Navigating New Challenges: The Impact of NCP Funding Changes on Learning Abroad
The latest news from the Australian Government (DFAT) regarding changes to the New Colombo Plan (NCP) is yet another blow for the Education Industry. Amidst a backdrop of recent government changes to international student enrolments in Australia, including caps and visa fee increases, this latest NCP announcement has the potential to significantly impact the Learning Abroad Sector (outbound mobility), a sector within International Education that is still struggling to recover from COVID.
In 2019 nearly 60,000 Australian students went abroad on a learning abroad experience as part of their degree studies. The primary funding mechanisms were OS-HELP, NCP and institutional support. In 2022 the Learning Abroad sector had only rebounded 38%, from its heights in 2019. The latest data from the 2024 CISaustralia Industry Survey suggests that while there was gradual recovery in 2023, the forecast from Australian Universities is limited to no growth in 2024. Changes to NCP funding, specifically a minimum duration of short-term mobility courses from two to four weeks, has the potential to significantly impact the sector’s recovery even further.
The latest data from the CISaustralia Industry Survey clearly indicates that that the number one most popular type of Learning Abroad program for Australian Universities in 2024 was ‘’study tours’’, with a whopping 92% response rate (30%+ more than any other type of program). We know mobility programs to Asia & the Pacific are primarily study tours for 2 weeks – so this latest change to NCP funding and the minimum duration abroad of 4 weeks will impact the number of programs and students travelling to the region. We also appreciate that Universities and academic staff can’t always afford and don’t want to be overseas for 4+ weeks at a time – its not always financially viable or family friendly. The 4 week minimum requirement is likely to lead to fewer academics participating in overseas programing solutions (study tours), while potentially increasing involvement in learning abroad programming (study abroad) supported by existing partnerships. These programs benefit from strong in-country support models, which help mitigate risk while achieving academic outcomes.
The impact of these changes to NCP funding on minority groups within the Learning Abroad space, for example, Indigenous programming, students with disabilities and students from lower socio-economic backgrounds could be significant. We know from industry data that the number of students with part time jobs post COVID has doubled due to economic pressures, combine that with students not wanting to lose their accommodation, 4 weeks becomes less attractive and affordable.
However, the Learning Abroad sector and its people are passionate and resilient. This will force institutions to reimagine their NCP and overall Learning Abroad strategy. It will force institutions to more closely consider how they engage with Asia and the Pacific. It will test the narrative over the past ten years whereby NCP has driven an agenda within institutional Learning Abroad strategies towards Asia and the Pacific, as opposed to more traditional destinations in Europe and North America.
It will force adjustments in priorities, potentially even create efficiencies in the way NCP programs are managed, with lower interest, less submissions, higher conversion rates, and less HR required to administer the program. Serious Learning Abroad practitioners and academic champions can and will still run their 2-week study tour programs each year, and while NCP will not be available as the funding cherry on top, programs can and will be funded by OS-HELP (and potentially supplemented by institutional funding).
It will be interesting to see if the new minimum duration abroad has a higher take up rate within some academic areas such as the health and education disciplines. These types of academic disciplines have traditionally lent themselves to longer term placements based on governing body requirements. Language learning placements of 4+ weeks is a new NCP focus and likely see a spike in NCP submissions.
Institutions will need to reconsider the way they communicate and educate their administrative and academic staff in relation to the recognised funding models available to students to learn abroad. Many institutions had formed an unhealthy dependence on NCP mobility funding, at nearly twice the rates of pre-COVID. This change, wanted or not, will mean many institutions will re-focus on OS-HELP as their primary funding mechanism as it was pre-COVID – and to focus on long term sustainable short-term programming, not hampered by the whims of government grants.
It will be interesting to see if the Government considers alternative solutions to soften the impact of what will be an enrolment shortfall to Asia and the Pacific – and the want to still achieve their objectives in the region. Perhaps the government will consider increasing accessibility and the amounts of OS-HELP in consideration for not only this NCP concession but also the current macroeconomic climate (accommodation and cost of living crisis, inflation, high interest rates etc). Perhaps the Government will also consider relaxing some of the historical conditions (unnecessary shackles) associated with OS-HELP. For example, eliminating the need for students to complete one course of study on return from their overseas learning abroad experience. Perhaps students could access OS-HELP after the completion of their first semester of study in Australia (instead of the full first year). Minor adjustments like these would create greater access to Learning Abroad for all students (including minority groups) and assist in achieving institutional and Government objectives for Australia overseas.
Founder and Executive Director
August 2024
