Public Consultation on the Review of the Approach to Widening Participation in Higher Education - A Summary of Responses - June 2026

Part 1: Context 

Background

This document sets out a summary of responses to the Department for the Economy’s (DfE’s) public consultation on the Review of Approach to Widening Participation (WP) in Higher Education (HE). The consultation was published on 22 January 2026 and closed on 16 April 2026. Respondents could provide feedback via the Citizen Space online platform or email.

The consultation sought views on how widening participation in Northern Ireland should evolve to ensure that individuals from under‑represented and disadvantaged backgrounds can access, succeed in, and benefit from higher education. It also explored how the supporting system can be more inclusive, collaborative, and responsive in delivering these ambitions.

In particular, the consultation invited feedback on a refreshed strategic approach to widening participation, moving beyond a primary focus on access towards a whole‑journey model that supports learners to enter, progress through, and succeed in higher education, contributing to a more skilled, inclusive and resilient workforce. This approach also supports wider social and economic inclusion, helping to ensure that the benefits of education and prosperity are shared across all communities.

Engagement with a wide range of stakeholders has played an important role in shaping the future direction.

Access to Success, the strategy for widening participation in higher education launched in 2012 and reached the end of its intended timeframe in 2020. A review was commissioned to assess the effectiveness of the strategy and identify potential next steps. The final report, Understanding Widening Participation in Northern Ireland was published in September 2022 by CFE Research & Consulting Ltd.

Building on the CFE report, the Department initiated a comprehensive review of the approach to WP. Working through the WP Forum and with stakeholder engagement, proposals were developed. 

The consultation sought views across a number of themes to inform policy development, including: 

1. the purpose and principles of widening participation;
2. the identification of priority groups;
3. approaches to target setting;
4. raising attainment and supporting progression;
5. structures, governance and collaboration; and
6. data, evidence and accountability.

Evidence and Research

The proposals were informed by a combination of expert input, stakeholder engagement and academic research and were subsequently tested against the available evidence base to ensure they were robust and appropriate for the Northern Ireland context. This included drawing on the findings of the CFE research and wider engagement, alongside the commissioning of additional Research from Stranmillis University College to strengthen the evidence underpinning the proposed approach.

Part 2: Analysis of Feedback from the Consultation

Consultation Responses

The consultation received 32 responses from stakeholders, ranging from Further Education Colleges and Higher Education Institutions to local charities and voluntary and community sector organisations. Responses were also received from other stakeholders, including a local council and a political party.

There was broad support for the majority of the proposals contained in the consultation document and further suggestions and refinements were offered by respondents. There were varying views on the approaches in some sections such as who should be included in priority groups, funding models, data and reporting, and contextual admissions.

This document provides an overview of the feedback received and a summary of responses.

Data Summary of Responses

Responses

Total Number of Respondents	Citizen Space Online Platform	Email
32	15	17

Respondent Profile

Higher Education Institutions	4
Further Education Colleges	3
Awarding  Bodies	2
Local Councils	1
Political Party	1
Organisation /Other	21

*Respondent profiles have been grouped here as identified in the response to the consultation. It is worth noting that one of the organisations responded twice.

Not all respondents provided definitive ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses to the questions posed. In a number of cases, respondents chose instead to provide more detailed, narrative commentary. The analysis set out in this report reflects responses submitted via the Citizen Space consultation platform for the definitive ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses. The commentary provided outlines the additional information provided in both the Citizen Space and email responses received. More detailed information, including the full responses, is provided in Annex 1.

Section One: Strategic Foundations for Inclusive Higher Education

Vision and Principles

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Do you agree with the proposed vision for widening participation?	100	0
Are the proposed principles appropriate and sufficient to guide future action?	81.25	18.75
Are there additional principles that should be considered?	56.25	43.75

100% of respondents agreed with the proposed vision for widening participation. 81% agreed that the proposed principles are appropriate and sufficient to guide future action. 56% agreed that additional principles should be considered. 

Commentary

There was clearly strong support for the proposed vision and principles, with stakeholders agreeing that they provide a strong foundation for reform. 

Some respondents identified a need for clarity on ownership, delivery and practical implementation. Others highlighted the need for accompanying definitions and understanding of implementation, including defined accountability, measurable outcomes and alignment with funding and performance frameworks. It was noted that the proposals were high-level and aspirational.

