News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Jan. 24, 2008
The chancellor of the Maricopa County Community College District sent an e-mail message to its employees late Wednesday saying that the institution would not seriously consider a private investor’s offer to buy the online operations of Rio Salado College, its “college without walls.”
“I feel the need to set the record straight,” Rufus Glasper, chancellor of the Maricopa system, wrote in the e-mail, the full text of which is below. “Rio Salado College is not for sale.”
Glasper’s e-mail came after a busy day of meetings and discussion prompted by the offer, which was first reported Wednesday by Inside Higher Ed. Under the terms of the offer, which was transmitted to and discussed for hours with Maricopa officials last week, an investment group led by Michael Clifford, a San Diego businessman, said it would pay $5,000 per enrolled student (or $400 million, whichever is more) for the “assets used to operate” the college’s online operations.
On Tuesday, Glasper had said in another e-mail message to Maricopa board members that he viewed the offer as “flattering” and “strong reinforcement of the good work we do.” He said that the “the legality and ramifications of such a transaction have not been determined,” and that “[w]hile we are obligated to perform due diligence and review any such offer, we remain committed to the important work we do; teaching and learning.”
Linda Thor, Rio’s president since 1990, briefed faculty members on the offer Tuesday and said in an interview that afternoon that she too was “very, very flattered by this offer, particular the size,” and that she and her colleagues viewed it as “enormous validation” of the work they do. But the fact that no public college has ever been taken for-profit — several longtime observers of higher education said they were unaware of such a precedent — has left the district’s lawyers with “lots of questions” about the proposal, Thor said, including a fundamental one: “Is this something we can even consider?”
Late Wednesday, after a day of deliberations and significant debate about the proposal (see, for example, reaction to Inside Higher Ed’s article Wednesday) and after Glasper released another statement to local reporters reiterating Maricopa’s willingness to consider the offer, Glasper abruptly changed course.
While college officials need to look for new sources of revenue, Glasper wrote, “Dr. Thor and I would never do so at the expense of our students and/or staff. Upon review, we find that the offer that has been brought forward does not align with our goals.”
Glasper said, however, that the college remained open to “public/private partnerships” that are consistent with its goals as a community institution.
***
Below is the text of the e-mail sent by Chancellor Rufus Glasper late Wednesday:
Dear Maricopa,
Everything we do at Maricopa must advance our critical objectives – student success, public stewardship and “one Maricopa.”
News stories in the past 24-hours, about the potential sale of Rio Salado College have raised many questions and I’d like to address some of them.
Our primary mission is teaching and learning. I want to reiterate that nothing will ever impede our work in providing educational access and opportunity — a true public education to the people of Maricopa County. We take very seriously our promise to students and their families to provide quality teaching and learning at a reasonable cost.
Just before the holiday weekend, I received a letter from a group of investors led by Michael Clifford. This letter of intent, offered at Mr. Clifford’s own initiative, outlined a proposal to purchase Rio Salado College.
The letter did not demand an immediate response – and, in fact, requested confidentiality. Mr. Clifford independently decided to announce his offer to the press on January 22, which unfortunately prompted local and national news stories.
Given the publicity that this situation has gained, I feel the need to set the record straight; Rio Salado College is not for sale.
While I have encouraged our colleges to pursue new options for revenue streams, Dr. Thor and I would never do so at the expense of our students and/or staff. Upon review, we find that the offer that has been brought forward does not align with our goals. However, we remain open to public and private partnerships that are consistent with those goals.
It is unfortunate that this matter has developed in this manner before we had the opportunity to communicate our response to Mr. Clifford.
We remain committed to our guiding principles and to helping our students succeed, using the public resources entrusted to us efficiently and effectively, and working together as “one Maricopa.”
Respectfully,
Rufus Glasper
Chancellor
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Issues such at this deeply challenge our Nation’s most conservative institutional framework. Although we like to think of ourselves as progressive, we innovate much more slowly than banking, the industry often seen as the most conservative.
In terms of Rio Salado’s mission, it is possible to structure such sale with benefit to all stakeholders. That said, an offer of $400 M is as laughable as the arithmetic upon which it is based. Given the context, the offer seems like a bid for attention by person with a reputation for immaturity. John Sperling would never have played such childish politics as has Michael Clifford. Éclat counts.
In doing the good job that it has, Rio has created considerable value that has not been leveraged. One could argue that a fiduciary responsibility of Rio’s Board is to exploit this potential for leverage. On the downside, the fears expressed by faculty and others are largely groundless and seem based on higher education’s ubiquitous lack of vision into common ways to structure incentives, disincentives, and protections while getting things done.
