Why Bismarck State College and the University of North Dakota Chose Nelnet Refunds Over a Bank-Model Platform

• 10–15 minute setup for student refund preferences, often without staff help
• Higher direct deposit adoption without added barriers
• Fewer paper checks resulting in fewer returns and less money in limbo
• No required student bank accounts along with $500/month ATM cost eliminated
• Automated communications replace manual follow-up for uncashed checks
• Duplicate account reporting adds a check against Title IV fraud risk

Jessie Bessert, Director of Student Financial Services at Bismarck State College (BSC), remembers her first day with the college. Before she even settled in, she found herself dealing with a complaint about a student refund that had escalated all the way to the president’s office.

A student couldn’t access their money. The college’s refund servicer—a digital banking service—wasn’t helping. And her office was stuck in the middle.

“I can’t wait to switch,” she remembers thinking.

That moment stuck with her, a clear sign that a refund model built around a bank wasn't built around students or the staff serving them. It also planted a seed that would eventually lead both BSC and their peers at the University of North Dakota (UND) to make a change.

Both BSC and UND previously used a third-party banking provider to issue refunds. The process “worked” in the narrowest sense. Refunds were processed, checks went out, and students eventually got paid. But the structure was built around a banking business model, not a campus finance office’s realities or a student’s day-to-day experience.

Under the prior system, students had to open a bank account to receive refunds electronically. If they didn’t, a paper check went to the address on file, which could be outdated, especially for returning students. Shanwia Gertz, Student Finance Coordinator at BSC, processed refunds weekly and watched the consequences play out more times than she can remember.

“If they applied and attended with us 10 years ago and now live in a different state, that information never got updated,” she says. “So we had a lot of returned refunds because of incorrect data.”

Returning students faced an even steeper hurdle. Old accounts and stale personal information were hard to update, and support channels weren’t reliable. “If a student had left for any amount of time and they wanted to get access to their old refund account, it would take an act of God to get them back in,” Bessert says.

In practice, campus finance teams often had to intervene just to help students reach the provider’s customer service. BSC even installed a dedicated “bank phone line” outside the office so students could call the bank directly—yet staff still ended up mediating. “It would require our intervention sometimes for them to actually have access to a real person,” Bessert says.

And the confusion didn’t stop there. Gertz and Mary Anderson, Student Account Specialist at UND, both described students receiving checks so generic they assumed they were fake. “It came in a plain envelope. Students were like, ‘Is this real?’” Gertz says.

Behind the scenes, the refund workflow was a multi-step manual process. Files had to be exported, uploaded via SFTP, matched and checked, and the institution had to complete a wire call with the bank.

Bessert recalls covering refund duties when Gertz was out: “I dreaded her being out. I was anxiety-ridden.”

Beyond the time-consuming workarounds and excessive troubleshooting efforts, there were financial costs to working with a bank for refunds disbursement—ones not immediately obvious until institutions started adding them up.

Because the provider required its own bank account and debit card, BSC was obligated to maintain an on-campus ATM for compliance—about $500 per month—purely to support the provider’s banking services.

It also raised uncomfortable questions about student impact. For students who enrolled in the provider’s account but didn’t actively use it, fees could be charged against their financial aid. “It felt kind of predatory,” Bessert says. “It felt like we were withholding their money from them without wanting to.”

At UND, financial pressure increased when the provider began shifting pricing from a flat annual fee to per-refund charges. As Finance Manager Cassandra McDonald looked at the volume of checks being sent on the university’s behalf, the financials became hard to justify. “We would have been paying a lot,” she says.

For BSC, the transition to Nelnet Refunds happened during a broader move away from another campus payment provider. They weren’t actively shopping for a refunds replacement, but once they saw what was possible, the gap was obvious.

“You don’t know what you don’t know,” Bessert says. “You don’t know that your process is antiquated or inefficient, or that it lacks certain services or student access, until you see something else.”

