The Hardship Gap: How UK Universities Distribute Emergency Funding Between Home and International Students
UK universities receive billions of pounds each year from international student tuition fees. They also set aside hardship funds for students in financial crisis. But our data shows that the relationship between these two things is not straightforward, and that how universities divide hardship support between home and international students varies enormously.
A Money Outsider investigation, based on Freedom of Information responses from 102 UK universities, reveals a significant and widening difference in hardship fund approval rates for UK versus international students.
The headline numbers
In 2020/21, international students who applied for hardship support were approved 94.9% of the time, a higher rate than UK students (86.3%). By 2024/25, those positions had reversed: UK students were approved at 80.6%, while international students had fallen to 70.0%.
The crossover happened between 2021/22 and 2022/23. Before that point, international students were more likely to be approved. After it, they were less likely, and the gap has continued to widen.
There are possible explanations. The COVID year saw specific emergency funding streams, some of which may have been particularly accessible to international students. As those wound down, universities may have reverted to hardship criteria that favour home students, whether by design or effect. Some government-funded hardship pots are explicitly restricted to UK students.
Fee income versus hardship spending
International students pay significantly higher tuition fees than home students, and at many universities they contribute the majority of total fee revenue. As those fees have to be funded without the aid of UK Government student loans, the assumption is that most international students have more substantial personal or family wealth; therefore, a lower need for hardship funds.
We compared each university’s international share of tuition fee income with its international share of hardship fund spending for 2023/24.
At the vast majority of universities, the international share of hardship spending is lower than the international share of fee income. This does not necessarily indicate unfairness: fee income and hardship eligibility are separate things, and many hardship funds are drawn from sources ring-fenced for home students. But the scale of the gap at some institutions is notable.
Six universities (Exeter, Royal Holloway, Bangor, Royal Academy of Music, Cranfield, and Keele) spend proportionally as much or more on international hardship as international students contribute in fees.
Hardship spending per student
Another way to look at the data is to calculate how much each university spends on hardship per UK student versus per international student. The variation is large.
At De Montfort, the university spends £41 on hardship per UK student and 17 pence per international student. At the other end, Exeter spends roughly twice as much per international student as per UK student. The range is enormous.
Some universities awarded zero international grants
At a small number of universities, every single international hardship application was refused, presumably on the grounds of policy. Leeds Beckett rejected all 67 international applications in 2022/23, and all 53 in 2023/24. The Royal Veterinary College has awarded zero international grants in three consecutive years. These may reflect eligibility rules rather than discretionary decisions, but the pattern is striking.
Context and caveats
This data does not tell us why these gaps exist, and there are several legitimate explanations.
Many university hardship funds are drawn from sources that are restricted to home students by regulation, not by university choice. The Office for Students’ hardship funding, for example, is ring-fenced for UK students. Several universities told us this explicitly in their FOI responses.
International students also have different financial profiles. They must demonstrate funds before receiving a visa, which may make them less likely to meet hardship criteria even when they are struggling. Conversely, international students do not have access to the UK welfare system, maintenance loans, or many of the other safety nets available to home students, which could mean their need is underreported rather than lower.
It is also worth noting that fee income and hardship spending are fundamentally different things. Tuition fees go into the university’s general revenue. Hardship funds are typically a separate, much smaller pot. There is no established principle that hardship spending should be proportional to fee contribution.
What the data does show clearly is that the gap is large, it is widening, and it varies enormously by institution. Whether that reflects appropriate policy or a structural problem is a question the sector has not yet publicly addressed.
The full dataset behind this investigation is available here, including charts and raw data tables.
This dataset is compiled from responses to Freedom of Information requests made to UK Universities. Money Outsider have not independently verified the accuracy or completeness of the disclosed information. Money Outsider have attempted to reprocess data from different formats to allow comparison. No warranty is given as to fitness for purpose. Use of this dataset is at your own risk. Attribution to MoneyOutsider.com is appreciated.
Where applicable, re-use of information is intended to be consistent with the Open Government Licence.