Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 5
5
Clearly articulate DfE, OfS, SLC roles and responsibilities for student funding fraud prevention.
Conclusion
Despite the complex regulatory system, roles and responsibilities for fraud prevention, detection and intervention are undefined. The system for paying loan monies and overseeing providers is complicated, involving multiple bodies. The Government Internal Audit Agency (GIAA) and C&AG both found that there were gaps between DfE, OfS and SLC responsibilities, that the boundaries between bodies were unclear, and that bodies had different interpretations about where the boundaries lay. OfS has a general responsibility for protecting public funds, but no explicit responsibility in respect of student loan fraud. SLC says that it has good information to tackle individual level fraud, which has been enhanced by membership of the National Economic Crime, but acknowledges that it has less knowledge, and can intervene less, with providers. SLC also has limited power to suspend payments, even where fraud suspected, without clear direction from DfE. Student loans issued to those studying at franchised higher education providers 7 Recommendation 5: DfE, OfS, SLC’s roles and responsibilities should be clearly articulated and written into organisational system statements and operating protocols.
Government Response
A response document is linked to this report, dated 11 July 2025. Response attribution to this conclusion has not been verified. Read the response document ↗