University shouldn’t just postpone cliff edges for care experienced students

A new report from TASO (Transforming Access and Outcomes for Students) shines a light on the barriers faced by those with experience of children’s social care entering and succeeding in higher education.

The research points to a stark reality – inequitable access to higher education for care-experienced individuals, but also for a much larger group of people who have experienced children’s social care.

Part of the problem is that support systems often hinge on rigid definitions like “care leaver,” leaving many students, who face similar challenges, without the help they need.

When institutional policies fail to account for the diversity of these experiences, students are left to navigate higher education and life beyond it largely on their own.

The report also suggests that while “care leavers” may have better access to support through Local Authorities (LAs) dedicated widening participation schemes, while those not neatly fitting into this category often fall through the cracks.

But even if the definitions were fixed and there was more focus on “getting on” as well as getting in, what if higher education’s current offer isn’t enough to transform these students’ lives?

Understanding diversity

When the diversity of experience is overlooked, those needing support often miss out or don’t realise they’re entitled to it. Worse, support organisations sometimes view this diversity with suspicion.

For example, the SLC’s rigid “estranged” or “in contact” policy fails to grasp complex family dynamics. Grey rocking – where abuse victims maintain minimal contact for safety – is ignored, leading to invasive social media monitoring and a profound lack of understanding of the complexities of family breakdowns.

At the Unite Foundation, we provide free, year-round accommodation for care leavers and estranged students, improving outcomes by offering stability during studies and after graduation. The support gives graduates the breathing room to seek degree-relevant work instead of scrambling for immediate housing and employment.

We understand that care and estrangement experiences vary widely. Some students enter care due to bereavement, maintain some family contact, or support younger siblings – highlighting how rigid policies fail to capture real-life complexities.

A more nuanced approach is needed. I recently spoke with a vice chancellor who dismissed targeted support for estranged students, claiming most came from low-income, BTEC backgrounds, so existing support sufficed. But when I explained that many South Asian women – across all social classes – estrange themselves over arranged marriage disputes, he could not point to any existing support provisions that would reasonably address their needs.

Recognising and addressing the diverse experiences of social care or estrangement is essential for creating a more equitable education system, and the TASO report helps highlight this need.

Ongoing support

The report makes clear that gaining access to university for those with experience of social care is only the first challenge – and there is a dire need to strengthen retention strategies.

The authors reference a proposal previously suggested by the Social Market Foundation, where providers could receive an additional £1,000 for each care leaver they recruit. Tony Moss and I proposed a similar idea on Wonkhe a few years ago, arguing that care leavers should be included in the OfS student premium allocation formula.

This would require some clarity around definitions and eligibility, but it would significantly help smaller and less financially robust institutions establish support systems for social care experienced students.

And support schemes are effective. The University of York, for example, offers free accommodation to care-experienced students and has seen applications from such students triple. Similarly, the University of Cardiff acts as a legal guarantor for any student in need of one for a rental contract – without a single case of rent default in the past decade.

An interesting aspect of the report highlights that the pathways to higher education for young people with experience in children’s social care often vary based on the type and timing of their experiences. In particular, it urges higher-tariff and more “prestigious” institutions to expand access to students from vocational pathways.

Two years ago, while reviewing the UCAS Next Steps report, I noted that applicants from care-experienced backgrounds are 179 per cent more likely to apply for health and social care courses than their non-care-experienced peers.

At the time, the Care-Experienced Graduates’ Decision-Making, Choices and Destinations Project offered some insight into this trend, explaining that a history in care often drives care-experienced people to altruistically pursue work such fields.

Additionally, I suggested that the accessibility of these courses through Access to Higher Education Diplomas and the employment certainty they offer post-graduation could play significant roles.

And I have also previously argued that care leavers have more direct contact with social workers, which exposes them to career trajectories of adults who influence them – similar to how children of lawyers are 17 times more likely to become lawyers than children of parents in other professions. So it all makes sense.

Care-experienced people need to see all higher education options as viable – not just the ones their circumstances push them toward. If they gravitate to certain courses due to access, bursaries, community, or career pathways, we should replicate these benefits across other disciplines. TASO’s call for research-intensive universities to support care-experienced students from vocational pathways is a crucial step.

Postponing the cliff-edge?

Become’s End the Care Cliff report highlighted how care leavers face an abrupt transition to independence – often much earlier than peers who typically leave home around 24. This “care cliff” leaves many at risk of housing instability and homelessness, with care leavers nine times more likely to become homeless. While TASO’s recommendations help students avoid this cliff during university, what happens when support vanishes at graduation?

The report noted that higher education can transform lives, but only if care leavers are supported to complete their degrees. But a degree alone doesn’t guarantee stability if old barriers reappear once institutional support ends.

Social work – a field with a high representation of care-experienced students – suffers from high stress and low staff retention, with average careers lasting just five to nine years. This may reflect not just job stress but also the complex backgrounds of many staff.

A 2022 UCAS report highlighted how support for care leavers often ends abruptly after graduation. Without ongoing help in early careers, the “care cliff” isn’t eliminated – just postponed.

The TASO report also highlights the need for secure housing during university breaks, but the real challenge is post-graduation.

Without family support, social care-experienced graduates often face unstable, high-cost housing that undermines career stability. While many peers live rent-free with parents, care-experienced graduates pay full rent on the same salary – assuming they’re even paid equally.

Employers may exploit their financial inexperience, and hybrid working only widens this gap – given their living conditions often aren’t conducive to productivity.

Beyond housing, these graduates face layered disadvantages. They’re more likely to be older, disabled, from minority backgrounds, or managing trauma-related health issues – often overlooked by employers.

Many are also overrepresented in high-risk groups, including justice involvement and sex work, which can impact career prospects.

Research then shows that early disadvantages persist into middle age, suggesting a need for long-term support. While the TASO report robustly addresses access and retention in higher education, it misses a crucial element – graduate careers.

Providers should prepare social care-experienced students for the workforce. But a real focus on “getting on” must also involve pushing both central government and employers to understand their lived realities beyond graduation.

If HE is serious about changing lives, it needs to work to eliminate the care cliff – not just delay it.