By Brittany Hackett, Communications Staff

The Department of Education (ED) last week released the allocation information for student loan servicers for the first period of 2015-16, as well as customer service data for the final quarter (Q4) of fiscal year (FY) 2015.

The data is the third round of customer service data to be released under the 2014 contracts ED has made with the servicers, with the first round having been released at the end of March and the second in July. The customer service scores are based on borrower surveys conducted by an independent group.

First Period 2015-16 Allocations

To determine the allocations for the first period of 2015-16 (which runs from September 1, 2015 through February 29, 2016), ED measured the customer satisfaction and default prevention of each loan servicer over a six-month period from March 2015 to August 2015 for the Title IV Additional Servicer (TIVAS) contracts.

The first period allocations for the TIVAS contracts are as follows:

(Note: "% of New Volume Servicer Will Receive" data reflects the breakdown among TIVAS servicers while the "% of Overall New Volume Servicer Will Receive" data reflects the breakdown among all servicers, both TIVAS and NFP)

The allocations for the Not-for-Profit (NFP) servicing contracts did not begin until January 1, 2015, so the allocation percentage for those servicers was not reset on March 1, 2015. Therefore, the NFP allocations for the first period of 2015-16 beginning on September 1, 2015, were determined by using the previous three quarters of performance statistics, “all those under the revised metrics that went into effect for the NFP servicers on October 1, 2014,” according to ED’s explanation document detailing how the allocations are calculated. 

The first period allocation for the NFP contracts are as follows:

(Note: "% of New Volume Servicer Will Receive" data reflects the breakdown among NFP servicers while the "% of Overall New Volume Servicer Will Receive" data reflects the breakdown among all servicers, both TIVAS and NFP)

It should be noted that ED did not provide allocation information for Aspire Resources Inc., because the servicer in July requested to no longer be a member of the federal loan servicer team, though Aspire’s Q4 FY 2015 performance results were included in the Electronic Announcement (see below).

Q4 FY 2015 Performance Results

Below are the customer service scores (based on a scale that goes up to 100) for the Title IV Additional Servicers (TIVAS) federal loan servicers for the four quarters of FY2015:

The same scores are listed below for the not-for-profit (NFP) members of TIVAS:

When comparing the four quarters of FY2015, the four TIVAS federal loan servicers saw similar percentages of borrowers currently in repayment in the fourth quarter as they did in previous quarters:

The NFP loan servicers' percentage rates of borrowers currently repayment stayed fairly steady between the third and fourth quarters, with only one servicer (Cornerstone) seeing an increase of more than 3 percent.

The TIVAS servicers saw the percentage of borrowers who were delinquent on their loans either by 91 to 270 days or 271 to 360 days stay largely consistent with the previous quarters of this year, though there were some slight increases among delinquencies in the 91-270 days category. There also were some slight decreases in the 271-360 days category:

The delinquency rates largely decreased across the board in between the second and fourth quarters among the NFP providers. Note: ED changed their reporting of the data for this category to encompass days 91 through 271. We have left off the Q1 FY2015 to allow for an accurate comparison:

Publication Date: 9/17/2015

Comments Disclaimer: NASFAA welcomes and encourages readers to comment and engage in respectful conversation about the content posted here. We value thoughtful, polite, and concise comments that reflect a variety of views. Comments are not moderated by NASFAA but are reviewed periodically by staff. Users should not expect real-time responses from NASFAA. To learn more, please view NASFAA’s complete Comments Policy.