SIOS: Problems for Higher Education in Accessing and Managing EU Grants
From the perspective of Students Ireland OS (SIOS), European Union (EU) grants have long represented both opportunity and contradiction for higher education (HE). On paper, EU funding instruments such as Erasmus+, Horizon Europe, and structural funds promise inclusion, mobility, innovation, and cohesion. In practice, however, many higher education institutions (HEIs)—particularly smaller, regional, and student-focused institutions—face systemic barriers that limit access, undermine sustainability, and exacerbate inequality across the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). This paper critically examines the key problems higher education institutions encounter when applying for, securing, and managing EU grants. It also highlights how these challenges ultimately affect students: through reduced mobility opportunities, underfunded support services, administrative inefficiencies, and unequal access to European programmes. Finally, from a SIOS standpoint, it outlines structural reforms needed to ensure EU funding genuinely serves learners and institutions across all member states. 1. Funding Instability and Policy Volatility One of the most pressing issues for higher education is the instability of EU funding commitments. While the EU frequently communicates ambitious long-term strategies—digital transformation, green transition, widening participation—actual funding envelopes often fluctuate due to political compromise, macroeconomic pressures, or reallocation to crisis response. A clear example is Erasmus+, which has faced periodic reductions in specific funding lines despite increased demand. Universities are encouraged to expand mobility, inclusion, and innovation, yet success rates for project applications have declined sharply. From a student perspective, this translates into fewer funded placements, reduced grants, and increased competition for already limited opportunities. For institutions, funding volatility makes strategic planning extremely difficult. Long-term initiatives—European University Alliances, cross-border curricula, shared infrastructure—require predictable multi-year financing. When funding is uncertain or cut mid-cycle, institutions are forced to absorb costs internally or scale back commitments, undermining trust in EU-level programmes. 2. Excessive Administrative and Bureaucratic Burden EU grants are widely recognised as administratively complex. Application processes are lengthy, highly technical, and often require specialist expertise that many institutions—particularly teaching-focused or smaller colleges—do not possess. Key administrative challenges include: From the SIOS perspective, this bureaucratic burden diverts institutional resources away from student-facing services. Academic staff are increasingly required to spend time on compliance rather than teaching, mentoring, or research supervision. Administrative overload also discourages innovation: institutions may avoid applying for EU grants altogether due to the perceived risk and workload. The problem is compounded by the misalignment between EU financial rules and national accounting systems, forcing institutions to maintain parallel reporting structures. This inefficiency disproportionately disadvantages institutions without large research offices or EU project units. 3. Co-Funding Requirements and Financial Inequality A significant structural barrier within EU grant programmes is the requirement for institutional co-funding. Many initiatives—particularly those linked to strategic alliances or infrastructure—expect universities to contribute substantial financial and human resources beyond the EU grant itself. For well-resourced, research-intensive universities, co-funding is manageable. For smaller institutions, regional colleges, or universities in economically constrained member states, it is often prohibitive. This leads to a two-tier system where access to EU funding is effectively determined by pre-existing wealth rather than merit or social impact. From a student advocacy standpoint, this inequity is deeply problematic. Students in peripheral regions or less affluent institutions are less likely to benefit from: The EU’s stated objective of cohesion is therefore undermined by its own funding architecture. 4. Unequal Distribution of Research Funding EU research funding, particularly under Horizon Europe, tends to be highly concentrated in a limited number of large, urban, research-intensive universities. While excellence-based funding is a legitimate principle, the current system reinforces structural inequality. Institutions in smaller countries or regions often face: For students, this concentration has long-term consequences. Research-active environments attract talent, industry partnerships, and additional funding streams. When EU funding consistently bypasses certain institutions, students in those settings experience fewer opportunities for advanced research training, innovation exposure, and academic progression. SIOS views this as a systemic failure to balance excellence with inclusivity and territorial fairness. 5. Sustainability of European University Alliances The European Universities Initiative was introduced as a flagship project to deepen integration across higher education systems. While conceptually strong, its implementation raises serious sustainability concerns. Participating institutions are expected to: However, EU funding often covers only a fraction of the real costs. National governments do not always compensate for the gap, leaving institutions to self-finance European ambitions. This creates financial strain and risks alliance collapse once initial grants expire. From a student perspective, unstable alliances mean disrupted programmes, uncertain qualifications, and inconsistent academic experiences—directly contradicting the promise of a seamless European education space. 6. Policy Fragmentation and Lack of Alignment Another major challenge is the lack of strategic coherence between EU funding instruments, national higher education policies, and regional development strategies. Universities frequently report that EU priorities do not align with domestic funding models or regulatory frameworks. This fragmentation results in: Students ultimately pay the price through fragmented services, inconsistent programme quality, and reduced institutional capacity to respond to local needs while pursuing EU objectives. SIOS strongly advocates for stronger alignment between EU funding, national strategies, and regional socio-economic priorities—particularly in areas such as skills development, employability, and inclusion. 7. Compliance Culture Over Educational Impact EU grant management has increasingly evolved into a compliance-driven culture. While accountability is essential, the current emphasis on audits, metrics, and procedural correctness often overshadows educational and social impact. Institutions become risk-averse, prioritising “safe” projects over innovative or student-led initiatives. Smaller student organisations and grassroots educational projects are effectively excluded due to administrative thresholds. From a student-centred viewpoint, this is a missed opportunity. EU funding should empower experimentation, inclusion, and learner-driven innovation—not suppress it under procedural weight. 8. The Student Impact: Lost Opportunities and Growing Inequality While EU grant challenges are often discussed at institutional or policy level, their direct impact on students must not be overlooked. These challenges result in: Students from lower-income backgrounds are disproportionately affected, reinforcing inequality within and between member states. This outcome directly contradicts the EU’s commitment to social inclusion and equal opportunity. 9. The Irish Context and Post-Brexit Pressures For Ireland, EU funding challenges are further complicated by post-Brexit dynamics. Collaboration with UK
