In the Matter of the Complaint Against NATIONAL COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES NORTHWESTERN COLLEGE OF ALLIED SCIENCE N.C.A.S. DISCIPLES OF TRUTH REGISTRAR CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE REGENCY NORTH (or any combination or variation of said names) at P. O. Boxes 2356, 2694, 3388 Tulsa, OK 74101 and AMERICAN WESTERN UNIVERSITY Donaldson Station P. O. Box 4592 Tulsa, OK 74104 P.S. Docket No. 11/64; 09/28/81 Grant, Quentin E. APPEARANCES FOR COMPLAINANT: Thom as A. Ziebarth, Esq. U. S. Postal Service Consumer Protection Division 475 L'Enfant Plaza West, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20260-1100 Clark Evans, Esq. Regional Chief Inspector's Office Southern Region, U.S.P.S. 1407 Union Avenue Memphis, TN 38161 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Mr. James R. Caffey Chief Canon Box 3388 Tulsa, OK 74101
A Complaint filed on May 5, 1981, with the Office of Administrative Law Judges, as amended at the hearing to include
American Western University, alleges that Respondent, doing business under the names and at the addresses set forth in the caption hereof, is engaged in conducting schemes or devices for obtaining money or property through the mails by means of numerous false representations in violation of 39 U.S.C. § 3005.
Respondent filed an Answer signed by James R. Caffey under the title Chief Canon of the Disciples of Truth, Inc. The Answer denied all the allegations of the Complaint.
A hearing was held in Oklahoma City on July 31, 1981. Respondent was not represented by counsel. James R. Caffey arrived at the hearing approximately one hour late and requested a continuance on the ground that he was not prepared to proceed because he had not received certain documents he had ordered concerning accrediting agencies and had not received copies of some Supreme Court decisions he required. The continuance was denied on the ground that Respondent had had sufficient time between May 11, 1981 (the date the Complaint and Notice of hearing were served on it) and the date of the hearing to complete such preparation. Nevertheless, Respondent was extended the privilege of filing any documentary evidence not available at the hearing that it might wish, including a sworn written statement by Mr. Caffey, within two weeks following the hearing. Respondent took advantage of this offer, filing on August 17, 1981, five documents which were received in evidence (Exhibits RX-1 through RX-5).
Postal Inspectors Gary R. Bormann and Victor Bernard Geerts and Dan R. Hobbs, Vice Chancellor for Planning and Policy Research for the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education testified for Complainant. Respondent called no witnesses.
The parties have filed proposed findings of fact, conclusions of law, and written argument all of which have been considered in arriving at the following decision. To the extent indicated they have been adopted. Otherwise, they have been rejected as irrelevant, immaterial, or contrary to the evidence.
1. Respondent, using the names and the addresses set forth in the caption hereof, uses the mails in the advertising and granting of purported college graduate and undergraduate degrees and furnishing of transcripts purporting to relate to such degrees, for a fee (CX-1 through CX-12, CX-16, CX-17; Tr. 12-37).
2. In classified advertisements placed in nationally circulated publications, Respondent solicits inquiries, accompanied by a $1.00 fee, concerning degrees (CX-1).
3. Inquirers sending the $1.00 fee receive a brochure relating to "enrollment" in National College of Arts and Sciences or Northwestern College of Allied Science (CX-2) and an application for admission (CX-3, 4) or for "Quarterly Honorary Status and Degrees Award Programs" (CX-5).
4. Upon payment of the "Evaluation Fee" specified in the brochure for the particular degree, certificate, diploma or transcript desired, and in certain cases the furnishing of a "thesis" CX-17 , applicants are sent through the mails a document bearing the earmarks of an academic degree awarded for completion of study and training at a bona-fide educational institution of higher learning (CX-6, 7) or a transcript certifying the completion of a list of specific courses with course numbers, credit hours, and grades for each course (CX-6, 7, 18).
5. Such degrees and transcripts are often used by purchasers thereof as evidence of qualification for employment (CX-20)
____________
The Complaint alleges seven specific misrepresentations made by Respondent in its advertisements, brochures and application forms. Each alleged misrepresentation is the subject of a finding of fact below, numbered 6 through 12, and is set forth and underscored in the first sentence of each such finding.
