Last Trinity Term, the Oxford Student Union (SU) conducted a University-wide Welfare Survey Analysis. Open to all students, it received 2,116 respondents. 93% of students reported experiencing stress at Oxford, and 24% said that their mental health had worsened since joining the University.
Respondents also shared their perspectives on the quality and availability of welfare support across the University and its colleges. Only 35% said they were satisfied with the wellbeing support provided. Many students described welfare services as “under-resourced and inconsistent across colleges.” This inconsistency is not just anecdotal. Rather, it reflects measurable disparities in welfare support, both financially and structurally.
Cherwell has analysed data from the welfare budgets of 30 Oxford colleges. These budgets include funds for students in JCRs and MCRs, money for welfare-related events, and payment for staff in welfare roles. It is important to note that there is no standard method to allocate these budgets. Additionally, each college organises their expenses differently. As such, colleges whose budgets do not account for salaries for welfare staff have been excluded to provide clearer analysis.
College Disparities
The mean spending per student on welfare is £282 (figure 1), with St John’s College spending the most. As the richest College in Oxford with an endowment of £790 million this is perhaps unsurprising. Their total of £317 per student is more than four times the size of Oriel College’s (£78). Oriel’s endowment of £101 million places them in the lower half of colleges by wealth. This suggests that drastic differences in endowment size may also translate to inequalities in student welfare support.
However, large endowments do not always guarantee higher spending. Among the middle 50% of colleges, per-student spending still ranges widely, from £159 to £307. This wide variation of £148 suggests there is no clear standard or benchmark for welfare spending across Oxford.
The Queen’s College underscores this inconsistency. Despite having the fourth-largest endowment of all Oxford Colleges at £340 million, they spent the third least amount per student on welfare, FoI data reveals. At £97 they spend less than a third of what St John’s College gives towards welfare, despite both being counted among the richest colleges in Oxford. This disparity among wealthier colleges suggests financial capacity alone does not always determine welfare investment.
Moreover, Blackfriars Hall – a Permanent Private Hall with approximately 70 students – has an estimated welfare “service value” of upwards of £60,000 each year. At £1,333 per person per year, that represents a much higher spend than other Oxford colleges. In an investigation earlier this year, Blackfriars’ Regent told Cherwell that all students are known by name to the staff, creating an environment conducive to high student welfare. Clearly financial capacity alone does not determine the level of welfare provision.
A spokesperson for the SU told Cherwell: “There are disparities in welfare provision across colleges. A collegiate university structure, with colleges varying significantly in terms of resourcing, size, and internal approaches to welfare, inevitably leads to differences in what students’ experience…Whilst these differences aren’t always negative, they do contribute to inconsistencies in provision.”
No Budget, No Clarity
Not all colleges put their welfare services on an equally firm financial footing. Some colleges told Cherwell they have no designated budget for welfare, including Corpus Christi, Wadham, and Lincoln. Lincoln College told Cherwell that they do “not work on a ‘budget’ system, so no specific figure is allocated. The Welfare Coordinator works directly with the Bursar to request whatever funds are required for events and for infrastructure to provide welfare support.”
This approach was echoed by Wadham College, who provide their welfare support “as an integral part of many of its other activities” but do not have a set budget. A student at Wadham College told Cherwell: “Welfare at Wadham is significantly devolved to the College SU.” They described that student officers provide the week-to-week welfare support, and “are given much more than they are equipped to handle”. They added that the college’s welfare team were not always the first point of contact and “not uniformly useful”.
Chaplaincy
Another source of inconsistency is the involvement of college Chaplains in welfare services. For some colleges, there is a clear link between the Chaplain’s role and the provision of welfare services. At Oriel College, for instance, the Chaplain has always been a member of the welfare team. Similarly, Brasenose College’s Chaplain supervises student welfare training and acts as both Welfare Officer and Link Officer with University Counselling Service. Brasenose told Cherwell that “[t]hese responsibilities have remained unchanged since the Chaplain was appointed”.
