The document discusses the Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) program in the UK, which provides means-tested financial support for students aged 16-19 to remain in education. It provides background on the implementation of EMA over time, findings on its impact in increasing participation in post-16 education, and criticisms of how the allowance is allocated. Studies found EMA increased participation rates, though some questioned whether the allowance always reached those most in need as it was based on family income from the prior year.

1. INTRODUCTION
Education has been at the centre of policies intended to
promote growth both in the developing world and in
wealthier countries. It is seen as a key to development and to
the ability of a country to keep up with the fast-moving
technological change. The recent increase in the returns to
education in the UK has reinforced this view.
Education is also seen as a way for individuals to escape
poverty and welfare (and possibly crime) dependency and
this perception has motivated numerous policies worldwide
that promote education as a long-run solution to these
problems. The most recent figures show just 76 percent of
25- to 34-year-olds with upper secondary education in the
UK as of 2006, which is 11 percentage points lower than the
corresponding figure for the US.

2. There has been worldwide focus on school dropout rates
and a number of policies have been devised to help reduce
them such as the Education Maintenance Allowance. The
EMA is a means-tested program that subsidizes children to
remain in school for up to two years beyond the statutory
age in the U.K.
The impact of this program provides valuable information
on whether such (Cash Conditional Transfer) CCT’s, which
effectively reduce the cost of education, actually reduce
school dropout rates, which at present are the central policy
concern

3.  Based on means- tested income
 Three income brackets:
£0 - £20,817 = £30 £20,818 - £25,521 £25,522 - £30,810
per week = £20 per week = £10 per week
 Areas with the highest proportion of students receiving
EMA:
Essex Manchester
Kent
Lancashire Shropshire
Cheshire

4. Child
maintenance
away from the Part- time jobs
household of the not included
student not
included
Students at
wealthy schools … but students
may receive at State schools
EMA… may not

5.  “Young people could miss out on vital funds due to a
misconception over who is eligible for Education Maintenance
Allowance” (LSC 2006)
41% of eligible … and 21% were
students did not unaware that
realise that EMA college students
spread over a could receive EMA!
variety of
courses…
 Who is eligible?
16,17 or 18 Income less In full- time International Students
than £30,810 education are not allowed to
A UK Citizen An EU An EEA apply for EMA!
National Migrant
Worker

6.  EMA first recommended in 1956.
 Ruled out in 1981.
 Piloted by Labour in 1999.
 Pilot extended in 2001.
 Rolled out nationally in 2004.

7. The implementation of EMA came significantly later than many people hoped. In
1956, under the leadership of Conservative Prime Minister Anthony Eden, the
Weaver Committee recommended the introduction of the means tested
maintenance allowance, this recommendation was not carried out and the EMA
debate rumbled on through to the 1980s, when Britain was once again under
Conservative leadership, this time of Margaret Thatcher. In 1981, the Secretary of
State for Education, said that there was no correlation between financial support
and remaining in Education.
It wasn’t until the New labour Government of the late 1990s, under the leadership
of Tony Blair, that EMA started to become prominent in the UK’s further education
system after it became apparent that levels of attendance in further education had
peaked in 1994 below the levels of the UK’s industrial competitors.
It was in 1999 when EMA was first piloted across fifteen Local Education
Authorities, this pilot was extended two years later when one in three LEA’s
adopted the education maintenance allowance policy. After a successful trial
Period, the EMA scheme was rolled out nationally in September 2004, with the
three amounts of allowance per week designated at ten, twenty and thirty pounds

8.  Scrapped in England in 2011.
 Continues only for those currently receiving
EMA.
 Will be replaced by a grant and bursary
related scheme from September 2011.
 Still running in Scotland, Wales and N.
Ireland.

9. The Coalition Government scrapped EMA in England in 2011, replacing it with a grant
and bursary scheme that provided £1,200 for those most in need of financial support
when attending full time education post-16. Those currently receiving EMA in England
will continue to do so for the rest of this academic year and those receiving thirty
pounds per week this academic year are entitled to twenty pounds per week for the
academic year 2011-2012.
Devolution laws in the United Kingdom mean that the policy of EMA has been
continued in Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland, with figures from EMA Scotland
suggesting that 39,000 students are currently receiving EMA.