Following are the standards of interpretation applicable in this type of proceeding and applied by the presiding Administrative Law Judge:
The meaning of advertising representations is to be judged from a consideration of an advertisement in its totality and the impression it would most probably create in ordinary minds. Donaldson v. Read Magazine, 333 U.S. 178 (1948); Vibra-Brush Corp. v. Schaffer, 152 F. Supp. 461 (S.D.N.Y., 1957); Borg-Johnson Electronic v. Christenberry, 169 F. Supp. 746 (S.D.N.Y., 1959). Express representations are not required. It is the net impression which the advertisement is likely to make upon purchasers to whom it is directed which is important, and even if an advertisement is so worded as not to make an express representation, if it is artfully designed to mislead those responding to it the mail fraud statutes are applicable. G. J. Howard v. Cassidy, 162 F. Supp. 568. See also Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976).
____________
6. (a) Respondent provides bona-fide academic instruction and guidance to applicants who are accepted for admission;
This representation is found in the following language used by Respondent:
"...through the many fine programs available here at NCAS. A candidate may enroll at anytime and complete the requirements for a degree in his chosen field at his own pace." CX-2, p. 3.
"Courses by Extension, Residence, Seminar, Research, Periodic Assembly and Direction." CX-2, p. 2.
"Costs of text books and courses will be quoted individually." CX-2, p. 8.
This representation is false.
Applicants do not receive bona-fide academic instruction. They receive degrees simply on submission of the application form and payment of the "evaluation fee" (Tr. 18, 19, 46, 47).
7. (b) Respondent has the physical facilities, qualified faculty, finances, staff and curriculum necessary for the operation of a bona-fide institution of higher education:
This representation is implied in the following language used by Respondent:
"... the various enrollment plans and degree programs offered by this institution." CX-2, p. 2.
"Courses by Extension, Residence, Seminar, Research, Periodic Assembly and Direction." CX-2, p. 2.
"Bachelor, Master, Doctorate degrees are available in each of these major areas of study." CX-4A, p. 10.
This representation is false. Respondent does not have the items listed in the representation, above (Tr. 47, 48).
8. (c) Respondent conducts a college level examination program that has gained wide acceptance in academic circles;
This representation is expressly made on the first page of its brochure in the following language:
"N.C.A.S. conducts its own 'College Level Examination Program.' This relatively new concept which has gained wide acceptance in academic circles..." (CX-2, p. 2.)
This representation is false.
Dr. Hobbs testified that there are two widely accepted, nationally standardized college level examination programs. These testing programs are rigorous, and are administered by experienced and reputable educational administrators (Tr. 48-49). Respondent did not utilize either of these examination programs in its dealings with "students" Bormann and Geerts. Therefore, I find that Respondent does not conduct a college level examination program widely accepted in academic circles.
9. (d) Respondent's programs are substantially similar to those offered by more than 350 other colleges and universities;
This representation is made expressly on p. 2 of Respondent's brochure in the following language:
"At this time, more than 350 other colleges and universities offer similar programs." (CX-2, p. 2).
This representation may be true, literally. However, implicit in this representation is the further representation that the 350 other colleges and universities are recognized, accredited institutions of higher learning. Dr. Hobbs testified that the 350 institutions would not be recognized and accredited if they offer programs similar to Respondent's (Tr. 49).
This representation is false.
10. (e) Respondent's independent study and accelerated degree programs" have been endorsed in principle by the leading educators quoted in its bulletin;
This representation is implicit in the quotations attributed to Rev. Robert Mahon, Dean of Catholic University' Summer School, and Glenn S. Dumke, Chancellor of California's State Colleges set forth on the third page of Respondent's brochure (CX-2).
Based on the affidavits of Robert Mahon and Glenn S. Dumke, in evidence (CX-11, 12), disclaiming any endorsement of Respondent's programs, I find this representation to be false.
11. (f) N.C.A.S. is accredited by recognized, reputable accrediting agencies;
This representation is implicit in the following language from Respondent's brochure (CX-2, p. 7):
"N.C.A.S. is accredited by the National Association of Open-Campus Colleges and Midwestern States Accreditation Agency." CX-2, p. 7.
This representation is false.
Dr. Hobbs testified that Oklahoma law requires private, educational institutions to receive accreditation and to have their degrees approved by the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. He stated that Respondent has not satisfied these criteria (Tr. 46).
Dr. Hobbs also testified that the fact that Respondent is incorporated in the State of Oklahoma in no way confers any authority upon Respondent in terms of the ability to grant academic degrees (Tr. 45).
Further testimony from Dr. Hobbs disclosed that there are two organizations in the United States which possess the power and authority to approve accrediting agencies. These two organizations are the U. S. Department of Education and the Council on Post-Secondary Accreditation. Each of these organizations publishes its directory of recognized accrediting agencies, and those two directories were produced in court by Dr. Hobbs. He testified that his search of these two directories failed to locate a listing for either of the accrediting agencies mentioned in Respondent's materials (CX-2, p. 7), namely, the National Association of Open-campus College and the Midwestern States Accreditation Agency (Tr. 54-55).