But this is not universal. Seven colleges – including Somerville and St Anne’s – have no staff employed in any kind of religious capacity. Corpus Christi College’s Chaplain was involved in welfare services until Michaelmas of 2023. Similarly, St John’s employed the Chaplain as the Welfare Dean until Trinity term 2024, at which point a Head of Student Welfare and Wellbeing was appointed.
With many colleges opting to replace or, in the case of Regent’s Park College, supplement Chaplains holding welfare roles with secular Welfare Lead roles, it seems that a transitional stage is afoot with regards to the involvement of the chaplaincy in college welfare services.
These variations mean student welfare support is not just shaped by financial means but by the personal ethos of individual chaplains. Indeed, the impact of chaplain involvement on perceived quality of welfare provision ultimately hinges on the attitudes or beliefs of the individual chaplains involved.
In a survey circulated by Cherwell, one respondent who had faced anti-Semitic abuse found that their college chaplain was “one of the most kind and understanding people” they had ever spoken to on the issue, even despite their religious differences. Others, however, had far more negative anecdotes to share – with one, “[feeling] mocked by” their college chaplain, as they claimed the chaplain refused “to even say words such as sexual assault”. Other students also voiced discomfort over the College Chaplain being a member of the welfare team, stating welfare “should be equally accessible to all students, regardless of faith”.
JCR Welfare Services
Another major facet of welfare provision in colleges are the services provided by JCR Welfare Representatives. According to a Cherwell survey, most college JCRs seem to provide a similar range of welfare activities, with welfare teas and wine-tasting events being the most popular.
However, many respondents expressed reluctance to go to Welfare Representatives directly for personal issues, mostly since they are fellow students who they know in a social capacity. One student told Cherwell: “I would feel more comfortable going to a professional with my problems than a student I know,” whilst another added that they would “find it weird” to go to someone they consider a “good friend” for personal welfare advice.
Ultimately, JCR welfare is viewed more as an extra opportunity for socialising within college than an avenue to address serious pastoral concerns. One respondent noted: “JCR welfare is predominantly for when you need a serotonin boost.”
Most students agreed that, compared to JCR Welfare Representatives, College welfare teams were better equipped to support students with serious pastoral issues. One respondent appreciated the “more professional setting” of their College welfare services. “Sometimes it’s just nice to have a ‘grown-up’ who understands how hard Oxford is,” another student told Cherwell.
University Welfare Services
Given the inconsistent provision across colleges, the University’s central welfare services are expected to provide a safety net. However, this is not always the case.
A spokesperson from Oxford University told Cherwell: “We take the wellbeing of our students very seriously and encourage those who are in need of support to access the extensive welfare provision available at both University and college level. A range of specialist support services for students is accessible via the Student Counselling Service and the Sexual Harassment and Violence Support Service as well as college Welfare Teams. Oxford’s Student Support and Welfare Services are committed to delivering timely, high-quality and effective support to all members of our student body who need information and support.”
However, in response to Cherwell’s survey, multiple respondents complained about University-wide services feeling too impersonal and overstretched. They cited long waiting times for counselling appointments and “dispassionate” email correspondence as reasons for their dissatisfaction.
In response, a University spokesperson told Cherwell: “In 2023/24, 37% of all students were seen in fewer than 5 working days, and 81% were seen within 15 days. An appointment prioritisation system enabled the service to support students with the greatest need in a timelier manner; the average wait for these students was just over four days.”
A Welfare Lottery
The overall picture is one of systematic disparity. Welfare provision at Oxford is a lottery, with each student’s experience determined largely by their College’s approach. These disparities cannot be explained by College wealth alone, nor are they adequately corrected by the University-wide services.
An SU spokesperson told Cherwell: “No system is ever ‘sufficient’ in the face of the scale of challenges young people are experiencing today. Oxford’s environment is unique and high-pressure, and our welfare structures must match that reality. We need not only more robust provisions from both colleges and the central University, but a broader cultural shift in how welfare is prioritised across the institution – including among academics. Students need to feel supported not just in crisis, but throughout their time here.”