GAO 

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on International Organizations, Human 

Rights, and Oversight, Committee on 

Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives 

HIGHER EDUCATION

Approaches to Attract 

and Fund 

International Students 

in the United States 

and Abroad 

April 2009 

GAO-09-379 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

April 2009

HIGHER EDUCATION 

Approaches to Attract and Fund International 

Students in the United States and Abroad 

Highlights of GAO-09-379, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on International 

Organizations, Human Rights, and 

Oversight, Committee on Foreign Affairs, 

House of Representatives 

Following September 11, 2001, the 

number of international students 

coming to the United States 

dropped for the first time in over 30 

years. While enrollments have 

rebounded, the U.S. image has 

declined in the Muslim world and 

elsewhere. To improve global 

attitudes toward America, the U.S. 

government funds higher education 

for international students to 

facilitate exchanges, promote 

understanding among peoples in 

different countries, and build 

capacity in developing nations. 

To provide insight on how higher 

education is used to advance 

public diplomacy and development 

assistance goals, we examined (1) 

the objectives the United States 

and selected peer governments 

seek to advance through higher 

education for international 

students and the approaches they 

employ to attract international 

students, and (2) the 

characteristics of major U.S. and 

peer government programs that 

fund higher education for 

international students to support 

public diplomacy and development 

goals. GAO collected information 

from the United States, Australia, 

China, the European Commission, 

Germany, and the United Kingdom. 

What GAO Recommends

This report does not contain 

recommendations. Technical 

comments from officials 

representing the programs 

discussed in this report were 

incorporated as appropriate. 

The United States and peer governments we reviewed use higher education 

for international students to advance diplomatic, development assistance, 

economic, and other objectives, often concurrently. For example, German 

officials said that international students studying in science and technology 

help advance German research and innovation goals while also advancing 

public diplomacy goals by returning to their home countries as unofficial 

ambassadors for Germany. Germany as well as other governments we 

reviewed use a number of approaches to reach and attract overseas students, 

including marketing their higher education to the international community 

much as a business would promote a product. For example, many countries 

promote their higher education systems through national branding, using 

logos and slogans, such as Australia’s “Study in Australia” and the United 

Kingdom’s “Education UK” marketing campaigns. Several countries have also 

taken steps to improve the quality of the study abroad experience. China, for 

example, has invested significant resources to modernize its schools and 

added additional academic programs that are aligned with workforce needs. 

The scholarship programs we reviewed that support public diplomacy and 

development assistance goals typically select recipients using merit-based 

criteria, offer graduate-level study, and cover the cost of tuition and other 

expenses, such as travel and living expenses. However, programs vary widely 

in the countries and regions they target, funding levels, and number of 

scholarships awarded. For example, scholarships for public diplomacy 

programs tended to be dispersed to a wider area to maximize their geographic 

reach. In contrast, development assistance programs tend to be more targeted 

to particular developing countries and regions. In administering and 

implementing these programs, government officials cited several strategies 

they believe facilitate program implementation and contribute to successful 

program outcomes. For example, some told us that offering preparatory 

courses or program orientation to all scholarship recipients enhances the 

students’ chance of success at the host university, and is particularly useful 

for students who require additional language, cultural, or academic skills. For 

development assistance programs, some countries align the course of study 

paid for by their programs with the human resource and capacity-building 

needs of the sending country. For example, in Australia, officials work with 

sending governments to identify the most acute development needs and 

consider these with the applicant’s proposed field of study when awarding 

scholarships. 

View GAO-09-379 or key components.

For more information, contact George Scott 

at (202) 512-7215 or ScottG@gao.gov. 
Page i GAO-09-379 

Contents 

Letter 1

Background 3 

Governments We Reviewed Use Higher Education to Advance 

Diplomatic, Economic, and Other Objectives and Employ 

Multiple Approaches to Attract International Students 7 

Public Diplomacy and Development Assistance Programs We 

Studied Share Key Characteristics 16 

Agency Comments 28 

Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 29 

Appendix II Percentage of Scholarship Recipients from Each 

Region by Scholarship Program 34 

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 35 

Tables 

Table 1: Selection Criteria, Level of Study Targeted, and Length of 

Award for Selected Scholarship Programs 20 

Table 2: Award Amount and Expenses Covered for Selected 

Scholarship Programs 23 

Table 3: Governments and Agencies Reviewed as Part of Our Study 32 

Figures 

Figure 1: Estimated Number of International Students Enrolled in 

U.S. Higher Education, 1984-1985 to 2007-2008 4 

Figure 2: Top Host Destinations for International Students at the 

Postsecondary Level in 2008 5 

Figure 3: National Brands That Germany, Australia, and the United 

Kingdom Respectively Use to Market Their Higher 

Education Abroad 9 

Figure 4: Examples of Materials Used to Provide Information and 

Promote International Study 11 

Higher Education 
Figure 5: Study in Australia and EducationUSA–Your Guide to U.S. 

