Educational Maintenance Allowance

It is more expensive for youngsters, particularly those of limited means, to seek and participation in post 16 learning in rural England. They have longer travel times and fewer choices. Notwithstanding this it seem that no rural proofing component has been applied to debate about changing the Educational Maintenance Allowance. Whilst the Committee looking into the issue acknowledged the impact of the withdrawal on participation and disadvantaged groups there was no consideration of the impact of the decision specifically on rural communities.

The article explains: “The EMA, a weekly payment of between £10 and £30 given to the poorest teenagers to help them stay in education, was controversially scrapped by ministers earlier this year. In a new report on 16 to 19-year-olds in education an training, the cross-party group of MPs said a change to financial support for this age group was “inevitable”.

The report says it is difficult to assess the benefits and improvements in pupils staying in education due to the EMA, but adds: “We would have welcomed a more measured and public analysis by the Government before it took the decision to abolish the EMA. “The Government should have done more to acknowledge the combined impact on students’ participation, attainment and retention, particularly amongst disadvantaged sub-groups, before determining how to restructure financial support.”