any false, erroneous, or misleading statement (whether made in writing, visually, orally, or through other means) that is made by an eligible institution, by one of its representatives, or by a third party that provides to the institution educational programs, marketing, advertising, recruiting, or admissions services and that is made to a student, prospective student, any member of the public, an accrediting or state agency, or to DOE. The DOE defines a “substantial misrepresentation” to include any misrepresentation on which the person to whom it was made could reasonably be expected to rely, or has reasonably relied, to that person’s detriment. The definition of “substantial misrepresentation” is broad and, therefore, it is possible that a statement made by the institution or one of its service providers or representatives could be construed by the DOE to constitute a substantial misrepresentation. On January 16, 2025, the DOE published guidance reinforcing that the misrepresentation rules apply equally to various types of statements made by a third-party entity engaged by the institution and their respective employees, contractors, and representatives and that institutions may be responsible for the consequences of misrepresentation committed by any external service provider that they engage. If the DOE determines that one of our institutions has engaged in substantial misrepresentation, the DOE may impose sanctions or other conditions upon the institution including, but not limited to, initiating an action to fine the institution or limit, suspend, or terminate its eligibility to participate in the Title IV Programs and may seek to discharge students’ loans and impose liabilities upon the institution. The DOE published final regulations on November 1, 2022 on a variety of topics including, amended and expanded regulations on substantial misrepresentations. Specifically, the new regulations expand the types of conduct that could result in a discharge of student loans including: 1) an expanded list of substantial misrepresentations; 2) a new section regarding substantial omissions of fact; 3) breaches of contract; 4) a new section regarding aggressive and deceptive recruitment; or 5) state or federal judgments or final DOE actions that could result in a borrower defense claim. Some of these forms of conduct also could result in further scrutiny of marketing and recruiting practices by institutions like our schools and could increase the chances of the DOE finding practices to be noncompliant and imposing sanctions based on the alleged noncompliance up to and including fines and potential loss of Title IV eligibility. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Borrower Defense to Repayment Regulations.”

In March 2022, the DOE published guidance about the enforcement of the requirements regarding substantial misrepresentations. The DOE indicated that it is monitoring complaints and Borrower Defense to Repayment applications from veterans, service members, and their family members who report that personnel and representatives of postsecondary schools suggested during the enrollment process that their military education benefits would cover all of the costs of their program but were told subsequently they would have to take out student loans to finish the program. The DOE stated that it would ensure that institutions engaging in misrepresentations are held accountable if they cause a student to incur extra costs unwittingly or without a full understanding of the implications of borrowing. The DOE also indicated that such students could be entitled to discharge of their student loans and that it would share information and complaints about military-connected students with the DOD and VA for potential agency action.

School Acquisitions/Change of Control. When a company acquires a school that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs, that school undergoes a change of ownership resulting in a “change of control” as defined by the DOE. Upon such a change of control, a school's eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs is generally suspended until it has applied for recertification by the DOE as an eligible school under its new ownership, which requires that the school also re-establish its state authorization and accreditation. Thus, any plans to expand our business through acquisition of additional schools and have them certified by the DOE to participate in Title IV Programs must take into account the approval requirements of the DOE and the relevant state education agencies and accrediting commissions. On October 30, 2022, the DOE published final regulations with a general effective date of July 1, 2023 concerning change of control which, among other things, expand the requirements applicable to school acquisitions in ways that could make it more difficult to acquire additional schools.

In addition to school acquisitions, other types of transactions can also cause a change of control. The DOE, most state education agencies and our accrediting commissions have standards pertaining to the change of control of schools, but these standards are not uniform. DOE regulations describe some transactions that constitute a change of control, including the transfer of a controlling interest in the voting stock of an institution or the institution's parent corporation. For a publicly traded corporation, DOE regulations provide that a change of control occurs in one of two ways: (a) if a person acquires ownership and control of the corporation so that the corporation is required to file a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing the change of control or (b) if the corporation has a shareholder that owns at least 25% of the total outstanding voting stock of the corporation and is the largest shareholder of the corporation, and that shareholder ceases to own at least 25% of such stock or ceases to be the largest shareholder. These standards are subject to interpretation by the DOE. A significant purchase or disposition of our Common Stock could be determined by the DOE to be a change of control under this standard.

Index

Most of the states and our accrediting commissions include the sale of a controlling interest of Common Stock in the definition of a change of control although some agencies could determine that the sale or disposition of a smaller interest would result in a change of control. A change of control under the definition of one of these agencies would require the affected school to reaffirm its state authorization or accreditation. Some agencies would require approval prior to a sale or disposition that would result in a change of control in order to maintain authorization or accreditation. The requirements to obtain such reaffirmation from the states and our accrediting commissions vary widely.

A change of control could occur as a result of future transactions in which the Company or our schools are involved. Some corporate reorganizations and some changes in the Board of Directors of the Company are examples of such transactions. Moreover, the potential adverse effects of a change of control could influence future decisions by us and our shareholders regarding the sale, purchase, transfer, issuance or redemption of our stock. In addition, the adverse regulatory effect of a change of control also could discourage bids for shares of our Common Stock and could have an adverse effect on the market price of our shares.

