Protecting Genuine Students: Why Financial & English Checks Still Matter

The Australian education system has long been recognised for its high standards, quality institutions, and diverse opportunities for international students. One of the key frameworks shaping student visas is the Simplified Student Visa Framework (SSVF). While this framework was originally introduced to make the visa process smoother, recent changes have raised important questions about how it is being implemented and what it means for genuine students.

The Intended Purpose of SSVF

When the SSVF was first introduced, its goal was clear: streamline student visa applications by reducing unnecessary paperwork and ensuring that genuine students could begin their studies with fewer obstacles. Evidence levels (EL) of countries and institutions played an important role. Students applying to universities and providers with lower risk ratings were not required to submit as much supporting documentation upfront, while those from higher-risk backgrounds had to demonstrate financial stability and English proficiency.

How the System Has Shifted

Recent changes mean that all universities and many private providers are now eligible for streamlined processing. On the surface, this looks like a positive step - but in practice, it has created an unusual situation.

The Home Affairs document checklist no longer asks students to attach financial evidence (such as proof of funds) or English test results with their visa applications. This relaxation has led to some agents and providers promoting messages like:

• “No need to show funds”
• “No need for English test”

While such promotions may appear attractive, they raise serious concerns about the integrity of Australia’s student visa program.

Why Financial and English Checks Still Matter

Education experts such as Mike Ferguson have pointed out that the SSVF is now well beyond its intended purpose. His recommendation is straightforward: financial capacity and English proficiency must always be assessed for all applicants, regardless of evidence levels.

Here’s why:

• Genuineness of students: Without proof of funds or English skills, non-genuine applicants may gain admission, only to struggle academically or financially once in Australia.
• Institutional reputation: Universities and colleges risk admitting students who cannot cope, which hurts retention rates and damages Australia’s reputation.
• System abuse by weaker providers: Private providers with poor screening systems may use this loophole for short-term gains, leading to long-term harm for the sector.

Lessons from Nepal

When Nepal was upgraded to Evidence Level 2 (AL2), the Department of Home Affairs visiting team recommended that agents still attach financial and English documents, even though they were not required on the checklist. The message was clear: documents could still be requested at the processing stage, and if they did not meet accepted standards, visa refusals could follow.

This highlights the gap between “not required on the checklist” and “may still be requested later.” It also raises the question of whether Home Affairs has been actively enforcing this provision.

AAERI’s Concern and Call to Action

The Association of Australian Education Representatives in India (AAERI) has also voiced concern. Its President, Nishi Borra, recently communicated to members that:

• Advertising visa processes as “no funds” or “no English” attracts the wrong profile of students.
• Such practices risk damaging Australia’s education reputation and will ultimately reflect poorly on agents.
• Almost all universities and institutes have their own internal checks (often referred to as GS or Genuine Student requirements) and will guide agents on how visas are to be lodged.

AAERI strongly recommends that institutions and agents continue to properly screen students to protect India’s AL2 status and ensure only genuine students benefit.

Global Reach’s Position

At Global Reach, we are committed to guiding students responsibly. While some may be tempted to take advantage of reduced evidence requirements, our advice is clear:

• Be prepared to provide financial and English documentation, even if the checklist does not explicitly ask for them.
• Understand that Home Affairs retains the right to request these documents during processing, and failure to provide them to the required standard may result in refusals.
• Follow the institution’s guidelines carefully, as universities and colleges continue to enforce their internal checks to ensure only genuine students are admitted.

Conclusion

The changes to SSVF and evidence levels highlight the importance of responsible student counselling. For genuine students, having clear financial planning and English proficiency will only strengthen their applications and their chances of success in Australia. For the education sector as a whole, continuing to maintain strong checks safeguards both reputation and quality.

At Global Reach, our commitment is not just to help students secure visas, but to ensure they are well-prepared, genuine, and positioned for long-term success in their academic journey.