Johnny Mythen (Wexford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

570. To ask the Minister for Education and Skills if a place on a college course will be provided to a person (details supplied). [45985/24]

Patrick O'Donovan (Limerick County, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Springboard+ is a Government initiative managed by the Higher Education Authority (HEA) on behalf of my Department, the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation, and Science (DFHERIS).

Since 2022, eligibility for Beneficiaries of Temporary Protection (BOTPs) for Springboard+ courses is determined ostensibly on the same basis as Irish citizens. However, specific guidance on eligibility for BOTP/Ukrainian applicants who are in employment is outlined on the Springboard+ website and shared with each course provider. This guidance states:

Note 3: Ukrainian applicants who are in employment or returning to the workforce, including those under Temporary Protection and in receipt of a Temporary Protection Letter, must meet the residency requirement , i.e. have lived in the EU/ EEA/ UK/ Switzerland for 3 full years out of previous 5 years, to be eligible to enrol on a Springboard+ or HCI Pillar 1 course.

Note 4: The process for determining eligibility is undertaken by the third level institution to which the application is made.

Additionally, applicants in receipt of Working Family Payment are required to apply under the “Employed” category and have their eligibility assessed and verified on the same basis as any other employed applicant. The Working Family Payment option provides for the 10% fee to be waived, but applicants must still meet the ‘visa/nationality’ and ‘residency’ requirements. Eligibility documentation for all course participants should be verified by the date that they start their course.

Records supplied by the HEA note that the person referred to in the details supplied correctly applied under the “Employed” category, as she indicated that they were in receipt of the “Working Family Payment”. Regrettably however, the applicant was accepted onto the course in error, as they did not meet the residency eligibility criteria. The oversight in this case was on the part of the course provider, who has the responsibility for verifying applicant eligibility, and this oversight was identified later in the process by the college.

The Springboard+ initiative is an administrative scheme which is not underpinned by legislation and the residency rule that applies may differ from what is in place for other schemes offered by other Government Departments. The terms and conditions that apply to Springboard+ are applicable to all students and that exceptions cannot be made in any particular case.

It is understood that this is disappointing, especially after the initial acceptance in error.

I would encourage the person to explore other educational or training options that may not have the same residency requirements, such as courses offered under the Micro-Credential Learner Fee Subsidy, which could provide alternative pathways for skill development.