XML 27 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.25.2

Commitments and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies |
Commitments and Contingencies | ​ 8. Commitments and Contingencies Legal Matters From time to time, the Company is a party to various lawsuits, claims, and other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business, some of which are covered by insurance. When the Company is aware of a claim or potential claim, it assesses the likelihood of any loss or exposure. If it is probable that a loss will result and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, the Company records a liability for the loss. If the loss is not probable or the amount of the loss cannot be reasonably estimated, the Company discloses the nature of the specific claim if the likelihood of a potential loss is reasonably possible, and the amount involved could be material. With respect to the majority of pending litigation matters, the Company’s ultimate legal and financial responsibility, if any, cannot be estimated with certainty and, in most cases, any potential losses related to those matters are not considered probable. Upon resolution of any pending legal matters, the Company may incur charges in excess of presently established reserves. Management does not believe that any such charges would, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Pending Litigation Matters False Claims Act Matter. In May 2020, the Company was served with a qui tam lawsuit that had been filed against us in 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts by a former employee on behalf of the federal government. All proceedings in the lawsuit had been under seal until February 2020, when the U.S. government decided to not intervene in the lawsuit, and the complaint was then unsealed by the court. The suit, United States ex rel Mackillop v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., alleges that we violated the False Claims Act by improperly compensating certain of our enrollment counselors in violation of the Title IV law governing compensation of such employees (the “incentive compensation rule”), and as a result, improperly received Title IV program funds. In response to a second amended complaint filed in September 2020, we filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to transfer the matter to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. In December 2020, the court granted our motion to dismiss as to one of three counts and granted the motion to transfer but only upon conclusion of pretrial proceedings. In September 2021, we filed a motion for summary judgment which the Massachusetts court denied in September 2022. Subsequently, the matter was transferred to the Arizona court and trial was scheduled for late April 2024. In the interim, we filed a motion for reconsideration of the summary judgment ruling in September 2023. Prior to trial commencing, we and the relator reached an agreement to stay trial while the parties attempt to finalize the terms upon which the litigation could be concluded. Having been unsuccessful in reaching terms with the relevant parties, which would have avoided litigation, the Court has rescheduled the trial for October 2025. The parties have recommenced settlement discussions, but consummation of any settlement is contingent upon certain regulatory approvals from applicable U.S. government agencies that are yet to be received. For any future settlement to be affected, all parties to the litigation, including the applicable U.S. government agencies, will need to agree on acceptable terms, both monetary and non-monetary, and we do not have certainty at this point as to whether those terms will be agreed upon. We believe that the compensation practices at issue in the complaint, which were developed with the guidance of outside regulatory counsel specifically to comply with Title IV and its regulations and relevant case law interpreting the incentive compensation rule, do not violate applicable law. The Company intends to defend itself vigorously in this legal proceeding. The outcome of this legal proceeding is uncertain at this point. At present, the Company cannot reasonably estimate a range of loss for this action based on the information available to the Company. Accordingly, the Company has not accrued any liability associated with this action. Matters Related to GCU Graduate Program Disclosures and Related Matters. The Company is a party to several matters alleging that, in the performance of its marketing services provided on behalf of GCU, it made false or misleading representations regarding the time to complete and the costs associated with and/or accreditation issues related to certain GCU graduate programs, and (in the case of the FTC matter noted below) also made false or misleading representations regarding GCU’s non-profit status and made telemarketing calls to phone numbers on do not call lists. These matters include:
| ● | Smith and Wang v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc. This putative class action was filed in June 2024 in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona and asserts claims under the federal RICO statute as well as various claims for violations of state law consumer protection statutes. On September 20, 2024, the plaintiffs amended their complaint, and on November 4, 2024, the Company moved to dismiss the case. The court granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss. Specifically, the court dismissed one of the plaintiff’s RICO counts but allowed the other RICO count and the consumer protection claims to proceed to discovery. Discovery is ongoing, and there is currently no trial date scheduled in this matter.
| ● | Federal Trade Commission v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., et al. This suit was filed in late December 2023 in United States District Court for the District of Arizona and asserts claims under the FTC Act and Telemarketing Sales Rule. In February 2024, GCE filed a partial motion to dismiss, which was denied in August 2024. On June 17, 2025, the parties filed a Joint Motion and Proposed Order Staying Case for 60-Days to Consider Non-Settlement Resolution of the Case. The Motion noted that the parties had discussed a proposed non-settlement resolution of the matter and requested a stay of the litigation for 60 days to allow for a vote of the Commission with respect to the proposed resolution. The Court granted the Motion and ordered a 60-day stay of the litigation on June 20, 2025.
| ● | Ogdon v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., et al. This putative class action was filed in May 2020 in federal district court in California and later transferred to United States District Court for the District of Arizona and asserts claims for violations of California’s False Advertising Law, Unfair Competition Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act; Unjust Enrichment; and purported violations of the federal RICO statute, including a conspiracy claim. The defendants include the Company along with our chief executive officer, chief operating officer and chief financial officer. On May 27, 2022, after significant motions practice, the Company filed an amended motion to dismiss and a motion to strike certain allegations in Plaintiff’s amended complaint. On August 8, 2023, the court presiding over the dispute entered two orders: (1) an order granting in part the Company’s motion to dismiss as to
|  | Ogdon’s RICO claim from the case and to dismiss the individual Defendants; and (2) an order granting in part the Company’s motion to strike scandalous and impertinent allegations in Ogdon’s complaint about our business. Shortly thereafter on August 22, 2023, Plaintiff moved the court to reconsider its dismissal of the RICO claim. Though discovery had commenced, and the Company substantially completed its discovery obligations on the state-law claims, discovery was stayed on March 18, 2024, pending mediation and the disposition of Ogdon’s motion for reconsideration. On March 29, 2024, the court issued an order reinstating Plaintiff’s RICO claim. On September 26, 2024, the court lifted the stay on discovery, and discovery resumed. In July 2025, the plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint and added an additional plaintiff. The Company’s answer to the Second Amended Complaint is due August 19, 2025. There is currently no trial date scheduled in this matter.
| ● | Valerio, et al. v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., et al. This suit was filed on December 24, 2024, in Maricopa County, Arizona Superior Court on behalf of nearly 300 plaintiffs. The plaintiffs assert various claims, including claims for violations of state law consumer protection statutes. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on May 12, 2025. The motion to dismiss is still pending, and there is currently no trial date scheduled in this matter.
​ We believe that the Company’s representations made in marketing materials or by our employees regarding GCU’s non-profit status and doctoral program requirements were at all times accurate and not false or misleading, and thus did not violate applicable law. In addition, to the extent the representations we made or actions we took that are at issue in these proceedings were done or taken after July 1, 2018 at the direction of GCU and/or based on written instructions, or advertising or web materials, provided to us for use by GCU, GCU has agreed to indemnify us in part under the terms of the Master Services Agreement for our losses and expenses arising from these matters. With regard to the FTC’s claims under the Telemarketing Sales Rule, we only make telemarketing calls to individuals who have demonstrated interest in speaking to us about educational opportunities at GCU, which are permitted by the rule. The Company intends to defend itself vigorously in each of these legal proceedings. The outcome of these legal proceedings is uncertain at this point. At present, the Company cannot estimate a range of loss for these actions based on the information available to the Company. Accordingly, the Company has not accrued any liability associated with these actions.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration