Top marks for university aid for worse-off students

Jun 25 2008 by Rob Merrick, Liverpool Daily Post

LIVERPOOL’S universities are praised today for spending more money than most colleges to att-ract students from poorer homes.

A study by the National Audit Office found the city’s institut-ions spent up to one third of the income they received from £3,000-per-year ”top-up” fees on bursaries last year.

In addition, they all hit benchmarks for the number of students from struggling families and neighbourhoods. In some cases, they were “significantly better”.

The availability of places was vital for poorer youngsters from the region, because more students were now choosing a university close to home, the NAO said.

Liverpool University (26.8%), Liverpool JMU (29.1%), Liverpool Hope (22.9%) and Edge Hill (34.9%) all exceeded the national average of 21% of income spent on bursaries.

In contrast, the NAO said, 32 universities spent less than 15% on the financial aid, as it warned that the scale of bursaries “varied considerably”. The only low-spending city institution was Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts (7.7%). No-one was available at LIPA to comment.

The NAO said: “Staff in schools and colleges found that fear of future debt is the obstacle they think most impedes students’ progress into higher education.

“Increasing financial support or incentives to students is the change that they think would do most to widen participation in higher education.”

However, it admitted that part of the problem was ignorance among would-be students, urging the Government to set up a “single source of comprehensive information for all government grants, loans and bursaries”.

Across the country, the NAO found the proportion of young, full-time students from poorer backgrounds had risen over the past four years, but only by 2%.

Universities received £456m in extra income from top-up fees in 2006-07, awarding bursaries that ranged from the statutory minimum of £310 to £3,150.

But as many as 12,000 students missed out on bursaries last year, the NAO said. Meanwhile, “white people from lower socio-economic backgrounds” were the most under-represented group.

Tory MP Edward Leigh, who chairs the Commons public acc-ounts committee, said the lack of guidance to would-be students was the most worrying finding of the inquiry.

And he added: “It is disappoint-ing, if somewhat predictable, that the newer universities are having more success than Russell Group universities in broadening access.”

Universities can be punished financially if they fall short of their benchmarks for poorer students, by being denied the right to levy the £3,000-a-year fees.

However, in the two years since fees came in, the Office for Fair Access has found no institution guilty of breaching agreements for “widening access”.

On average, a graduate earns £100,000 more over his or her life-time than someone who leaves education after A-levels – but average student debt reached £13,500 in 2004.