In today’s connected world, school safety extends far beyond hallways. Experts highlight how to protect students through cybersecurity, digital literacy, and trust-centered policies.
Safety starts with digital literacy
For schools today, safety means more than locked doors. In an era where student data is currency and misinformation spreads at viral speed, digital security has become just as critical as physical protection.
Megan Derrick, Ph.D. candidate at the University of South Florida and instructional designer at Hillsborough College, identifies “two big red flags: data privacy and misinformation. Hackers love student data, and AI makes fake news spread faster than a viral TikTok.” For her, protecting schools requires both strong cybersecurity systems and teaching students to be critical consumers of information.
But safety isn’t only technical. “True protection is both technical and human,” says Yanbei Chen, a doctoral researcher at Syracuse University. Her work emphasizes combining infrastructure with education in digital citizenship, so students and teachers feel safe engaging with technology.
Both Derrick and Chen agree that digital literacy should be integrated across subjects, not siloed into a single workshop. “Students should know how to fact-check a source and avoid clicking on emails that promise free AirPods,” Derrick says. Chen adds that administrators and teachers can model responsible online behavior, weave discussions of privacy and bias into lessons, and provide opportunities for students to practice safe decision-making.
Safety ensures trust and resilience
Balancing safety with openness remains a key challenge. Derrick emphasizes the role of transparency: “Policies should not feel like surveillance. They should feel supportive.” When students and teachers understand the reasons behind safeguards, collaborative and creative learning can thrive within secure boundaries.
Looking ahead, emerging technologies and stronger policies offer hope. Transparent data practices, inclusive design, and human-centered AI can help schools build environments that are both innovative and resilient.
As Chen puts it, “Digital literacy and cybersecurity are not just technical skills — they’re part of preparing students to be thoughtful, ethical participants in a digital society.”
In short, protecting schools in the digital age means equipping students and educators not only to avoid risks but to thrive. That requires blending strong safeguards with a culture of trust, transparency, and resilience.
CHEQ is trusted by more than 15,000 companies — from the Fortune 50 to emerging disruptors — to enable and protect each critical touchpoint in the evolving, human-AI customer journey. Powered by the only integrated Traffic, Threat, and Identity Intelligence Engine, CHEQ distinguishes legitimate users from bad actors — human, AI agent, or bot — and, in real-time, delivers granular, context-specific insights to marketing, commerce, and security platforms. With a best-in-class
Higher Education is under intensifying scrutiny as federal regulations tighten, and public trust continues to waver. A growing threat to this is student aid fraud. Organized schemes are exploiting institutional systems to siphon millions in financial aid, particularly targeting Pell Grant disbursements and student aid refunds. The result is a direct hit to both institutional revenue and reputation. Institutions can no longer afford to operate passively. They must lead with transparency, accountability and systems built to withstand obstacles. In an era already marked by increasing skepticism surrounding higher education, this is a risk that institutions cannot afford to ignore
In June 2025, The US Department of Education announced identity verification measures for over 125,000 FAFSA applicants—a clear signal that proactive fraud prevention is no longer optional. Failure to act risks financial loss, audit exposure and reputational damage. Explore how your institution can recognize the warning signs, implement smart prevention strategies and build a strong foundation of trust that supports both reputational and revenue goals.
Understanding the Modern Fraudster’s Playbook
Today’s fraudsters are highly strategic. They understand how to game institutional processes—enrolling just long enough to trigger student aid refunds, then disappearing soon after. By carefully selecting enough credits to qualify for more aid, these fraudsters have fueled the rise of “ghost enrollments” — fraudulent student records created to claim federal aid without actual attendance.
This surge is fueled by gaps in infrastructure, less stringent verification procedures and siloed systems, all challenges that hit resource-limited institutions hardest. The rapid expansion of online learning has outpaced the sophistication of verification systems, reducing touchpoints to confirm student legitimacy. Adding to this challenge, outdated or isolated internal systems often lack real-time data sharing between critical departments such as admissions, financial aid and academic offices.
These deceptive tactics lead to more than just financial losses; they corrupt enrollment data, misguide long-term strategic planning and damage an institution’s reputation. Enrollment fraud is not just a compliance problem but a strategic issue that compromises the very accuracy of the data institutions depend on to create budgets, predict enrollment trends and allocate resources effectively.
Without real-time data sharing and alignment between systems, institutions remain vulnerable to fraud and flawed decision-making. EducationDynamics supports colleges and universities in closing these gaps through integrated data strategies that prioritize accuracy and system-wide consistency.
Identifying the Warning Signs
Early detection is an institution’s strongest defense against coordinated financial aid fraud. As schemes grow more sophisticated, so must the systems and vigilance required to stop them. Fraudsters are increasingly leveraging tools like AI to complete assignments, VPNs to hide their locations and fake identities to access financial aid. Even with these evolving tools, fraud leaves detectable patterns—and catching these patterns can become a valuable asset for institutions.