10. The aims of the policy are threefold:
•to raise participation rates in post-compulsory
education, particularly among pupils from
deprived social backgrounds;
•to improve retention rates in the post-16 age
category; and
•to raise attainment levels in further education.

11.  “Women and men whose families were in
serious financial trouble in 1969 or 1974
have significantly worse educational
outcomes than those from families not
experiencing financial difficulties”
(Deardon, 1998)

12.  Barriers, such as family and childcare
commitments, costs and transport are clearly
identified in a 1996 survey of the most important
reasons for adults not participating in learning.'
(Kennedy, 1997, P65)
 Student withdrawal rates in further education
colleges were higher for those qualifying for
income-related fee remission than for
others.“(Kennedy, 1997, P72)
 over four out of five students in the college
sector completed courses between 1994-95; two
in three of those who completed their courses
achieved a qualification

13.  Has the policy done what was intended?
 In assessing the impact of EMA on learners it is important to
look at what students would have done had they not have been
eligible for the scheme.
 Students were asked which statement best suited them had
they not have received EMA.
LSC, leading, learning and skills. (2008) -
http://readingroom.lsc.gov.uk/lsc/National/nat-
emaevaluationreportnov07-jan2008.PDF )

14. It would have made no difference to 45%
my choice.
I’d still have applied for the course but 42%
would have had to earn more money.
I would have applied to go into Work 7.4%
based learning.
I would not have stayed in education 5.6%
at all.
It is interesting to note that 5% of those who would not have stayed in
education were in the received the maximum £30 allowance.
This shows that the EMA scheme did encourage those who may not have
continued in education to stay on at sixth form/college.

15.  The Educational maintenance allowance was meant to provide money for
students with low income families, so that they can afford any extra books,
materials and transport.
 A survey by the Research and consultancy service (2007) showed that for 56%
of students their EMA allowance was used as spending money.
 Moreover only 20% of students said that they actually spent their allowance
on materials and transport.
 EMA was meant to help eradicate inequalities within the educational system
but…
 It seemed unfair that the allowance was based on family income meaning that
some students were not entitled to it.
 Not all parents support their children, meaning that some students are
disadvantaged.
 The income is based on the previous year of earnings therefore, household
incomes may not be up to date.

16.  Since EMA was introduced in 2004, more than 11,000 students from
across the county have accessed EMA funding, which provides up to £30
a week to help people between 16 and 19 from low-income households
to continue in learning. Recent government figures published on the
participation of 16 and 17 year olds in education and training in the North
East show an increase from 79% in 2003, the year before EMA was
introduced to 82% in 2006, which equates to an additional 2,200 young
people. Whilst it is not possible to put this increase entirely down to
EMA, it has been one of the most important initiatives aimed at
increasing participation in recent years.
 The scheme worked because it gave economic power to teenagers who
were without any and thus propelled us into harnessing our individual
talents. That is how a young teenager born into a council estate in
London and from a single parent household could attend the same
university as the future King of England, but sadly now that drawbridge is
being slowly pulled up.

17. EMA was estimated to increase participation at 16 and 17 (i.e. staying in post-
compulsory education for two years) by 7.1 percentage points or 4.1points across all
students. There was a greater impact among young men, students from ‘lower’
socio economic background and those with low or moderate levels of attainment at
the end of compulsory education. Despite only being available for 16-17 year olds in
most pilot areas participation was still higher among men at aged 18, the difference
was not statistically significant for women.
On the contrary, only 12% of young people overall receiving an EMA believe that
they would not have participated in the courses they are doing if they had not
received an EMA. This shows that the EMA was successful in cutting down the high
rate of non- school goers and increasing possibilities for the children in the near
future.

18.  BBC News (2011) QandA: EMA Grants [Online]. Available from:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12209072 [Accessed 26th
April 2011].
 Department for Education (2011) Plans to end the Education
Maintenance Allowance (EMA) programme [Online]. Available from:
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a0073028/pla
ns-to-end-the-education-maintenance-allowance-ema-
programme [Accessed 26th April 2011].
 Jones, R. (2010) Are rich kids getting education maintenance
allowance cash [Online]. Available from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/apr/06/ema-
educational-allowance-abused-rich [Accessed 26th April 2011].
 LSC (2006) Misconceptions could cause young people to miss out on
cash payments. Learning Skills Council. Report Number: 396