Higher Education Web Sites 13 

Figure 6: Percentage of Participants from Each Region for the U.S. 

Fulbright Foreign Student Program and the Australian 

Development Scholarships Program 22 

Abbreviations 

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 

 Development 

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. 

Page ii GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Page 1 GAO-09-379 

 

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

 

April 30, 2009 

The Honorable William D. Delahunt 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on International Organizations, 

 Human Rights, and Oversight 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

House of Representatives 

After decades of growth in international student enrollment in higher 

education, the total number of international students studying in the 

United States leveled off and even dropped slightly between 2002 and 

2006, the first decline in over 30 years. In the wake of the September 11, 

2001, terrorist attacks, the United States tightened its immigration policy, 

making it difficult for international students to come to the United States. 

Although international enrollment has rebounded, and the United States 

continues to be the leading destination for international students, the U.S. 

image has declined in both the Muslim world and among many of 

America’s oldest allies, affecting foreign relations and national interests. 

President Barack Obama recently stated that improving relationships with 

other countries is important to promoting American interests and ideals. 

GAO also recently reported that improving the U.S. image abroad is an 

urgent issue needing presidential and congressional attention.1

The U.S. government seeks to improve global attitudes toward America 

through a variety of means, including funding higher education in the 

United States for international students. By funding higher education, the 

United States seeks to improve global attitudes by facilitating student 

exchanges that help promote mutual understanding among people in 

different countries (referred to as public diplomacy) and by providing 

assistance to developing nations to build their economic, social, and 

technological capacities (development assistance). To address your 

interest in how higher education is being used to advance public 

diplomacy and development assistance goals in the United States and peer 

nations and to provide Congress with relevant information as it considers 

ways that higher education can be used to advance these goals, this report 

examines (1) the objectives the United States and selected peer 

1

GAO, 2009 Congressional and Presidential Transition Series, 

http://www.gao.gov/transition_2009/urgent/diplomacy-broadcasting.php (accessed Feb. 12, 2009). 

Higher Education 
 

governments seek to advance through higher education for international 

students and the approaches they employ to attract international students, 

and (2) the characteristics of major United States and peer government 

programs that fund higher education for international students to support 

public diplomacy and development goals. 

To conduct our study, we selected two U.S. agencies—the Department of 

State (State) and the U.S. Agency for International Development 

(USAID)—and five peer governments (Australia, China, the European 

Commission, Germany, and the United Kingdom) for review. Though many 

U.S. agencies are involved in promoting U.S. higher education to 

international students, we limited our scope to State and USAID because 

they are primarily responsible for funding programs aimed at public 

diplomacy and development assistance. We selected peer governments 

based on the following criteria: (1) strong market share of international 

enrollment, (2) growth in market share of international enrollment, (3) 

diversity of populations and countries targeted for higher education, and 

(4) geographic diversity. We also conferred with embassy and government 

officials and industry experts to obtain their recommendations on which 

countries to review based on their knowledge of their programs. We 

selected major scholarship programs of the United States and peer 

countries for review based on program funding and participation levels, as 

well as agency and peer government officials’ recommendations. We 

broadly defined public diplomacy programs as those that help to promote 

mutual understanding among people from different countries, and 

development programs as those that provide assistance to developing 

nations to build their economic, social, and technological capacities. 

During our exploratory work, we found that peer countries’ programs 

often are designed to achieve multiple goals and that these multiple goals 

are not always clearly delineated. Thus, we selected programs that had 

either a public diplomacy or development focus, but may also advance 

other goals for the country, such as recruiting students who, after 

completing their studies, will participate in the country’s labor market. 

Though many of the governments we reviewed may fund a number of 

smaller scholarship programs, we limited our study to scholarship 

programs that receive at least $8 million annually, or the equivalent in 

local currency, and award at least 50 scholarship awards annually based 

on the information we received. While our focus was on programs that 

offer education and training in the host country, some of the countries we 

reviewed, including the United States, also offer education and training to 

international students within their home nation or a third country. 

