Students who live independently receive a higher grant than students living at home with their parents: a difference of nearly two hundred euros per month. Students can take advantage of this.

Student finance provider DUO tried to combat this, but primarily targeted students with a migration background in its inspections. This amounted to indirect discrimination. In addition, the inspections themselves were flawed, and the evidence for fraud was often weak. This emerged in 2023 from an investigation by the Higher Education Press Agency (HOP), together with Investico, NOSop3, and the newspaper Trouw.

Meanwhile, work is underway on a new inspection system, which is expected to launch during the next academic year. The new approach will also focus on prevention: how can students be encouraged to commit less fraud? Research into this question was commissioned by OCW. The results were sent to the House of Representatives on Tuesday.

Checking a box

According to the researchers, committing fraud is currently too easy. Students only need to register at a different address with the municipality and then check the box indicating they are “living independently.” In addition, they believe the likelihood of inspections is low. The higher grant is also often seen as “easy extra money.”

The researchers also propose possible solutions. Many people want to maintain a positive image of themselves, the report states. If they are required to make a more conscious decision to commit fraud, they find that uncomfortable.

That is why the researchers recommend making the grant for students living at home the default option. Students who want the higher grant for living independently would then have to actively change their status and enter their address. This would force them to reflect on their choice.

Inspections

It also helps if students are more aware that they may be inspected. Students should therefore be better informed about this. At the same time, the researchers warn that if DUO communicates this too frequently, it may be perceived as “hostile and unfair,” potentially producing the opposite effect.

Finally, the researchers argue that students should no longer view the higher grant as “easy extra money.” This comes down to framing, they say. The grant for students living independently should not be seen as a reward, but as compensation for additional living expenses.

This article was translated using AI-assisted tools and reviewed by an editor.