Educational Redlining

Student Borrower Protection Center
{"title":"Educational Redlining","authors":"Student Borrower Protection Center","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3759925","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Alternative data, or information such as cell phone payments or utility bills, is increasingly used in underwriting by the financial services industry, especially financial technology or “fintech” companies. Some financial companies have begun to use information about borrowers’ education history, including the identity or sector of the college or university a borrower attended, when determining access to and the cost of credit. For years, policymakers have weighed the use of alternative data to help expand access to credit for marginalized or underserved communities. Although helping consumers trapped outside of the credit market is an important policy goal, regulators have made clear that certain data can also pose serious fair lending and discrimination risks by introducing unfair biases and perpetuating existing disparities.<br><br>The use of education data in credit decisions is particularly troublesome given the continuing pattern of disparate access to education in America and the historical inequality perpetuated by the use of this information. Widespread use of this data by lenders could reinforce systemic barriers to financial inclusion for black and Latinx consumers. For example, African American and Latinx students are especially underrepresented at the nation’s most selective colleges and universities, with nine percent and 12 percent, respectively, represented at the most prestigious public universities.<br><br>The SBPC examined a private loan product at a large bank and a private loan refinance product offered by a fintech lender. Using lenders’ publicly available online rate check tools, the SBPC tested loan applications from fictional borrowers from different schools while maintaining all other borrower characteristics constant (e.g., income, savings, occupation, loan amount). The sample credit estimates generated by the big bank indicated higher loan costs charged to borrowers for attending a community college. In the case of the fintech lender, higher costs were charged to a borrower who attended certain Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs).<br><br>The companies used in the analysis are Wells Fargo and Upstart Network, Inc. Wells Fargo is one of the nation’s largest banks and the second-largest lender of new private student loans to college students. Upstart Network is a fintech company that uses machine learning and alternative data, including degree attainment, school attended, and area of study, in its underwriting processes.<br><br>Specific takeaways from the consumer case studies included in this report: 1) A private student loan borrower may pay a penalty for attending a community college. Wells Fargo charges a hypothetical community college borrower $1,134 more on a $10,000 loan, when compared to a similarly situated borrower enrolled at a four-year college. 2) A borrower who refinances student loans may pay a penalty for attending an HBCU. When refinancing with Upstart, a hypothetical graduate of Howard University, an HBCU, is charged $3,499 more over the life of a five-year loan when compared to a similarly situated NYU graduate. 3) A borrower who refinances student loans may pay a penalty for attending an Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). When refinancing with Upstart, a hypothetical graduate who received a bachelor’s degree from New Mexico State University-Las Cruces, an HSI, is charged at least $1,724 more over the life of a five-year loan when compared to a similarly situated NYU graduate.","PeriodicalId":166384,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Politics of Race (Topic)","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Politics of Race (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3759925","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Alternative data, or information such as cell phone payments or utility bills, is increasingly used in underwriting by the financial services industry, especially financial technology or “fintech” companies. Some financial companies have begun to use information about borrowers’ education history, including the identity or sector of the college or university a borrower attended, when determining access to and the cost of credit. For years, policymakers have weighed the use of alternative data to help expand access to credit for marginalized or underserved communities. Although helping consumers trapped outside of the credit market is an important policy goal, regulators have made clear that certain data can also pose serious fair lending and discrimination risks by introducing unfair biases and perpetuating existing disparities.

The use of education data in credit decisions is particularly troublesome given the continuing pattern of disparate access to education in America and the historical inequality perpetuated by the use of this information. Widespread use of this data by lenders could reinforce systemic barriers to financial inclusion for black and Latinx consumers. For example, African American and Latinx students are especially underrepresented at the nation’s most selective colleges and universities, with nine percent and 12 percent, respectively, represented at the most prestigious public universities.

The SBPC examined a private loan product at a large bank and a private loan refinance product offered by a fintech lender. Using lenders’ publicly available online rate check tools, the SBPC tested loan applications from fictional borrowers from different schools while maintaining all other borrower characteristics constant (e.g., income, savings, occupation, loan amount). The sample credit estimates generated by the big bank indicated higher loan costs charged to borrowers for attending a community college. In the case of the fintech lender, higher costs were charged to a borrower who attended certain Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs).

