Reform the eligibility criteria of the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA), so that it’s no longer just based on household income

Nationwide there are many sixth form and college students who receive EMA. However, this similarly brings along with it many who do not receive EMA, and in some cases who should receive EMA and need EMA. The root of this problem is with the criteria and means testing they use for EMA which is purely based on household income. This is not right and it is not just.  Take the example of a household which has to cater for 5 children. For a family this big, the boundary of approximately 30,000 (under which would only see you receive 10 pounds a week, with the threshold for 30 pounds a week being considerably lower) would not stretch as far as a household which had only 1 child. Furthermore, the idea of single parent households receiving more purely on the fact that having only one parental income backing the student up is not justified as the fact is that it is possible that the other parent is giving the student significant amounts of money thus that EMA could be put to much better use.

There is a clear problem with the system. We are campaigning for this unfair system to be changed, but changed in a way that the people behind EMA can accept as a compromise where ideas like bonuses for everyone might be rejected outright. We propose that the means testing for EMA be reformed. We would suggest that there would be better criteria to test whether someone receives EMA such as asking how many people are in the household and asking about all sources of income which the parents/ guardians may use to support a student. Furthermore there should be put in place some form of evaluation, which could occur on a yearly basis for example, which would assess the effectiveness of the current boundaries for household income.

How does your campaign have an impact on all young people?

EMA is a nationwide form of financial support, thus the problems associated with affect all young people from around the United Kingdom. In completing research for the campaign a North-wide event based on education was attended where the issue was brought up, illustrating its relevance to a wide geographical base. EMA reform would make life easier for a great number of people nationwide and make it massively more easy for a great number of people to get involved with non-compulsory education.

What would be the ultimate goal of this campaign?

To convince the people behind EMA to reform the way they means test for the allowance in some form. They do not need to abolish household income as a criterion but it can’t simply be the only factor taking into account. Furthermore, the boundaries for which one can receive EMA are too fixed, and EMA should be convinced to consider altering or evaluating the boundaries on a regular basis.

What challenges do you expect to face if this was to become a national campaign?

Although the campaign would be very popular, those who would still not benefit from the reform would be apathetic towards the whole policy. The potentially biggest barrier is EMA themselves, who might argue that more criteria, even it is in the name of fairness, will complicate matters and make administration more difficult. However, the nature of the campaign is a compromise and even if it were to lack a degree of success it would address a great barrier to many young people which affects decisions which ultimately affect their entire life.