Red Flag Reports are among the most valuable tools institutions can use to identify fraudulent activity before financial aid is disbursed. These reports highlight anomalies in student data that may otherwise go unnoticed, offering a proactive mechanism to pause and review questionable activity. Implementing this type of reporting is a critical step toward closing system gaps and elevating your fraud prevention infrastructure.
To effectively intercept fraud, institutions should actively monitor for specific indicators across the enrollment and financial aid process, such as:
Multiple students tied to the same bank account or IP address
Invalid or recycled phone numbers tied to applicants
Unusual enrollment or participation patterns, such as registering for the maximum credit load with no subsequent academic engagement
Last-minute documentation or sudden changes to refund delivery preferences
VPN usage that obscures geographic location, particularly when login or application behavior conflicts with submitted residence information
By actively seeking out these red flags and embracing modern verification practices, institutions can significantly bolster their defense.
Actionable Strategies for Institutional Defense
This is the era of proactive defense, demanding that institutions build workflows that not only accommodate scrutiny but leverage it to strengthen their practices.
To achieve this, institutions must:
Empower Staff for Early Detection
Use Red Flag Reports to monitor for suspicious indicators such as shared IP addresses, duplicate bank accounts and invalid phone numbers. These reports empower your staff to pause questionable disbursements and trigger manual reviews, catching issues that might otherwise slip through.
Build Verification Workflows to Withstand Volume
Build scalable, repeatable workflows to efficiently handle identity checks, document intake and federal verification requirements. Implement triage systems that ensure timely reviews, minimizing student disruption while maintaining operational efficiency and compliance.
Create Strategic Friction
Introduce intentional friction points that deter fraudsters without impeding legitimate students. Examples include phone verification for refund information or holding disbursements until after the add/drop period. These small process shifts significantly raise the barrier for fraudulent activity, preventing large-scale losses.
Require the Financial Responsibility Agreement
Make it standard practice to collect signed Financial Responsibility Agreements (FRAs) before disbursement. Doing so strengthens your paper trail and creates another point of identity verification, helping deter those attempting to abuse the system.
Modernize Refund Security
Require muti-factor authentication (MFA) when students update refund profiles, and default to e-refunds over checks. Limit paper disbursements and ensure funds are only returned to verified payment methods, significantly reducing fraud risk and maintaining transaction integrity.
Showcase Strong Digital Infrastructure
When institutions adopt secure, transparent payment systems, they project competence. Adopting strong digital infrastructure is more than an operational improvement; it’s a powerful brand message. A secure system builds public trust and reinforces your institution’s responsible stewardship of student funds.
Break Down Silos and Align Teams
Financial Aid cannot combat fraud in isolation. Establish a collaborative task force with key stakeholders from IT, Registrar and Academic Affairs. Faculty, for instance, are often early observers of suspicious academic behavior. When departments share insights, vulnerabilities are closed far more swiftly.
Create Real-Time Communication Loops
Facilitate consistent touchpoints between Financial Aid, Accounts Receivable and IT to rapidly flag and act on anomalies. Integrated communication accelerates response times and minimizes oversight risks.
Strengthen Awareness Across Campus
Incorporate scam awareness into existing financial literacy programs. Students who understand phishing and fraud risks are less likely to fall victim and more likely to report suspicious behavior.
Develop a Crisis Communication Playbook
A public incident of financial aid fraud extends beyond headlines; it directly threatens an institution’s credibility. Build a comprehensive crisis communication playbook that ensures a fast, transparent, and coordinated response. Proactive planning is crucial, and institutions can significantly strengthen their efforts by partnering with trusted reputation management experts.
When institutions elevate fraud prevention to a core business function, they safeguard far more than their balance sheets, protecting their reputation, enrollment pipeline and overall standing.
Why This Matters for Institutional Leaders
Fraud prevention is a strategic responsibility that demands the attention of every institutional leader. The consequences of fraud aren’t limited to financial aid offices. Fraud compromises presidential planning, marketing performance and enrollment numbers—all while chipping away at public trust. If institutional leaders want to chart a course for sustainable growth, defense against fraud must be built into the foundation of that strategy.
Presidents
For presidents, fraud erodes the central pillars that define institutional stability—financial resilience and decision-making confidence. Ghost enrollments and fake students distort budget forecasts, inflate success metrics and mask areas of real vulnerability.
Fraud prevention supports long-term vision by ensuring that enrollment, funding and performance data reflect institutional realities, not manipulations. In an environment where every resource must be justified, clarity is a leadership requirement.
Marketing Leaders
Marketing teams are measured by outcomes. Fraud makes those outcomes unreliable. Invalid inquiries and ghost enrollments inflate to the top of the funnel, while wasting precious budget. For leaders who rely on brand perception to drive engagement and attract prospects, fraud directly undermines their efforts, risking a loss of trust and diminished return on investment.