There were calls for a stronger emphasis on equity, transparency and differentiated support, alongside improved accessibility and inclusion, particularly for those with complex or overlapping barriers.

The importance of system-wide alignment and shared ownership was highlighted. Respondents emphasised the need for stronger cross-sector and cross-departmental integration to ensure consistent delivery, as well as clearer articulation of how the principles would be embedded within existing governance, quality assurance and institutional planning processes.

There was strong support for the overall direction of travel, particularly the focus on equity, collaboration and a whole-journey approach. Respondents welcomed the shift beyond access towards supporting success, progression and outcomes, as well as the emphasis on partnership working across education providers, communities, employers and government. The learner-centred approach, recognition of diverse pathways, and inclusion of flexible routes, including part-time and non-traditional study, were particularly endorsed. 

System Level Targets

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Would you support the introduction of a national target for underrepresented learners in higher education	68.75	18.75
Would a flexible model of targeting, focused on priority groups and institutional targets, be effective?	87.5	0
Are the principles identified sufficient to guide the development of a region-wide taxonomy of priority groups to ensure relevance and inclusivity?	93.75	6.25

68% of respondents would support the introduction of a national target for underrepresented learners in higher education. 88% agreed that a flexible model of targeting focused on priority groups and institutional targets would be effective. 94% agreed that the principles identified are sufficient to guide the development of a region-wide taxonomy of priority groups to ensure relevance and inclusivity. 

Commentary

Whilst Citizen Space responses tended to support the introduction of a single, fixed national target, commentary responses suggested that such an approach may be less effective in driving widening participation. Respondents raised concerns that such an approach could mask institutional and regional variation, and risk narrowing focus to access rather than the full learner journey, including retention and outcomes.

There was strong support for a more flexible model of targeting with institution-level targets. This was seen as enabling providers to respond to local context, capacity and demographic variation, particularly in areas affected by rurality, deprivation and small population sizes.

Practical challenges associated with rigid targets were also highlighted, including data volatility in small cohorts and the risk of unintended behaviours or compliance-driven approaches. Responses emphasised that any target framework must be proportionate, meaningful and underpinned by robust data.

There was strong agreement that the principles identified were sufficient to develop a taxonomy of priority groups and that a balanced approach is required, providing direction and accountability, while allowing flexibility in delivery. However, respondents cautioned that flexibility must be underpinned by clear expectations and oversight to avoid reinforcing uneven outcomes across the sector.

Refining Target or Priority Groups

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Are the proposed priority groups appropriate and sufficient to guide future action?	81.25	12.5
Would a thematic model better reflect learner realities?	87.5	0
Are there additional thematic groupings that should be considered?	56.25	43.75
Are there too many priority groups for WP activities and financial support to be meaningful within the resources available?	12.5	56.25
Do you agree that all groupings should be priority groups?	56.25	31.25
Should any of the groups be prioritised over others?	31.25	68.75
Should institutions retain flexibility to support additional groups not formally designated as priorities, such as Travellers, asylum seekers, or refugees?	87.5	12.5
Should a formal mechanism be established to regularly review and update priority groups based on emerging data, lived experience, and stakeholder feedback?	87.5	0
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that would need to be considered	62.5	37.5

81% of respondents agreed that the proposed priority groups were appropriate and sufficient to guide future action. 88% of respondents agreed that a thematic model would better reflect learner realities. 

Commentary

Respondents broadly agreed that the proposed priority groups reflect those facing genuine barriers to participation. However, many cautioned that identifying a wide range of groups, without clear prioritisation, risks diluting impact and stretching limited resources. There was a consistent view that not all groups can be addressed with equal intensity, and that prioritisation should be evidence-led, responsive to levels of need. Reporting will need to clearly reflect this, with a phased approach over time to support effective delivery and develop appropriate data capture.

Several responses highlighted the importance of aligning prioritisation to factors such as personal circumstance of individuals, while others emphasised the need for flexibility to reflect institutional context and emerging local need. At the same time, respondents called for guidance to support implementation and for mechanisms to regularly review and update priority groups given needs may change over time. 

While the proposed groups were generally considered appropriate, some respondents raised concerns that key cohorts were not sufficiently or specifically recognised in the priority group framework, including Irish Travellers and Roma, refugees and asylum seekers.  There was also a strong emphasis on part-time and adult learners, alongside those with learning disabilities. These cohorts were reflected in the consultation but not explicitly referenced within the priority group framework. 

