For decades, the government of Ontario has been providing financial aid to post-secondary students through its Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP). Funding has included grants, which do not need to be repaid, as well as loans, which need to be repaid.
On Feb. 12, the government announced that, starting in Fall 2026, Ontario students “will be eligible to receive a maximum of 25 per cent of their OSAP funding as grants and a minimum of 75 per cent as loans. OSAP will no longer offer grants to students at private career colleges, in alignment with changes made by the federal government to its own student support funding.”
While the government framed the changes as a measure to improve the long-term sustainability of OSAP, the policy will significantly increase the proportion of student aid delivered through loans rather than grants. In response to the upcoming changes, the Public Service Alliance of Canada – Ontario has warned that the government’s decision “will make post-secondary education more debt driven and less accessible…Instead of strengthening public investment, the government is shifting costs onto students and their families.”
Earlier this year, Excalibur reported that students and organizations like the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario have been protesting these changes throughout the province. While protests are effective in raising awareness and fostering engagement in communities and on social media, some have questioned whether these protests could be effective in making significant changes to policy. Ricardo Tranjan, senior researcher on housing and social policy at the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, noted that public outrage is important, but simply opposing the government’s changes would only get us so far. He suggested that other measures are required, specifically raising funds by increasing taxes on corporations and high-income earners.
If political processes are ineffective, and raising funds through additional and/or alternative forms of taxation are unfeasible or insufficient, what other options are relevant and possible as a way forward in helping fund Higher Education Institutions (HEI) and students? Notably, concerns over HEI-related funding also arise, to varying extents and in different ways, in other provinces throughout Canada as well as in other countries around the world. As the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) cautions in its #FundEducation blog series, funding of education is in crisis worldwide. This raises the risk of HEIs failing to meet the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, such as Goal #4 which aims to “ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and the promotion of lifelong learning opportunities for all.”
In its #FundEducation blog series, UNESCO also explains that the needs for financing education require resorting to different sources, such as contributions by public sources, the private sector, as well as philanthropic actors.
UNESCO recognizes that philanthropic actors “bring a unique set of tools to the global education financing landscape: flexible grantmaking, catalytic capital, [and] strategic conveying.”
Recent research reveals that HEIs tend to focus on “external” sources of elite philanthropy (i.e. voluntary giving by wealthy individuals, couples, and families) and institutional philanthropy (i.e. philanthropic foundations). However, as Dr. Michael Moody, Professor of Philanthropic Studies at the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy at Indiana University, points out, these sources raise numerous concerns and risks. For example, parents may try to directly or indirectly influence admission of their children based on their donations.
In my opinion, philanthropy could and should nonetheless have an increased and prominent role in providing additional sources of funding for HEIs and for students by adopting and increasing reliance on internal fundraising through the work of students, faculty, and staff.
Internal fundraising could be spearheaded by individual students through student-led initiatives. For example, during my visual arts studies at York University, I recognized a need for more scholarships at Stong College. I used my art to raise funds for scholarships by initiating and organizing an exhibition called Students Helping Students which was inspired by the philanthropic work of my father, Jacob Pichhadze. Throughout his career, my father similarly used his art to raise funds for numerous social needs, such as supporting medical research and hospitals, helping immigrants and refugees, and assisting charities.
The initiative of individual students, however, may be too limited — one student can’t be expected to raise and donate amounts equivalent to elite or institutional donors. It is, therefore, beneficial for students and other members of the university to act collectively by holding fundraising campaigns that could raise larger amounts. For example, at the University of Michigan Law School, students annually hold a Student Funded Fellowship Auction. In 2020, the auction raised $122,585. In Canada, a particularly notable example is the Front and Centre campaign at the University of Manitoba, which raised just over $625 million, exceeding its initial goal by $125 million. The campaign involved a mix of fundraising initiatives by students, alumni, faculty, and staff.
An emerging fundraising strategy that utilizes collective action and could be applied university-wide or by groups of students is that of “giving circles.” This involves a group of individuals pooling their donations and collectively deciding how to distribute the funds, making it possible to create larger grants than could typically be achieved by individual contributors.
Some universities also teach philanthropy as a subject, allowing students to pursue special certificates or graduate degrees. Through “experiential philanthropy” programs, students receive money to donate to community organizations. Notable examples are the Philanthropy Lab in the US and the Pathy Foundation Fellowship in Canada. Instead of fundraising for external causes, such programs could be focused on the internal needs of the university, such as establishing student scholarships.
In addition to the benefit of raising funds to support the university and fellow students, internal fundraising activities could also benefit students in different ways by facilitating the development of students’ civic virtues alongside their financial and leadership skills.
In conclusion, while it is reasonable, necessary, and valuable to question the government’s approaches to public funding of education, I suggest that it is also possible and advisable to more actively consider and pursue alternative sources of funding such as philanthropy, with increased focus on internal fundraising.