Opening Additional Schools and Adding Educational Programs. For-profit educational institutions must be authorized by their state education agencies and be fully operational for two years before applying to the DOE to participate in Title IV Programs. However, an institution that is certified to participate in Title IV Programs may establish an additional location and apply to participate in Title IV Programs at that location without reference to the two-year requirement, if such additional location satisfies all other applicable DOE eligibility requirements. Our strategic plans for future expansion are based, in part, on our ability to open new schools as additional locations of our existing institutions and take into account the applicable approval requirements of the DOE and our other regulatory agencies.

A student may use Title IV Program funds only to pay the costs associated with enrollment in an eligible educational program offered by an institution participating in Title IV Programs. Generally, unless otherwise required by the DOE or by DOE regulations, an institution that is eligible to participate in Title IV Programs may add a new educational program without DOE approval. However, institutions that are provisionally certified may be required to obtain approval of new educational programs. Our institutions are provisionally certified and required to obtain prior DOE approval of new locations and of new educational programs. If an institution erroneously determines that an educational program is eligible for purposes of Title IV Programs, the institution would likely be liable for repayment of Title IV Program funds provided to students in that educational program. Our expansion plans are based, in part, on our ability to add new educational programs at our existing schools.

Some of the state education agencies and our accrediting commission also have requirements that may affect our schools' ability to open a new campus, establish an additional location of an existing institution or begin offering a new educational program. The DOE has published final regulations that further restrict the ability of some schools – such as schools that are provisionally certified – to add new locations or educational programs, which could impact our ability to make such changes if we are provisionally certified or subject to other criteria in the regulations.

Closed School Loan Discharges. The DOE may grant closed school loan discharges of federal student loans based upon applications by qualified students. The DOE also may initiate discharges on its own for students who have not reenrolled in another Title IV Program eligible school within three years after the closure and who attended campuses that closed on or after November 1, 2013, as did some of our former campuses. If the DOE discharges some or all of these loans, the DOE may seek to recover the cost of the loan discharges from us. As noted above, the DOE published final regulations on November 1, 2022 with a general effective date of July 1, 2023 on a variety of topics, including closed school loan discharges (and, among other things, the reintroduction of automatic closed school loan discharges), which would make it easier for borrowers to obtain discharges of their loans and for the DOE to recover liabilities from institutions. As also noted above, certain borrower defense and closed school loan discharge provisions of the new regulations are currently under an injunction ordered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and currently under appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, the challenged amendments to the BDR and closed school discharge regulations that were to take effect on July 1, 2023 are not in effect, but the previous BDR and closed school discharge regulations in effect prior to July 1, 2023, generally remain in effect in the meantime. See Part I, Item I. “Business –Regulatory Environment – Borrower Defense to Repayment.” We cannot predict with certainty any additional closed school loan discharges that the DOE may approve or the liabilities that the DOE may seek from us for campuses that have closed in the past or any possible school closures in the future.

Subsequent to the end of the third quarter of 2024, our Board of Directors approved a plan to sell the assets related to the Las Vegas, Nevada campus operated under Euphoria Institute of Beauty Arts & Sciences (“Euphoria”). The Company entered into a signed agreement and closed the transaction on January 1, 2025. While the transaction is not material, the transaction will be treated as a school closure by Lincoln for regulatory purposes. There were approximately 300 students enrolled in programs at Euphoria as of the closing date of the transaction. Such students are being permitted to transfer to the purchaser-operated school post-closing and continue their programs such that the sale should not have a significant impact on the student experience.

Index

The DOE confirmed that the transaction will not be treated as a change in ownership and, instead, will be treated as the closure of Euphoria and the establishment of a new location by the purchaser at the site of Euphoria. Although the parties continue to work toward enabling our students at the Las Vegas, Nevada campus at the time of the transaction to complete their programs with the purchaser, certain current and former students could qualify for closed school loan discharges if they do not continue and complete their programs and, in turn, the DOE could impose liabilities and other sanctions on us based on any such closed school loan discharges. We cannot predict at this time the potential amount of any closed school discharge liabilities related to the Euphoria transaction, but we do not expect the dollar amount of such discharges to have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Also, we will be required to comply with other DOE, state, and accreditor requirements associated with the transaction, the transfer of the site, and the teaching of current students.

Administrative Capability. The DOE assesses the administrative capability of each institution that participates in Title IV Programs under a series of separate standards. Failure to satisfy any of the standards may lead the DOE to find the institution ineligible to participate in Title IV Programs or to place the institution in provisional certification status as a condition of its participation. These criteria require, among other things, that the institution:

The DOE has placed all of our institutions in provisional certification status based on findings in recent audits of the institutions’ Title IV compliance that the DOE alleges identified deficiencies in regulations related to DOE regulations regarding an institution’s level of administrative capability. See Part I. Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs.”

The DOE published final regulations on October 31, 2023 that, among other issues, expand the scope of the administrative capability regulations to include other requirements (such as, for example, providing adequate financial aid counseling and career services, ensuring the availability of clinical and externship opportunities, the disbursement of Title IV funds in a timely manner, compliance with high school diploma requirements, preventing substantial misrepresentations, complying with gainful employment requirements, and avoiding significant negative actions with a federal, state, or accrediting agency). The regulations had a general effective date of July 1, 2024.

