Why FE colleges can’t stand still on EDI

By Sian Mantovani, sociology lecturer at York College and Research Further Scholar

We’re living in challenging times; a rise in polarising politics, accompanied by the creep of far-right ideologies into the mainstream and the normalisation of racist, transphobic, homophobic and misogynistic attitudes have left some of us feeling far less secure and safe.

As further education colleges, we need to stand firm as anchor institutions and offer stability and support in these stormy seas. Thankfully, exciting and innovative work is around equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) within the sector to support us to do that.

In March 2024, AoC launched its EDI Charter, highlighting that colleges are “uniquely placed to bring about transition and transformation in our society”. The AoC’s Equity Exchange also serves as a network of support, challenge and collaboration for those committed to championing the EDI cause. At the recent AoC Conference 2025 I was lucky to be afforded an insight into some of the inspiring work being done by colleagues at Solihull and Southport colleges. There’s a lot for the sector to be proud of.

However, this is not the time to rest. An ‘anti-woke agenda’ is growing in popularity. The return of Donald Trump to the White House appears to have been accompanied by a shift in attitude towards EDI in the United States. For example, Meta Platforms recently ended its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) hiring initiatives and supplier-diversity programmes, and disbanded its internal DEI team. Amazon has also said in a memo that it would “wind down outdated programmes and materials” tied to DEI. High-profile business leaders such as Elon Musk have also come out against EDI initiatives, describing them as another form of discrimination.

Whilst it may be tempting to be dismissive of policy and attitude shifts across the Atlantic, there is clear evidence of a seeping tide of antagonism towards EDI strategies in the UK too. For example, some local councils with a number of Reform councillors, such as Cornwall Council, are pushing to “stop mandatory EDI/DEI policies,” arguing that only existing legislation (the Equality Act 2010) should apply. The justification for such moves often centres on claims that EDI policies are not required by law beyond that which the Equality Act already mandates and that extra policies amount to unnecessary bureaucracy. More often they are condemned as a waste of public money.

The previous UK government commissioned the “Inclusion at Work Panel”. They reported that many organisations have introduced EDI initiatives without an evidence base, and don’t know whether they result in improvements. The current Labour government’s Spending Review in June 2025 shows increased spending in key public services (health and education for instance), but it does not clearly earmark increased EDI funding or signal reversals of EDI constraints in all departments. This could be taken as mounting evidence that EDI is under attack or at least side lined.

So, in the midst of these shifting sands, what is the effect on our FE colleges?

The FE sector is currently undergoing significant change driven by new government investment and reform. The 2025–26 budget includes £302 million in capital funding for FE colleges as part of a wider £6.7 billion skills and education investment, alongside an additional £300 million for 16–19 education. However, challenges remain. Analysts warn that inflation and rising student numbers risk eroding the value of increased funding. Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies highlighted that the FE sector has taken some of the deepest funding cuts across the education system and is particularly vulnerable when budgets are tightened. These budgetary constraints may threaten the scope and visibility of non-statutory EDI activity in colleges because as budgets tighten many non-statutory posts and projects are sacrificed.

However, Ofsted’s updated Education Inspection Framework and associated FE inspection toolkits (new model from late 2025) put greater emphasis on inclusion and make expectations more explicit for FE providers. This may ensure that colleges put more emphasis on inclusive practice and thus protect some EDI activity. Conversely, the impact may be to limit EDI to ‘demonstrative compliance’: that which can be easily evidenced. This may draw colleges away from longer-term, broader strategies involving culture shifts which are less easily quantified.

There is also an ideological pressure concerning the visibility of EDI strategies. Colleges are not immune to the type of scrutiny which has been focused on the public and higher education sectors. For example, the online and mainstream media criticisms waged against ‘woke’ councils for removing St George flags may encourage colleges to rename, absorb, or stop advertising “EDI-titled” posts and programmes to reduce political risk or public scrutiny. This is where we must stand firm.

In the President’s address at the 2025 AoC Conference Pat Carvalho made a stirring call to action. She argued that the vital role played by colleges in fostering community cohesion feels “more urgent than ever in the face of rising extreme ideologies, deliberate polarisation, othering and widespread misinformation”. She urged us all to engage in the inclusive dialogues and informed actions that ensures we can rise to the challenge of ensuring that the potential of every child and every adult is supported and met.

Standing up for what we believe and who we represent requires belief and a pride in our mission, now more than ever.