Page 2 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

In conducting our study, we relied on program information we gathered 

from our interviews of U.S. and cognizant officials from selected peer 

governments we reviewed. Because of the nature of this study, we were 

not able to independently verify or assess the reliability of the data 

provided by the foreign countries we reviewed. Moreover, direct 

comparisons of the United States and other nations’ international 

education systems and programs are difficult because these nations’ 

higher education financing structure and costs, immigration policies, and 

security concerns differ. 

We conducted our work from March 2008 to April 2009 in accordance with 

all sections of GAO’s Quality Assurance Framework that are relevant to 

our objectives. The framework requires that we plan and perform the 

engagement to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to meet our 

stated objectives and to discuss any limitations in our work. We believe 

that the information and data obtained, and the analysis conducted, 

provide a reasonable basis for any findings and conclusions. 

Following the events of September 11, the total number of international 

students studying in the United States leveled off and even dropped 

slightly after 2002, though enrollment numbers have recently rebounded. 

(See fig. 1.) According to the Institute of International Education (IIE), the 

decline in the number of international students attending U.S. higher 

education institutions between 2003 and 2006 was the first drop in over 30 

years. While the United States continues to be the leading destination for 

international students, the U.S. share of international students worldwide 

dropped—from 26 to 20 percent—between 2000 and 2008.2

 (See fig. 2.) 

According to the Pew Global Attitudes Project, since 2002 the United 

States’ image has declined in both the Muslim world and among many of 

America’s oldest allies. In the wake of September 11, the United States 

also tightened its immigration policy and made it more difficult for foreign 

nationals, including international students, to apply for a visa. As we 

previously reported, these changes, made to help protect our nation’s 

Background 

 

2

The U.S. share of international students in 2000 and 2008 is based on data from the 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Institute of 

International Education, respectively. GAO relied on publicly available information for 

these 2 years. Further, during this period, the number of international students studying 

abroad globally increased by 61 percent. State officials attribute much of the drop in the 

United State’s share of international students to large increases in intra-European student 

mobility. 

Page 3 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

security interests, may have contributed to our declining share of 

international students and the perception that the United States was an 

unwelcoming place for international students.3

Figure 1: Estimated Number of International Students Enrolled in U.S. Higher Education, 1984-1985 to 2007-2008 

Estimated number of international students

Source: Institute of Intenational Education data.

Year

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000

550,000

600,000

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

199

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

8-1999

1997-1998

19

1990-1991

1991-1992

1992-1993

1993-1994

1994-1995

1995-1996

1996-1997

89-1990

1988-1989 

1987-1988

1986-1987

1985-1986

1984-1985

 

3

GAO, Higher Education: Challenges in Attracting International Students to the United 

States and Implications for Global Competitiveness, GAO-07-1047T (Washington, D.C.: 

June 29, 2007). 

Page 4 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Figure 2: Top Host Destinations for International Students at the Postsecondary 

Level in 2008 

Source: Institute of International Education (based on Project Atlas 2007 data and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural 

Organization / Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2006 data).

7%

4% 5%

8%

28%

Japan

All

others

Canada

China

7%

Australia

8% Germany

France

20%

United

States

13%

United

Kingdom

(Estimated total 2.9 million students)

The U.S. government seeks to improve global attitudes toward America 

through diplomatic and development assistance efforts, which include 

funding higher education for international students in the United States.4

Many of the programs that support these efforts are administered through 

the Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

which funds programs aimed at advancing public diplomacy goals, and the 

United States Agency for International Development, which is primarily 

concerned with providing assistance to developing nations. These efforts 

typically create face-to-face exchange opportunities with foreign students, 

researchers, professionals, and educators to provide a better 

understanding of a nation’s views, values, and culture. The United States 

also funds higher education for international students to help developing 

nations alleviate poverty and promote peace and security, public health, 

economic growth, education, and democratization. These programs target 

the economic, social, or technological needs of developing nations by 

equipping students and professionals for future leadership roles in their 

 

4

GAO, Higher Education: United States’ and Other Countries’ Strategies for Attracting 

and Funding International Students, GAO-08-878T (Washington, D.C.: June 19, 2008). 

Page 5 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

communities, businesses, and governments and to fill critical labor and 

skill gaps. 