UND’s decision was accelerated by timing and trust. Their existing contract was approaching expiration, and McDonald describes BSC as a major influence: “It was BSC telling us how great it was...I was happy to kick [their previous provider] out the door.”

After years on the prior platform—McDonald estimates around 13 years at UND—the biggest hesitation wasn’t whether a change was needed. It was the operational reality of moving thousands of students to something new.

Clear communications and a collaborative roadmap with Nelnet made all the difference. Bessert describes building a plan to ensure students understood the new process, including events specifically designed to help students set up their refund preferences. Gertz adds that BSC used multiple channels including announcements on their landing page, targeted texts, emails, and campus notifications, plus in-person events during the transition year.

UND went live with Nelnet Refunds in April 2024, running it and the banking system in parallel through the end of the bank’s contract in June. “We used both systems and just kind of eased into it until we were more confident,” McDonald says. They also drew on the memory of staff who had lived through the original implementation—“the trauma associated with that,” as McDonald puts it—to make sure this transition went differently. And they had BSC, already a year into Nelnet Refunds, telling them exactly what to expect.

Students set preferences quickly, and staff hear fewer complaints

The change from handling refunds through a bank to Nelnet Refunds has been felt most acutely in the small moments.

Gertz hears it at her office window. Students set up their refund preference in 10-15 minutes and walk away saying, in her words, “Wow, that was easy. That’s it? That’s all I have to do?”

Bessert says the quiet is the clearest sign that the new process is working. “When I don’t hear from them, it’s good news,” she says. “And I don’t hear any complaints about Nelnet’s refund process.”

More direct deposits, fewer paper checks, and smoother processing

Both institutions saw more students opting for direct deposit after the switch, reducing reliance on paper checks and the issues that came with them. Melissa Dietrich, a Student Account Technician at UND, calls it “a huge win,” noting they used to send more checks under the bank model.

Fewer checks also means fewer returned checks, fewer stop payments, and less money sitting on desks instead of in student accounts where they belong. As Bessert puts it, “I want money in their hand…I don’t want it sitting in limbo.”

Staff get time back through automation and simpler workflows

The operational difference is substantial. With Nelnet Refunds, Gertz says her team no longer has to send reminders about uncashed checks. Nelnet handles those communications automatically, and staff only intervene when funds are returned. “I love that,” she says.

And for Bessert, the most personal change is also the most telling: she no longer dreads covering refunds. “Today, if there's a refund to process, I'm like, 'Oh, okay, it's fine.' The process is a lot smoother. It's easier, it's more user-friendly.”

Expanded capabilities and practical fraud checks

UND’s staff point to Parent PLUS processing as an operational improvement. Anderson notes that under the previous provider, they had to route Parent PLUS through their accounting department. Now those refunds can run directly through Nelnet.

On fraud risk, Bessert highlights duplicate bank account reporting as a practical defense measure—helpful for identifying potential issues like multiple refunds routing to the same account.

“Knowing there’s a lot of financial aid fraud out there...it’s just a nice checks and balances,” Bessert says. “I don’t recall that was something [their previous provider] had.”

When asked what they’d tell peers still using a bank-model refunds provider, both schools return to the same idea: a banking platform shouldn’t add friction between students and their funds.

“The student barriers were just there,” Bessert says. “Limiting access to their own Title IV funds felt very wrong. We weren’t the gatekeeper of that. But [our previous provider] would be.”

They also point to Nelnet’s customer support as a differentiator. “Our Nelnet support team is very accessible, very easy to work with,” Bessert says. “If there’s something that we want, they are quick to try to implement or put it on their development team to work on.

They’re open to our feedback. If you want good support, ease of use, good student-facing support—I think those are pretty easy sells to another organization.”

Gertz’s advice for peers is to start with a demo. “It was never even a thought in my mind until we saw what was possible,” she says.

See how Nelnet Refunds could simplify refund disbursements at your institution. Schedule a consultation today, and one of our associates can walk you through the benefits of using a refunds solution designed for higher education, not banking.

Schedule a Consultation