OIA briefing note: Complaints arising from weekend-only course financial support arrangements
The purpose of this note is to outline the approach which we would take to complaints from students who can no longer receive maintenance loan funding from SLC on weekend-only delivery courses. It also offers guidance to providers on operating a bespoke complaints process.
Our approach
Our remit is to review complaints brought to us by students about the acts or omissions of the higher education providers that are members of our Scheme. We cannot review the actions of either the Department for Education or the Student Loans Company (SLC). This means that when students complain to us, we will not reach any conclusions about what these bodies have done. We will consider how providers have acted and how this has impacted the student.
What we can do
Our reviews are likely to focus on what providers have done to mitigate the impact on the students affected by the changes. We can consider how providers have communicated with students, and what support has been put in place to enable students to make informed choices about their next steps.
It is clear that students are not responsible for what has happened. We will look at the reasonableness of the steps providers have taken to enable students to complete their studies, whether immediately or in the future, and to minimise financial and other personal impacts.
What we cannot do
We will not review an issue that is the subject of a court case that has not been stayed. Some providers have indicated that they may take legal action to challenge the lawfulness of the decisions to change what financial support students on weekend courses were receiving, and to establish whether the relevant regulations and guidance were sufficiently clear. Where legal action is ongoing, it would not be appropriate for us to reach any conclusions on how providers interpreted the guidance. An individual student or provider does not have to be a party to the legal claim for it to be relevant to what we will consider in an individual case.
Bespoke Complaints Processes
Steps to resolve students’ concerns
Before any complaints process begins, providers should focus on the practical steps that can be taken to support students. This could include:
- Clear communications about the options for continuing study. The options are likely to be to continue on their original course of study with a different financial support package; to transfer to another course which is eligible for the kind of financial support from the SLC that the student had previously been receiving; to suspend or defer studies for a short period of time in order to make arrangements to continue at a later date; to end their studies. It will be helpful to explain to students about any exit awards they are entitled to receive and to set explain how accredited prior learning may be relevant if they wish to return to study at a later date.
- Clear signposting to sources of advice to help students make informed decisions about these options.
- Clear signposting to sources of well-being support such as student representative bodies, financial assistance organisations and charities such as the Samaritans.
- Clear information about any additional financial support that is available from the provider or from other sources to enable students to continue their studies.
- Clear information about how to contact other relevant organisations.
- Proactive consideration of the students’ circumstances and the impact this may have had on their ability to engage in their studies and perform in assessments either without requiring students to submit a claim, or by streamlining the process and evidential requirements for a request for additional consideration.
Providers may find it useful to refer to the Compassionate Communications statement published by the Academic Registrars’ Council.
A streamlined formal stage
Students who are dissatisfied with the options and support that is available should be able to complain to their provider. Since the cause for complaint is already established, it is likely to be more efficient and effective to operate a bespoke, streamlined process to address this issue. Where providers have already attempted to offer support and a way forward for students, it is unlikely to be effective to attempt further informal resolution to a complaint.
- Partnership working
Where the student’s course of study has been delivered at one provider in partnership with a different awarding provider, the two providers should consider which is best placed to address student complaints taking into account the usual arrangements under the partnership agreement and regulations, and also taking account of which provider is able to address students’ concerns. The lead provider is ultimately responsible under the regulatory framework but may consider delegating the process of responding to its partner. If it is necessary to escalate the complaint from one provider to the other, providers should ensure that this process is transparent and accessible to students.
Providers should ensure that whichever role or office responds to complaints under its bespoke process, it has sufficient authority to make decisions about any further actions that may be appropriate.
- Group Complaints
Students may complain individually or collectively in large or small groups. Given the systemic nature of the cause for complaint, it is likely to be helpful to address complaints collectively. Providers may encourage and support students to identify a representative to liaise with them on behalf of students; this may be something that a student representative body can help with.
Although many students will be likely to be offered the same outcome to their complaints, providers should still ensure that where a student raises something that has affected them uniquely, this is addressed.
- Evidential requirements
Students will not need to submit evidence about the broad situation. Providers should encourage students to explain why they do not feel that the options available are acceptable. It is reasonable for providers to ask students to explain any personal or financial impact and where possible to quantify this, to avoid any purely speculative claims. But it will also be appropriate to take a flexible and proportionate approach to requesting documentary or other corroborating evidence.
- Impact of any legal action
If providers are taking legal action about the interpretation of SLC regulations and guidance, it may be reasonable not to address complaints that directly relate to the provider’s interpretation whilst that claim is undecided. However, it will not be reasonable to refuse to address all aspects of the complaints until the legal action is completed. Providers should respond to complaints from students who are dissatisfied about the mitigating actions taken, and issue Completion of Procedures Letters at the end of that consideration.
- Review/appeal stages
Providers may decide to operate an appeal or review stage but should only do so where there is the potential for a different outcome to be reached. If a provider considers that it has no flexibility to vary the outcome for an individual student, it may operate a single stage process and issue a Completion of Procedures Letter to students once an outcome has been reached. It is good practice to issue a Completion of Procedures Letter directly to individual students. If a Completion of Procedures Letter is issued collectively to a large group of students, providers should keep a record of which students were included within that complaint process.