While the federal government funds education for international students to 

achieve public diplomacy and development objectives, the vast majority of 

students who come to the United States to study do not receive funding 

from the U.S. government. According to the Institute of International 

Education’s Open Doors 2008 report, 623,805 students came to the United 

States to study during the 2007-2008 academic year and nearly 9 out of 10 

international students reported their primary source of funding for 

education as coming from either personal and family sources or from their 

host college or university in the United States. Although the primary 

source of funds for the vast majority of students that enter the United 

States is not provided by the federal government, promoting study in the 

United States can support a range of U.S. objectives in addition to the 

public diplomacy and development goals supported by State and USAID 

efforts. For example, the United States has relied on undergraduate and 

graduate students from other countries as important sources of innovation 

and productivity in our increasingly knowledge-based economy. Such 

students who remain in the country after completing their studies have 

brought needed research and workforce skills and strengthened our labor 

force. For example, international students have earned about one-third or 

more of the degrees at both the master’s and doctoral levels in 

engineering, math and computer science, and the physical sciences.5

 

5

GAO, Higher Education: Federal Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics 

Programs and Related Trends, GAO-06-114 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 12, 2005).

Page 6 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Governments We 

Reviewed Use Higher 

Education to Advance 

Diplomatic, 

Economic, and Other 

Objectives and 

Employ Multiple 

Approaches to Attract 

International Students 

Governments We 

Reviewed Use 

International Education to 

Advance Diplomatic, 

Economic, and Other 

Objectives, Often 

Simultaneously 

All of the governments we reviewed fund higher education for 

international students to advance diplomatic, development, economic, and 

other objectives, often simultaneously. For example, Australian officials 

said that international higher education helps Australia achieve economic 

goals. Education was Australia’s third largest export and contributed $15.5 

billion in Australian dollars (about $13 billion in U.S. dollars) to its 

economy in 2008.6

 According to Australian officials, international students 

also help Australia meet its foreign relations and diplomatic goals. To 

illustrate the diplomatic linkages that education can create, Australian 

officials said that at one time nearly half of the Malaysian cabinet had been 

educated in Australia. Australian officials reported that student exchange 

is Australia’s primary way of providing a contemporary understanding of 

the country, building linkages between Australia and foreign nations, 

forming the basis of business and cultural relationships, demonstrating the 

quality of Australia’s educational opportunities, and helping to dispel the 

myth that Australia is a “far away land.” The Australian government also 

provides development assistance to Asian countries and Pacific Islands to 

increase their access to high-quality education and training, which 

supports growth in the region. These development assistance efforts also 

build enduring links at the individual, institutional, and country levels, 

according to Australian officials. 

 

6

Throughout this report, currency is converted to U.S. dollars at 2008 annualized exchange 

rates. 

Page 7 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Chinese officials told us that by promoting international student study in 

China, they are able to advance goals aimed at promoting peaceful and 

common development of all countries. According to these officials, 

providing international educational opportunities to foreign students is 

part of their strategy for promoting cultural, scientific, and technological 

exchanges between the East and the West. China develops exchanges with 

other countries in the fields of education, science, and technology to 

strengthen friendship and understanding between the Chinese people and 

people around the world and to promote modernization in China. China 

reported that its collaboration with foreign universities and educational 

institutions helps to develop an exchange network that allows it to send 

“the best students to study in the best universities under the supervision of 

the best advisers,” mutually benefiting institutions and countries. 

According to officials from Germany’s national agency that supports 

international education, international students help Germany advance 

several goals, including increasing the international appeal of German 

universities and promoting the academic, economic, and democratic 

development of developing countries. German officials said that their 

ability to advance several goals simultaneously is an important strength of 

international education. For example, international students studying in 

science and technology help advance German research and innovation 

goals while also advancing public diplomacy goals by returning to their 

home countries as unofficial ambassadors for Germany. 

Officials in the United Kingdom (UK) reported that international education 

contributes to building a high-skilled workforce, helps build relationships 

with people from around the world, enhances understanding about each 

others’ cultures, and opens doors to trade, investment, and political 

influence. The European Union (EU) also seeks to advance several 

international education goals, including promoting intercultural 

understanding through cooperation with non-European countries as well 

as ensuring that education and training are accessible to the global 

community. 

In the United States, the federal government similarly seeks to advance 

multiple goals simultaneously through international higher education. For 

example, the United States is able to advance both diplomatic and country 

development goals through higher education by reaching out to students 

in developing countries and equipping them with the skills and knowledge 

needed to support efforts in their own countries. In addition, the United 

States has historically relied on international students to fill critical skill 

gaps in the economy and, in particular, has relied heavily on international 

Page 8 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

students to fill critical skill gaps in science, math, engineering, and 

technology fields. Finally, international education also contributed $15.5 

billion to U.S. economy in 2007-2008, according to data from the 

Department of Commerce. 