Failure by us to satisfy any of these or other administrative capability criteria could cause our institutions to be subject to sanctions or other actions by the DOE including the loss of eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs, which would have a significant impact on our business and results of operations.

Restrictions on Payment of Commissions, Bonuses and Other Incentive Payments. 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 recruiting or admission activities or in making decisions regarding the awarding of Title IV Program funds. The DOE’s regulations established 12 “safe harbors” identifying types of compensation that may be paid without violating the incentive compensation rule. On October 29, 2010, the DOE adopted final rules that took effect on July 1, 2011 and amended the incentive compensation rule by, among other things, eliminating the 12 safe harbors (thereby reducing the scope of permissible compensatory payments under the rule) and expanding the scope of compensatory payments and employees subject to the rule. We cannot predict how the DOE will interpret and enforce the revised incentive compensation rule and the limited published guidance that the DOE has provided, nor how it will apply the rule and guidance to our past, present, and future compensation practices, or whether the DOE will issue new regulations or guidance on the subject. See Part I, Item I. “Business –Regulatory Environment – Negotiated Rulemaking.” The implementation of the final regulations have required us to change our compensation practices and has had and will continue to have a significant impact on the productivity of our employees, on the retention of our employees and on our business and results of operations.

Index

Compliance with Regulatory Standards and Effect of Regulatory Violations. Our schools are subject to audits, program reviews, site visits, and other reviews by various federal and state regulatory agencies, including, but not limited to, the DOE, the DOE’s Office of Inspector General (“OIG”), state education agencies and other state regulators, the VA and other federal agencies (such as, for example, the FTC or the CFPB), and by our accrediting commissions. In addition, each of our institutions must retain an independent certified public accountant to conduct an annual compliance audit of the institution’s administration of Title IV Program funds. The institution must submit the resulting annual compliance audit report to the DOE for review. The annual compliance audit reports for our institutions contain findings on topics that were the subject of findings in prior audits although the amount of questioned funds in the reports are immaterial. The reoccurrence of findings in our compliance audit reports could result in the DOE initiating an adverse action against one or more of our institutions. Significant violations of Title IV Program requirements by any of our institutions could become the basis for the DOE to impose liabilities on us or initiate an adverse action to limit, suspend, terminate, revoke, or decline to renew the participation of the affected institution in Title IV Programs or to seek civil or criminal penalties. Generally, a termination of Title IV Program eligibility extends for 18 months before the institution may apply for reinstatement of its participation. Some of the findings in the annual Title IV Program compliance audits for some of our institutions resulted in the DOE placing those institutions in provisional certification status. See Part I. Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Regulation of Federal Student Financial Aid Programs.”

If one of our schools fails to comply with accrediting or state licensing requirements, such school and its main and/or branch campuses could be subject to the loss of state licensure or accreditation, which in turn could result in a loss of eligibility to participate in Title IV Programs. If the DOE or another agency determined that one of our institutions improperly disbursed Title IV Program funds or violated a provision of the HEA or DOE regulations, the institution could be required to repay such funds and related costs to the DOE and lenders, and could be assessed an administrative fine. The DOE could also place the institution in provisional certification status and/or transfer the institution to the reimbursement or cash monitoring system of receiving Title IV Program funds, under which an institution must disburse its own funds to students and document the students' eligibility for Title IV Program funds before receiving such funds from the DOE. See Part I, Item 1. “Business - Regulatory Environment – Financial Responsibility Standards.”

Consumer Protection Laws and Scrutiny of the For-Profit Postsecondary Education Sector. As a postsecondary educational institution, we are subject to a broad range of consumer protection and other laws, such as recruiting, marketing, the protection of personal information, student financing and payment servicing, enforced by federal agencies such as the FTC and CFPB and various state agencies and state attorneys general. We devote significant effort to complying with state and federal consumer protection laws. In recent years, Congress, the DOE, state legislatures and regulatory agencies, accrediting agencies, the CFPB, the FTC, the SEC, the Department of Justice, state attorneys general and the media have scrutinized the for-profit postsecondary education sector. Congressional hearings and other inquiries have occurred regarding various aspects of the education industry, including issues surrounding student debt as well as publicly reported student outcomes that may be used as part of an institution’s recruiting and admissions practices, and reports have been issued that are highly critical of for-profit colleges and universities.

In addition to Title IV Programs and other government-administered programs, all of our schools offer extended financing programs to their students. This extension of credit helps fill the gap between what the student receives from all financial aid sources and what the student may need to cover the full cost of his or her education. Students or their parents can apply to a number of different unaffiliated lenders for this funding at current market interest rates. In such regard, we are required to comply with applicable federal and state laws related to certain consumer and educational loans and credit extensions, which may be subject to the supervisory authority of the CFPB.

Available Information.

The Company’s website iswww.lincolntech.edu. The Company makes available free of charge on its website its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after it electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the SEC. Information contained on the Company’s website is not a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and is not incorporated herein by reference.