Enrollment Leaders
Enrollment leaders face rising stakes driven by declining traditional student populations and heightened expectations for conversions. In this environment, fraud distorts the metrics that enrollment leaders depend on. It artificially inflates applicant numbers, conceals melt and obscures true student movement through the funnel.
More importantly, fraudulent applications divert the time and energy of enrollment coaches. Every moment spent chasing a ghost applicant is a moment stolen from a real applicant who may never get the support they need. Over time, this leads to higher melt, poorer service and declining performance. Strategic financial aid conversations can refocus coaching efforts on real prospects and improve yield through trust-building and transparency.
Fraud prevention empowers enrollment leaders to understand their true audience and make decisions rooted in authentic student behavior, not artificial patterns. Aligning enrollment management strategies with proactive fraud prevention creates a foundation that drives sustained success.
Building a Resilient Institution
Fraud prevention is an ongoing commitment to institutional resilience. As fraudsters evolve their tactics, institutions must continually refine their defenses with smarter workflows, updated red flag criteria and technology. The most resilient schools treat fraud prevention as core infrastructure, integrating it into strategic planning rather than siloing it within financial departments. More importantly, many fraud safeguards also enhance the experience of students and staff by eliminating confusion and freeing teams to focus on supporting real students. When institutions take a proactive approach to fraud, they’re not only protecting their operations—they’re actively preserving the credibility and brand reputation that define long-term success.
EducationDynamics is here to help you turn defense into momentum. By aligning revenue strategy with reputation stewardship, we empower institutions to lead with clarity, act with confidence and build a foundation for success in an increasingly high-stakes environment.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
Harvard University argued Thursday that the Trump administration may attempt to use “creative relabeling” to circumnavigate a court order blocking its attempt to end the institution’s ability to enroll international students.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs has twice blocked attempts by the federal government to halt all international students from attending Harvard through temporary orders. Now, Harvard and the Trump administration are clashing over what a more permanent preliminary injunction should look like.
In legal filings, the Ivy League institution called on the court to approve its own proposal, which would place more restrictions on the Trump administration and require it to provide a status report detailing its compliance with the pending preliminary injunction.“Given the government’s pattern of behavior thus far and the chaos it has inflicted, this surety is more than warranted,” it said.
Dive Insight:
In late May, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard’s ability to enroll international students by terminating its Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification.The agency alleged that the university had permitted a “toxic campus climate” to flourish by accommodating “anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators.”
The loss of SEVP certification — required to host international students — would have devastating impacts on both Harvard and its international students.
In the 2024-25 academic year, nearly 6,800 foreign students attended Harvard,according to institutional data. They made up 27.2% of the university’s total student body.
The day after the SEVP revocation, Harvard sued the federal government, arguing that the Trump administration acted abruptly and without “rational explanation.”
Burroughs granted Harvard’s request for a temporary restraining order to block DHS’ decision later that day, ruling the university would undergo “immediate and irreparable injury” if the ban was enforced before she could hear from both parties.
After the judge issued the order, the federal government formally notified Harvard of its intent to revoke the university’s SEVP certification on May 28, according to court documents.
The notification alleged in part that Harvard failed to sufficiently fulfill a federal information request about its international studentsand gave the university 30 days to rebut the allegations.
The next day, Burroughs ruled that she would issue a preliminary injunction in the case and directed Harvard and the Trump administration to negotiate the terms of the order.
The Trump administration then tried another tactic. President Donald Trump signed a proclamation in early June ordering top federal officials to stop all international students heading to Harvard from entering the country.
The university updated its lawsuit and asked Burroughs also to block the proclamation, arguing it is tantamount to a “government vendetta against Harvard.” Burroughs issued a temporary restraining order on June 5 against Trump’s proclamation and extended the block on the SEVP revocation.
Now, Harvard and the Trump administration are fighting out the specifics of that injunction in court.
In legal filings Thursday, Harvard said its proposed preliminary injunction is “tailored to preserve the status quo” while its lawsuit proceeds.
But the Trump administration is pushing back on multiple aspects. One disputed passage would prohibit the federal government from restricting Harvard’s ability to sponsor student visas outside of the attempted SEVP revocation, the university said.
If DHS again tries to revoke Harvard’s DHS certification, another part of the proposed order would delay the decision by 30 days. The timeframe would give Harvard time to seek another injunction, it argued.
“Requiring Harvard to rush to the courthouse for a third time, and requiring the Court to take up these issues on an emergency basis yet again to prevent predictable harms — the inevitable result of the government’s approach — is inefficient, ineffective, and unnecessary,” it said.
The federal government also pushed back on a proposal that would require it to promptly demonstrate how it intends to comply with the court order once approved.
![Protecting Every Marketing Dollar: How Collegis Helped Block $2.2M in Ad Waste with CHEQ [CASE STUDY]](https://blog.college-counseling.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Protecting-Every-Marketing-Dollar-How-Collegis-Helped-Block-22M-in.png)
