ID192 Foundation Year bursary

The Idea

I put this idea forward in 2021 as a potential mitigation to the Augar Review recommendation to remove student finance eligibility from the Foundation Year (FY). Since then, the fee level has dropped for some subject areas and the idea, despite seeming radical, may make financial sense as a recruitment tool to the full degree. Losing one year of (reduced) fee to gain three years of fee. Furthermore, there would be benefits in widening access and strengthening league table metrics.  

The idea is to protect and sustain Keele’s major widening access route by offering the FY at zero cost or a comparable low-cost model. 

Several options could be considered: zero fee; low fee (e.g. £1,000); moderate or half fee; or the full FY fee refunded on successful progression to a Keele undergraduate degree. The preferred delivery mechanism might be a bursary that offsets fees and/or contributes to living costs, providing flexibility for students while maintaining institutional control over policy objectives. 

Eligibility and continuation conditions could be applied to shape behaviour and outcomes, including applicant background (e.g. APP target groups), subject priorities aligned to growth areas, mode of delivery or attainment and engagement during the FY. Additional models could include charging no FY fee but levying a transcript or certification fee for students progressing elsewhere, or piloting the bursary in selected subjects before wider rollout. 

The alternatives students have include, Access to HE Diplomas (Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group and Stoke on Trent College offer these at a fee ranging from £3020 to £3380) Students are eligible for a loan which is written off upon completion of HE. Other options are Vocational Foundation Degrees of Higher National Diplomas which both attract the standard undergraduate fee.  

This approach protects recruitment, supports social mobility, mitigates financial risk from policy change, and reinforces Keele’s identity as an access-led institution.

Why This Idea Should Be Considered

• High-impact publicity and reputational benefit 
• Unique proposition in the market 
• Sustains and grows recruitment pathways 
• Enables targeted recruitment to priority subjects (high margin, no capacity constraints, lower FY fee so less income loss) 
• Direct contribution to the Access and Participation Plan with widened access to target groups. 
• Strengthens social mobility and local/regional engagement 
• Students through FY are students that would not otherwise have studied at Keele. 
• Mechanism to recruit students without negatively impacting entry tariff. 
• Potential to increase value-added league table metrics. 

Modelling I did at the time (2021) showed: 

• Since 2014/15, 64% of Keele’s growth is attributable to FY and former FY students 
• 19% of UG students are FY/former FY (32–33% in Natural Sciences) 
• £15.6m fee income attributable to FY and former FY students (2020/21) 
• FY students match non-FY students in good degree outcomes and add the maximum value-added for league tables and do not contribute to the entry tariff.

How We Would Implement This Idea

• Use a bursary as the core mechanism, flexible to be used to pay fees or living costs 
• Apply conditions linked to APP characteristics, subject priorities, and FY attainment 
• Model multiple fee scenarios (free, breakeven, Access to HE fee aligned, refund-on-progression, charge for a transcript if do not progress to Keele) 
• Consider a phased pilot approach by subject or demographic group (however restricting or phasing would reduce the 'big bang' impact of a widescale roll out). 
• Explore employer, alumni, or philanthropic co-funding as the scheme matures. 

What Success Would Look Like

• Increased income driven primarily by increased student numbers and progression rates to fee paying degree. The mechanism by which this idea makes financial sense is to increase student numbers through the FY route; losing one year of fee but gaining three or four years fees.  
• My modelling in 2021 (which was based on £9250 fees meaning that the modelling now would be more favourable as fees are lower). At 500 students and 70% progression, increasing the fee from £0 to £7k raises income by only ~40% (£3.5m) 
• At the time, achieving the equivalent income was achievable at zero fee with ~800 students and 80% progression 
• Clear contribution to APP targets, recruitment stability, and strong external narrative around access and opportunity.