policy & reform
The Science of Compliance
One of the risks of running an educational institution is keeping compliant with government regulations. Every six months, I hear of another college hit with a non-compliance transgression for failing to check their students’ visa status or some other compliance-related matter.
The regularity of these transgressions in a relatively large industry – there are about 2500 private colleges in Australia – shows the difficulty in staying up-to-date with government regulations.
While compliance can often be seen as a cumbersome and tedious matter, adopting a more scientific approach to compliance can bring very real benefits to educational providers, more than just the avoidance of being found“ guilty” for their transgressions.
Compliance is continually changing, driven by an education sector that is increasingly globalised and the growing need among governments to form planned and systematic processes that ensure confidence in educational services.
Historically, compliance is built on three key principles. Firstly, compliance systems are used to protect the reputation of a country’ s education systems.
Secondly, these systems are used to provide assurance that public and private funds are being spent appropriately.
Thirdly, it provides student assurance and protection.
The first principle is clear to any educational institution in Australia.
The potential impact to Australia’ s reputation as a destination for learning is evidenced in a recent wave of negative publicity surrounding Indian students which caught on in India’ s local media.
The effect was chillingly immediate, and no doubt contributed to a 24 per cent drop in enrolments by Indian students in January to June last year.
The second principle demonstrates probity and financial accountability, which are crucial in an industry that is affected by exchange rates and international schooling trends. For example, at least 39 colleges closed down in 2009 in Australia as the global financial crisis took hold. More recently, local educational institutions are under increasing pressure due to the resiliently high dollar, which makes Australia less attractive to international students.
The third principle follows on from the second, as students need to be confident that the education they have paid for is of the type and the standard they were promised.
Consequently, as Australia moves towards a more systematised and reliable approach to compliance, educational institutions are forced to work within a framework that is much more data-driven and carries more legal ramifications.
Moreover, in several countries such as Singapore, government officials have passed legislation to govern compliance for educational institutions and handed responsibility for enforcement to quality assurance agencies.
These agencies have increasing regulatory powers to impose quality controls, conduct inspections of various sorts, and monitor compliance through regular audits.
More worryingly, the legislation is often reinforced with penalties for noncompliance such as enforced closure, fines or even criminal charges.
The punishment for non-compliance can extend beyond the terms of the legislation and thus, the increasing relationship between compliance and government funding models in Australia and internationally creates a strong incentive to play by the rules.
Naturally, educational providers faced with an increasingly punitive environment for non-compliance can become more concerned with their own compliance requirements and“ live in fear” of the regulatory authority.
Staying compliant is even harder in countries like Australia where a single education provider may be answerable to several quality assurance agencies and the
24 | April 2013