Overall, the prevailing view was that a more focused and dynamic approach is required, one that combines a clear, evidence-based framework with the flexibility to respond to evolving patterns of disadvantage and regional need, while ensuring resources are targeted where they can have the greatest impact.

Section Two: Enabling Success Across the Learner Journey

Communications and Outreach

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Is the proposed purpose of communications and outreach appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	87.5	0
Would a coordinated sector-wide plan improve consistency and impact across institutions and communities?	87.5	6.25
Would a joint brand or visual identity strengthen recognition and trust in widening participation efforts?	43.75	18.75
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure outreach is inclusive, locally relevant, and sustainable?	56.25	43.75

88% of respondents agreed that the proposed purpose of communications and outreach is appropriate to guide future sector-wide action. 88% of respondents agreed that a coordinated sector-wide plan would improve consistency and impact across institutions and communities.

Commentary

There was consistent agreement that communications and outreach must be clear, accessible and tailored to different audiences. Respondents emphasised the need for plain language, targeted messaging and a stronger focus on demonstrating clear pathways and available support, rather than relying on generic, one-size-fits-all approaches.

A strong theme was the importance of delivery through trusted, local channels. Respondents highlighted the role of schools, further education providers, and community and voluntary organisations in reaching underrepresented learners, noting that effective engagement depends on established relationships and place-based approaches rather than solely central or digital communication.

There was also broad support for a more joined-up, system-wide approach, including stronger employer engagement and alignment with wider economic and skills priorities. However, respondents were clear that communications alone will not be sufficient to drive change and must be supported by wider action to address structural barriers to participation.

Overall, responses emphasised the need to move from information provision to sustained, relationship-based engagement, including earlier intervention and co-designed messaging with learners to ensure relevance, credibility and impact.

Strengthening Contextual Admissions and Pathways

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Is the proposed approach to contextual admissions and alternative pathways appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	81.25	6.25
Should a consistent framework/ approach for contextual admissions be developed across providers to ensure fairness and clarity for applicants?	75	18.75
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure admissions and pathways are inclusive, equitable, and sustainable?	75	25

81% of respondents agreed that the proposed approach to contextual admissions and alternative pathways is appropriate to guide future sector-wide action. 75% of respondents agreed that a consistent framework/ approach for contextual admissions should be developed across providers to ensure fairness and clarity for applicants. 

Commentary 

There was strong and consistent support for a more flexible and inclusive approach to contextual admissions, with respondents emphasising the need to move beyond traditional academic criteria to better reflect diverse learners and pathways. This included broad endorsement of recognising prior learning, life experience and transferable skills, and adopting more holistic assessment approaches that take account of individual circumstances.

Respondents also highlighted the importance of greater consistency and transparency across the sector. While there was support for a common framework with clear principles and accessible criteria, there was equal recognition that this must be balanced with institutional flexibility to respond to local context and learner needs.

There was a clear view that contextual admissions must be underpinned by robust wraparound support, including academic, financial and pastoral provision, to ensure learners not only access higher education but succeed and progress. Improved communication was also identified as critical, with calls for clearer, more accessible and consistent information for applicants.

More broadly, respondents emphasised the need to strengthen pathways into higher education, particularly through further education and flexible routes, and noted that the impact of these measures is currently constrained by funding and student number limits.

Overall, while there was strong support for the direction of travel, respondents highlighted that successful implementation would depend on clear frameworks, consistent application, adequate resourcing and coordinated support across the system.

Supporting Retention and Outcomes

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Is the proposed whole-journey support model appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	100	0
Do you agree that WP support should be extended to include postgraduate learners?	68.75	18.75
Should support services be extended beyond graduation to assist WP learners during transitions into employment or further study?	87.5	6.25
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure retention and successful outcomes for WP learners?	43.75	56.25

100% of respondents agreed that the proposed whole-journey support model appropriate to guide future sector-wide action. 88% of respondents agreed that support services should be extended beyond graduation to assist WP learners during transitions into employment or further study.

Commentary

There was strong and consistent support for a whole‑journey approach to widening participation, with respondents emphasising that access alone is insufficient and that retention, completion and long‑term outcomes must be central. Sustained support throughout study and into employment was seen as critical, including at key transition points.