In fact, in a general search done by Dr. Hobbs for any accreditation awarded to Respondent he was unable to locate Respondent in any recognized or reputable accrediting document (Tr. 44).
12. (g) Persons who have not completed high school may obtain a recognized equivalency certificate from National Research Institute, a division of N.C.A.S., by completing a short test and paying the requisite fee.
This representation is found in the following language from Respondent's brochure (CX-2, p. 7):
"For those prospective candidates for a degree program who have neglected to secure a High School Diploma, National Research Institute, a Division of N.C.A.S., offers a short test leading to an equivalency certificate. The administrative cost for this test is set out in the fee schedule."
Dr. Hobbs testified that any equivalency certificate issued by the Respondent would not be recognized by Oklahoma institutions of higher learning, unless Respondent's test was the nationally standardized General Education Development (GED) test (Tr. 59-60).There is no indication that the test referred to in Respondent's brochure is the GED test. Chief Canon Caffey had the opportunity to testify that Respondent's test is the GED. He failed to do so.
I find this representation to be false.
13. The representations found to be false above are material in that their natural tendency is to cause readers of Respondent's advertisements and literature to apply for one or more of Respondent's "degrees" or diplomas.
____________
Count II of the Complaint, paragraphs 5 through 8, alleges that Respondent sells degrees for a fee through the mails and knowingly cooperates with its customers in the usage of Respondent's degrees, diplomas, certificates and transcripts of credits as a means of falsely representing to others that said materials were conferred upon completion of a comprehensive program of instruction, the content and form of which comports with generally accepted American educational standards. The following findings of fact relate to Count II.
____________
14. In its brochure (CX-2, p. 6) Respondent stresses "the value of a degree in today's marketplace," the obvious purpose being to encourage inquirers to procure one of Respondent's degrees for use in seeking employment or promotion.
Postal Inspector Bormann testified that CX-8 was his request that Respondent transmit a transcript of credits directly to a prospective employer. Respondent did, in fact, send said transcript directly to said prospective employer, as reflected by CX-9 and 10, in evidence (Tr. 20-24).
Dr. Hobbs testified that this transcript, CX-10-, appears on its face to be a valid transcript of academic course work completed (Tr. 64). Dr. Hobbs also stated that many prospective employers had stated to his agency that they had initially treated Respondent's transcripts as bona-fide, valid academic transcripts (Tr. 65).
Dr. Hobbs also testified that the titles of Respondent's degrees are titles generally accepted in academic circles as indicative of earned degrees as opposed to honorary degrees. It was his opinion that this did mislead prospective employers (Tr. 62-64).
Based on the foregoing I find that Complainant has sustained its burden of proving the allegations contained in Court II of the Complaint.
15. Attached hereto as Exhibits A, B, C, and D, respectively are copies of CX-1 (Respondent's classified advertisements); CX-6 (Degree of Doctor of Science in Psychology awarded to G. Ross Bormann); CX-10 (Transcript furnished to Michael Anderson); CX-18 (Degree of Doctor of Religion awarded to Dr. Vic Geerts).
1. Respondent is engaged in a scheme for selling through the mail for a fee, without requiring evidence of educational or experience entitlement thereto, degrees, diplomas, certificates and transcripts by means of materially false representations in violation of 39 U.S.C. § 3005.
2. Respondent, by means of such scheme, is also in violation of 39 U.S.C. § 3005 in that it knowingly cooperates with its customers by furnishing documents (listed in 1, above) which enable and encourage customers to use them as a means of falsely representing to others that they were conferred upon completion of a comprehensive program of instruction the content and form of which comports with generally accepted American educational standards. U. S. v. International Term Papers, Inc., 477 F.2d 1277 (1st Cir. 1973).
3. None of the documentation or argument submitted by Respondent following the hearing serves to overcome or impair in any way Complainant's evidence and argument. In particular, there is no support in the record for Chief Canon Caffey's contention that the evidence adduced by Complainant relates to an organization named Disciplies of Truth International (underscoring supplied), not a party to the proceeding. Further, this proceeding has nothing to do with impairment or change by the state of the charter of a privately operated college. Therefore the Dartmouth College case, asserted by the Chief Canon to demolish Complainant's case, misses the issues targeted by the allegations of the Complaint.
4. An order pursuant to 39 U.S.C. § 3005 in the form attached should be issued against Respondent.