The companies used in the analysis are Wells Fargo and Upstart Network, Inc. Wells Fargo is one of the nation’s largest banks and the second-largest lender of new private student loans to college students. Upstart Network is a fintech company that uses machine learning and alternative data, including degree attainment, school attended, and area of study, in its underwriting processes.

Specific takeaways from the consumer case studies included in this report: 1) A private student loan borrower may pay a penalty for attending a community college. Wells Fargo charges a hypothetical community college borrower $1,134 more on a $10,000 loan, when compared to a similarly situated borrower enrolled at a four-year college. 2) A borrower who refinances student loans may pay a penalty for attending an HBCU. When refinancing with Upstart, a hypothetical graduate of Howard University, an HBCU, is charged $3,499 more over the life of a five-year loan when compared to a similarly situated NYU graduate. 3) A borrower who refinances student loans may pay a penalty for attending an Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI). When refinancing with Upstart, a hypothetical graduate who received a bachelor’s degree from New Mexico State University-Las Cruces, an HSI, is charged at least $1,724 more over the life of a five-year loan when compared to a similarly situated NYU graduate.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教育注销
金融服务行业,尤其是金融科技或“金融科技”公司,越来越多地在承保中使用替代数据或信息,如手机支付或水电费。一些金融公司已经开始使用借款人的教育历史信息,包括借款人的身份或就读的学院或大学的部门,来确定获得信贷的途径和成本。多年来,政策制定者一直在权衡使用替代数据来帮助边缘化或服务不足的社区扩大获得信贷的机会。尽管帮助被困在信贷市场之外的消费者是一项重要的政策目标,但监管机构已明确表示,某些数据也可能带来严重的公平贷款和歧视风险,因为它们会引入不公平的偏见,并使现有的差距长期存在。在信贷决策中使用教育数据尤其麻烦,因为美国受教育机会的差异一直存在,而且这种信息的使用使历史上的不平等得以延续。贷款机构对这些数据的广泛使用可能会加强对黑人和拉丁裔消费者的金融包容性的系统性障碍。例如,非裔美国人和拉丁裔学生在美国最顶尖的大学中所占比例尤其不足,在最著名的公立大学中所占比例分别为9%和12%。SBPC检查了大型银行的民间贷款产品和金融科技贷款公司的民间贷款再融资产品。利用贷款人公开的在线利率检查工具,SBPC测试了来自不同学校的虚构借款人的贷款申请,同时保持所有其他借款人特征不变(例如,收入、储蓄、职业、贷款金额)。这家大银行提供的样本信贷估计显示,就读社区大学的借款人需要支付更高的贷款成本。在金融科技贷款机构的案例中,参加某些少数民族服务机构(msi)的借款人要承担更高的成本。分析中使用的公司是富国银行和Upstart Network, Inc.。富国银行是美国最大的银行之一,也是向大学生发放新私人学生贷款的第二大银行。Upstart Network是一家金融科技公司,在其承保流程中使用机器学习和替代数据,包括学历、就读学校和学习领域。本报告中包含的消费者案例研究的具体要点:1)私人学生贷款借款人可能会因就读社区大学而支付罚款。富国银行(Wells Fargo)向一名假设的社区大学借款人收取1万美元贷款的费用,比向一名就读于四年制大学的借款人多收取1134美元。2)为学生贷款再融资的借款人可能会因就读HBCU而支付罚款。在Upstart进行再融资时,假设霍华德大学(HBCU)的毕业生在五年期贷款期限内要比纽约大学(NYU)的毕业生多支付3499美元。3)为学生贷款再融资的借款人可能会因就读于西班牙裔服务机构(HSI)而支付罚款。在Upstart进行再融资时,一个假设从新墨西哥州立大学拉斯克鲁塞斯分校(New Mexico State University-Las Cruces,简称HSI)获得学士学位的毕业生,在五年期贷款期限内要比同样情况的纽约大学毕业生多支付至少1,724美元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Why are there Racial Disparities in the Small Business Loan Market Race, Dignity, and Commerce Measuring Racial Discrimination in Algorithms Educational Redlining Does Race Matter for Police Use of Force? Evidence from 911 Calls
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1