The importance of early identification and proactive intervention was highlighted, supported by joined‑up, data-informed systems across schools, further education and higher education to enable coordinated support.

Respondents highlighted the need for holistic, wraparound provision, encompassing academic, financial and wellbeing support, alongside practical assistance where required. There was clear consensus that support must be tailored and responsive to individual circumstances, recognising the complexity and intersection of barriers faced by many learners.

Employer engagement and progression into employment were also seen as key, with respondents highlighting the importance of structured partnerships, paid opportunities and clear pathways to improve outcomes. There was strong support for extending support beyond graduation to assist transitions into employment or further study.

While the overall approach was strongly supported, respondents emphasised that successful delivery will depend on sufficient resourcing, coordinated systems and sustained, targeted intervention.

Section Three: Enabling Systems and Structures

Improving Financial Support

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Is the proposed approach to improving financial support appropriate to guide future sector wide action?	68.75	6.25
Would regional pooling of resources improve consistency and equity in financial support across institutions?	43.75	6.25
Are there additional actions or interventions that should be prioritised to ensure financial support reaches those most in need?	43.75	56.25
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure financial support is effective, equitable, and sustainable?	50	50

69% of respondents agreed that the proposed approach to improving financial support is appropriate to guide future sector wide action. 44% of respondents agreed that regional pooling of resources would improve consistency and equity in financial support across institutions. 56% of respondents indicated that no additional actions or interventions are required to ensure financial support reaches those most in need.

Commentary

There was strong consensus that financial support requires reform to reflect current economic realities. Respondents widely highlighted that existing income thresholds are outdated and exclude many learners in genuine need, with calls for revised or more graduated approaches to improve targeting.

A key theme was the need to strengthen support for part-time, mature and non-traditional learners, who were seen as particularly disadvantaged under current arrangements. Respondents emphasised that widening participation ambitions will depend on ensuring parity of access to financial support across modes of study.

More broadly, there were calls for more flexible and responsive support models, alongside an expansion of bursaries and hardship funding. Respondents also highlighted the significant impact of wider cost pressures, including transport, childcare and accommodation, as ongoing barriers to participation and retention.

Improving awareness and accessibility of support was identified as a further priority, with calls for clearer communication and simpler processes. While there was support for employer and philanthropic contributions, respondents emphasised that these should complement, not replace, core WP funding.

Overall, respondents stressed that reforms must ensure support remains targeted and meaningful, underpinned by sustainable funding, and capable of addressing both direct and wider financial barriers across the learner journey.

Enhancing Data, Accountability and Reporting

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Do you agree with the proposal to develop a regional WP data plan with common definitions, indicators, and reporting formats?	100	0
Would a regional WP dashboard be a useful tool for monitoring progress and informing decision-making?	100	0
Would you support the introduction of annual WP impact reviews or peer learning mechanisms?	87.5	6.25
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach to enhancing data, accountability, and reporting that should be addressed to ensure financial support is effective, equitable and sustainable?	43.75	56.25

100% of respondents agreed with the proposal to develop a regional WP data plan with common definitions, indicators, and reporting formats. 100% of respondents agreed that a regional WP dashboard be a useful tool for monitoring progress and informing decision-making. 88% of respondents agreed that the support the introduction of annual WP impact reviews or peer learning mechanisms. 

Commentary 

There was strong support for developing a more coherent and consistent data framework across the sector, with respondents highlighting the value of common definitions, shared metrics and improved use of data to support comparability, benchmarking and decision-making.

A key theme was the need to strengthen the link between data and accountability, with respondents emphasising that data should be used to inform policy, investment and continuous improvement, rather than purely for reporting. This included calls for more outcomes-focused approaches, supported by transparent reporting and regular review.

Respondents highlighted the importance of capturing a fuller picture of the learner journey, including through improved longitudinal and intersectional data, and the integration of qualitative insights such as learner voice. There was also support for greater data sharing and coordination across sectors, including the development of centralised approaches such as a Data and Insights Hub.

However, concerns were raised about the potential burden of additional reporting requirements, particularly where these duplicate existing processes. Respondents emphasised the need for proportionate, streamlined systems that align with current data collection.

Overall, there was support for a more coordinated, improvement-focused approach to data and accountability, underpinned by collaboration, shared learning and practical use of evidence to drive outcomes.