Based on reasonable interpolations of previous sales (admittedly difficult as “comps” are so dissimilar), the asking price would be $1.2B to $1.6B and there would be a partnership with residuals. Net, the County’s taxpayers, students, and employees could benefit from increased revenue, decreased supporting taxes, more efficient education, and more jobs all around.
Instead of retreating to the comfort of its rigid administrative structure and the cocoon it provides its would-be Mandarins, this time reinforced by a ridiculous public offer, I suggest that Rio open the dialog with many investors. I can envision a variety of partnership structures that would benefit everyone.
The choice is Rio’s but the taxpayers should weigh in on the issue. Will Rio build upon this accidental public spotlight to begin an investigation of further ways to leverage its assets. . . or retreat? As good Rio is, it operates at perhaps 55% of possible efficiency. The right partnerships could increase that number to 75% or higher.
Robert Tucker, President at InterEd, Inc., at 11:45 am EST on January 24, 2008
As a professor who has worked in academia for many years, I was not surprised by the offer made to Rio, as it is building a steady and strong national presence in the world of online delivery. I am pleased to learn, however, that Rio is not considering the offer. There is a place for public institutions, not for profits and for profits. For profits-at least in my experience-do not treat their faculty as rich resources, but rather as replaceable widgets on an assembly line. Some people actually choose to go into higher education because they have a purpose other than making tons of money. Nothing wrong with money, but hopefully there is room still in this world for those institutions that care about education versus making quotas for an owner or stockholders. For profits, as we know, rely heavily on adjuncts and are generally driven by the bottom line rather than on academic quality. While competition is good, healthy and very American, let us hope that all higher education is not going the way of for profit. We should also watch who owns the for profits and how decisions are made that affect the lives of the students. Hooray for Rio!
Robert Paseomeja, Professor, at 10:05 pm EST on January 24, 2008
It’s nice to see that student/staff/faculty are going to be taken seriously and not endangered by this kind of nonsense.
For all those of you that comment that it’s a great deal, everyone will benefit... GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND!
Being a not for profit means that the focus can be kept around EDUCATION... rather than improving the bottom line and sucking as much money from people that you can. Students of Rio are found world wide! From Tempe Arizona to Iraq. No investor needs to try to improve Rio by buying them... Rio’s ability to succeed and continue to improve on their mission statement “We astonish our customers” means that they’ll always been in the global market.
Oh, and to clear things up from yesterday’s post. Student/faculty/staff are all equally considered “customers” meaning that not one group is put in front of another. The group of customers that are students/faculty are the educational side, while staff customers, internal staff, take care of day to day operations so that students/faculty can get the highest quality experience possible. So yes, we are all customers.
It’s nice to see that this type of sale won’t go through. Instead of being consumed by the same group that bought GCU, perhaps a partnership would be a better idea. That way everyone benefits — staff/students alike!
I for one welcome this sale being discontinued... You cannot find a better, more talented and dedicated group of individuals, using their strengths and combining their knowledge as a whole, to make the educational process as easy as possible while adhering to the standards set for Rio. To propose a sale would only victimize students and put the job security of those involved in jeopardy. I dare you to find another institution so dedicated to helping students succeed and going above and beyond, like 24/7/365 access to services for students.
Joe Blow Tax Payer, at 4:35 am EST on January 25, 2008
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Troy University-Troy Campus is currently accepting applications for the full-time position of International Business ... see job
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), one of the world’s preeminent research universities, is dedicated to ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Salary: Commensurate with qualifications and experience Date of appointment: July 1, 2009 Responsibilities: Coordinate ... see job
University of Maryland University College (UMUC) seeks a professional with significant experience and a drive for success to ... see job
The Associate Dean for Advancement is responsible for establishing strategic direction and tactical implementation of ... see job
Discover your future at The University of Montana. see job
Reporting to the Vice President of Institutional Planning, Research & Accountability, and the Associate Vice President for ... see job
Working Title: Budget Officer-Journey
Posting Information: The Business Officer will have primary ... see job
Drexel University is a nationally and internationally recognized as a pioneer in cooperative education. see job
Good Decision Rufus!!!!
Thank goodness someone has the students and faculty in mind! Partnering is often a viable solution, especially when there are so many private institutions out there who do online learning justice and ARE willing to work with faculty as developers and as a coherent, caring administrative team. (BTW, I would NEVER recommend these partnerships be formed with a Wall Street traded corporation—too much abuse and focus on investers.)
Seg to next thought....
Here’s another thing I just tripped over: “...said it would pay $5,000 per enrolled student.” Isn’t this the same thing as paying recruiters by the student and giving bonuses...an illegal practice?
Note to the world: As someone else pointed out, college education is no longer an option. It is a necessity. A K-14 system is needed now more than ever, especially with lenders understanding that consumers won’t put up with their abuse any longer!
kgotthardt, at 10:15 am EST on January 24, 2008