Department of Education published their Orange Book for the Perkins Loan program showing that 10.04% of borrowers entering repayment in 2007-08 defaulted by September of 2009. The comparable number for 2006-07 cohort was 8.32%. The average Perkins loan in default was just over $1,950 for the 2007-08, which is up from almost $1,800 from the earlier cohort.
The Perkins CDR is higher than the draft 2008 cohort default figures for the federal student loan program, which were recently announced at 7.2%. It also showed a more dramatic increase in going from 8.32% to 10.04% then the federal student loan CDR wich grew from 6.7% to 7.2%. Given that these loans are going only to the neediest students, it probably shouldn't be a surprise that the default rates have risen faster than for the federal loan programs.
This is a question that I am often asked at conferences by concerned financial aid administrators who have seen the significant drop in private (non-federal) student loans and wonder if there is another shoe to drop should lenders such as Sallie Mae and Citibank no longer make federal student loans.
Discover Financial reiterated their commitment to their private loan product in their 10-K today:
"We
currently offer both federal and private student loans. In September
2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Student Aid and
Fiscal Responsibility Act (“SAFRA”), which is currently under
consideration in the U.S. Senate. If
passed in its current form, SAFRA would require all federal student
loans to be made directly by the federal government starting July 2010,
rather than by private institutions through the Federal Family
Education Loan Program. Because SAFRA allows
financial institutions to continue offering private student loans, we
do not expect SAFRA to have an impact on our ability to continue
offering private student loans, even if we discontinue offering student
loans under federal programs."
College Board released their 2009 Trends in Student Aid today. I will be digesting the report over the next week and posting analyses. Having assisted the College Board with their analysis of the private student loan market, it didn't come as a complete surprise that they reported a 50% decline in private student loans from $23.8 billion in 2007-08 to $11.9 billion in 2008-09. Private student loans from the private sector declined by 51% from $22.3 billion to $11.0 billion, with state sponsored programs (such as Massachusett's MEFA, New Jersey's NJCLASS and Minnesota's SELF program) dropping 39%, from $1.5 billion to $900 million over the past year. Note that the College Board adjusted their earlier 07-08 private loan preliminary estimates upwards, from $19.1 billion to $22.3 billion, which accentuated this decline of $11.9 billion.
The webinar focused on the results from SLA flash surveys conducted with the financial aid community on the following topics:
Federal student loan reform
Private student loan availability
Financial literacy
Financial aid counseling
Perkins loan reform
As I mentioned on the call, many groups are interested in what financial aid administrators are thinking these days as webinar participants included lenders, guarantors, consultants, investors and government officials.
Wonder what your peers are thinking about:
* Federal student loan reform?
* The new Perkins loan proposal?
* Financial literacy programs?
* Availability of private student loans?
* Financial aid counseling?
Join Tim Ranzetta of Student Lending Analytics on Thursday, August
6th at 1:30pm ET for an informative (and free) webinar highlighting
results of recent SLA Flash Surveys. These surveys, which generate
hundreds of responses, tap into the pulse of the financial aid
community. Participate in this webinar if you are interested in
learning how your peers are reacting to this dynamic environment.
I am providing their comments in response to an aide to the House Committee on Education and Labor who had earlier indicated that legislators were
interested in working with the financial aid community on finding a
compromise solution to this interest rate subsidy issue. I also am hoping that other financial aid administrators will use this as a forum to discuss any issues they might have with the proposed Perkins Loan reform, which has been overshadowed by the FFELP and DL debate.
Here are the comments from the University of California:
New name for Perkins Loans: Federal Direct Perkins Loans
Terms and Conditions: Unless otherwise specified will be similar to Unsubsidized Stafford Loans.
This effectively eliminates the interest rate subsidy during the in-school period that Perkins Loan borrowers currently enjoy
A House Committee on Education aide indicated that legislators are interested in working with the financial aid community on finding a compromise solution to this interest rate subsidy issue.
With dramatic change on the horizon for the Perkins Loan program, it seemed an opportune time to understand how the Perkins Loan program is currently being managed today. Thanks to the following financial aid administrators for their
technical support on this survey: Margaret Carothers of Pitzer
College, David Levy of Scripps College, Elisabeth Rankin of Saint Bonaventure University, Mark Lindenmayer of Loyola University Maryland and Jackie Ito-Woo of University of California.
Thanks to Susan Coates, Assistant Director of University Loan Programs at Georgetown University for sharing this information. Georgetown was recently featured in a post about schools achieving extremely low Perkins default rates. Their 2006-07 cohort default rate for Perkins loans was 1.39%, which ranked in the top 10 for larger schools (over 500 borrowers entering repayment).
Here is the Georgetown process:
Georgetown University uses the electronic
master promissory note and
requires students to complete on-line loan entrance counseling each
year they receive a Perkins Loan. This provides the student borrower
with the cumulative amount borrowed, reviews their rights and
responsibilities, and reaffirms that Georgetown is the lender.
Prior
to graduation, we require the student borrower to complete on-line Loan
Exit Counseling which provides the student detailed repayment
information, reviews their rights and responsibilities along with
deferment and cancellation provisions, and again reaffirms that
Georgetown is the lender.
In order to ensure that the student borrower
is aware of their loan obligation to Georgetown and to complete the
Loan Exit Counseling, three notifications of the counseling requirement
are sent to the student borrower.
Once the student borrower is in
repayment, Georgetown is willing to work and be flexible, in accordance
to federal regulations, with student borrowers who are having
difficulty with repayment.
We encourage the student borrower to
contact our office for payment options.
Georgetown uses a loan
servicer, which sends the required due diligence letters and 90 day
telephone call.
In the interim, Georgetown sends monthly delinquency
letters for 60 days to 6 months.
Accounts are placed with an outside
collection agency after 6 months of no activity, i.e. no contact or
payment, and Georgetown feels that we have exhausted our efforts. This
has worked well for Georgetown.