Support and Structures

In the consultation, we welcomed views on the following: 

Question	% of Respondents Agree	% of Respondents Disagree
Do you agree with the proposal to formalise and expand the WP Forum as the central cross sector body for oversight and implementation of WP policy and practice?	100	0
Would a WP Data and Insights Hub be a valuable addition to support evidence-based decision-making and benchmarking?	93.75	6.25
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure effective and consistent support for WP learners?	31.25	68.75

100% of respondents agreed with the proposal to formalise and expand the WP Forum as the central cross sector body for oversight and implementation of WP policy and practice. 94% of respondents agreed that a WP Data and Insights Hub be a valuable addition to support evidence-based decision-making and benchmarking. 69% of respondents indicated that there are no gaps in the proposed approach that need to be addressed to ensure effective and consistent support for WP learners.

Commentary

There was broad support for the formalisation and expansion of the WP Forum as a central mechanism for coordination, collaboration and accountability. Respondents viewed the Forum as a key vehicle for driving system-wide consistency, enabling peer learning, shared use of data, and the dissemination and adoption of effective practice.

A strong theme was that the Forum should operate as a structured and well-resourced platform, with clear governance, defined expectations and regular reporting to support transparency and continuous improvement. Many emphasised the importance of embedding strong accountability arrangements, alongside alignment with wider funding and performance frameworks.

Respondents highlighted the need for the Forum to be inclusive and representative, with meaningful participation from further education, the voluntary and community sector, employers and those with lived experience, ensuring these voices have a genuine influence on decision-making.

More broadly, there was support for complementary structures, such as a Covenant or Memorandum of Understanding, to reinforce shared commitments and strengthen cross-sector collaboration. However, respondents cautioned that the Forum’s effectiveness will depend on its ability to move beyond a consultative role, with sufficient authority, resourcing and focus on delivery to drive real impact.

Cross‑Cutting Themes

Across all sections of the consultation, a number of consistent and reinforcing themes emerged. Respondents highlighted that widening participation is fundamentally a structural issue rather than one driven solely by individual choice or aspiration, requiring coordinated, system-wide action to address entrenched barriers. 

There was strong emphasis on the importance of early intervention and the need to view participation through a lifelong learning lens, recognising that engagement with education does not follow a single, linear pathway. Further education colleges were widely recognised as central delivery partners, particularly in supporting progression routes and providing accessible, locally based provision, while community and voluntary organisations were seen as essential in reaching those furthest from education through trusted, relationship-based engagement. 

Respondents also stressed that employer engagement must be meaningful, inclusive and embedded throughout the learner journey, supporting both aspiration and progression into employment. 

Underpinning all of these themes was a clear message that sustainable and adequately targeted funding is critical to success, with respondents highlighting that long-term investment is required. 

Next Steps 

Focused Conversation on Key Themes 

The Department is grateful for the many responses to the consultation received. 

We note broad agreement for most of the principles and approaches put forward and will give careful consideration to all of the comments and suggestions. 

Some areas of feedback fall outside of the scope of this consultation but will be shared to inform other projects and initiatives in the Department as appropriate. 

We recognise that further consideration is needed in some areas, and we will continue our engagement with stakeholders on those points.

Annex 1

Section One: Strategic Foundations for Inclusive Higher Education

Vision and Principles

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Do you agree with the proposed vision for widening participation?	16 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Are the proposed principles appropriate and sufficient to guide future action?	13 (81.29)	3 (18.75)	0 (0)
Are there additional principles that should be considered?	9 (56.25)	7 (43.75)	0 (0)

 

System Level Targets

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Would you support the introduction of a national target for underrepresented learners in higher education	11 (68.75%)	3 (18.75%)	2 (12.5%)
Would a flexible model of targeting, focused on priority groups and institutional targets, be effective?	14 (87.25)	0 (0)	2 (12.5)
Are the principles identified sufficient to guide the development of a region-wide taxonomy of priority groups to ensure relevance and inclusivity?	15 (93.75)	1 (6.25)	0 (0)

 

Refining Target or Priority Groups

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Are the proposed priority groups appropriate and sufficient to guide future action?	13 (81.25)	2 (12.5)	1 (6.25)
Would a thematic model better reflect learner realities?	14 (87.5)	0 (0)	2 (12.5)
Are there additional thematic groupings that should be considered?	9 (56.25)	7 (43.75)	0 (0)
Are there too many priority groups for WP activities and financial support to be meaningful within the resources available?	2 (12.5)	9 (56.25)	5 (31.25)
Do you agree that all groupings should be priority groups?	9 (56.25)	5 (31.25)	2 (12.5)
Should any of the groups be prioritised over others?	5 (31.25)	11 (68.75)	0 (0)
Should institutions retain flexibility to support additional groups not formally designated as priorities, such as Travellers, asylum seekers, or refugees?	14 (87.5)	2 (12.5)	0 (0)
Should a formal mechanism be established to regularly review and update priority groups based on emerging data, lived experience, and stakeholder feedback?	14 (87.5)	0 (0)	1 (6.25)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that would need to be considered	10 (62.5)	6 (37.5)	0 (0)

 

Section Two: Enabling Success Across the Learner Journey

Communications and Outreach

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Is the proposed purpose of communications and outreach appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	14 (87.5)	0 (0)	2 (12.5)
Would a coordinated sector-wide plan improve consistency and impact across institutions and communities?	14 (87.5)	1 (6.25)	1 (6.25)
Would a joint brand or visual identity strengthen recognition and trust in widening participation efforts?	7 (43.75)	3 (18.75)	6 (37.5)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure outreach is inclusive, locally relevant, and sustainable?	9 (56.25)	7 (43.75)	0 (0)

 

Strengthening Contextual Admissions and Pathways

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Is the proposed approach to contextual admissions and alternative pathways appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	13 (81.25)	1 (6.25)	2 (12.5)
Should a consistent framework/ approach for contextual admissions be developed across providers to ensure fairness and clarity for applicants?	12 (75)	3 (18.75)	1 (6.25)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure admissions and pathways are inclusive, equitable, and sustainable?	12 (75)	4 (25)	0 (0)

 

Supporting Retention and Outcomes

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Is the proposed whole-journey support model appropriate to guide future sector-wide action?	16 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Do you agree that WP support should be extended to include postgraduate learners?	11 (68.75)	3 (18.75)	2 (12.5)
Should support services be extended beyond graduation to assist WP learners during transitions into employment or further study?	14 (87.5)	1 (6.25)	1 (6.25)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure retention and successful outcomes for WP learners?	7 (43.75)	9 (56.25)	0 (0)

 

Section Three: Enabling Systems and Structures

Improving Financial Support

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Is the proposed approach to improving financial support appropriate to guide future sector wide action?	11 (68.75)	1 (6.25)	4 (25)
Would regional pooling of resources improve consistency and equity in financial support across institutions?	7 (43.75)	1 (6.25)	8 (50)
Are there additional actions or interventions that should be prioritised to ensure financial support reaches those most in need?	7 (43.75)	9 (56.25)	0 (0)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure financial support is effective, equitable, and sustainable?	8 (50)	8 (50)	0 (0)

 

Enhancing Data, Accountability and Reporting

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Do you agree with the proposal to develop a regional WP data plan with common definitions, indicators, and reporting formats?	16 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Would a regional WP dashboard be a useful tool for monitoring progress and informing decision-making?	16 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Would you support the introduction of annual WP impact reviews or peer learning mechanisms?	14 (87.5)	1 (6.25)	1 (6.25)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach to enhancing data, accountability, and reporting that should be addressed to ensure financial support is effective, equitable and sustainable?	7 (43.75)	9 (56.25)	0 (0)

 

Support and Structures

Question	No of respondents Agree (%)	No of Respondents Disagree (%)	No of Respondents who don’t know (%)
Do you agree with the proposal to formalise and expand the WP Forum as the central cross sector body for oversight and implementation of WP policy and practice?	16 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)
Would a WP Data and Insights Hub be a valuable addition to support evidence-based decision-making and benchmarking?	15 (93.75)	1 (6.25)	0 (0)
Are there any gaps in the proposed approach that should be addressed to ensure effective and consistent support for WP learners?	5 (31.25)	11 (68.75)	0 (0)

Accessible version of tables

An alternative text document detailing the responses has also been provided for those with screen readers (or other assistive technology).

• Public Consultation on the Review of the Approach to Widening Participation in Higher Education - A Summary of Responses - Alt text tables