Governments Employ a 

Number of Approaches to 

Attract International 

Students, Such as 

Marketing Their Higher 

Education Internationally 

To advance public diplomacy, development, and other national goals, the 

governments we reviewed use a number of approaches to introduce 

international students to their higher education systems. To promote their 

higher education systems internationally, countries like the United 

Kingdom, Germany, and Australia have developed broad marketing 

strategies with a focus on outreach to international students. These 

marketing strategies include developing a national brand through the use 

of logos and slogans to promote higher education systems among 

international communities, much as a corporation would promote a 

commercial brand, as shown in figure 3. 

Figure 3: National Brands That Germany, Australia, and the United Kingdom 

Respectively Use to Market Their Higher Education Abroad 

Sources: The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), Australian Education International, and the British Council.

For example, many of the higher education institutions in the United 

Kingdom use the national brand “Education UK–Innovative.Individual. 

Inspirational.” to distinguish United Kingdom higher educational 

institutions from others. This United Kingdom national brand and its 

associated logo are used for products, activities, events, and marketing 

Page 9 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

campaigns aimed at promoting United Kingdom education. Similarly, 

Germany’s higher education national brand “Study in Germany–Land of 

Ideas” appears in various promotion efforts, including advertisements, and 

at educational fairs.7

 Australia promotes its international study 

opportunities through the “Study in Australia” campaign with the 

“Live.Learn.Grow.” slogan. According to Australian officials, the “Study in 

Australia” campaign is used to highlight the quality of Australia’s 

education system, the country’s unique lifestyle, and the personal growth 

that comes from an international education experience in Australia. The 

national brand is used in various promotion channels, including the Study 

in Australia Web site, education exhibitions, student forums in target 

markets, and traditional advertising media such as print, radio, and 

television. See figure 4 for samples of promotion brochures from selected 

countries. 

 

7

Germany has developed multiple slogans to promote its international higher education. 

Other slogans are tailored to a specific field or program. 

Page 10 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Page 11 GAO-09-379 Higher Education 

Figure 4: Examples of Materials Used to Provide Information and Promote International Study 

Sources: From top left to bottom right: Australian Education International; China Scholarship Council; U.S. Department of State; 

© The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD); and the Delegation of the European Commission to the US Science, Technology 

and Education Section (copyright November 2008).
 

In addition, all of the governments we reviewed have developed Web sites 

to inform potential students about their academic options, application 

procedures, student support services, and lifestyles within that country; 

and in the case of the European Commission, the Web site provides similar 

information on 32 European countries.8

 These Web sites are typically 

provided in several languages and offer a range of information on issues 

such as academic programs, visa requirements, higher education financing 

options, and predeparture advice. For example, prospective students 

accessing Australia’s Study in Australia Web site can find a range of 

information including language and academic requirements, study costs 

and available scholarships, and listings of accredited Australian 

institutions and available courses.9

 The Web site also describes life and 

culture in Australia as well as the benefits of study in Australia, such as the 

types of student support services and the cultural diversity of the country. 

In addition, the Web site provides students points of contact for further 

inquiry, including country-specific alumni networks and Australian 

education advisers stationed in-country. Web site information is available 

in multiple languages, many of which are languages spoken in the region, 

such as Indonesian, Japanese, Thai, and Vietnamese. See figure 5 for 

examples of Web sites. 

The United States provides an online guide for international students on 

higher education called EducationUSA.10 The Web site provides guidance 

on a number of areas, including how to select a school, find English 

language training programs, apply for a visa, and obtain financial 

assistance. It also provides information on the benefits of a U.S. education, 

such as the accreditation system that helps ensure higher education 

institutions maintain quality standards for their faculty, curriculum, 

administration, and student services. Practical information on 

predeparture preparations, such as travel and housing arrangements, and 

everyday living in the United States, are also included on the Web site. 

Potential students are directed to advising centers stationed around the 

 

8

This Web site provides information on 32 European countries: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, 

Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, 

Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, 

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, 

Turkey, and the United Kingdom. 

9

See http://studyinaustralia.gov.au/Sia/en/WhyAustralia/whyaustralia.htm for additional 

information on Australia’s Web page (accessed Feb. 12, 2009). 

10See http://www.educationusa.state.gov/home for additional information on the U.S. Web 

page (accessed Feb. 12, 2009). 

Page 12 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

world for additional information and assistance. The Web site provides 

information and resources to potential students in six languages, including 

Arabic, Chinese, and French. 

Figure 5: Study in Australia and EducationUSA–Your Guide to U.S. Higher Education Web Sites 

Sources: Commonwealth of Australia 2008 and U.S. Department of State.

Page 13 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Australia, the United Kingdom, Germany, and the United States also 

conduct outreach to international students through their overseas 

information centers. These centers are designed to facilitate in-country 

outreach and provide information and guidance to prospective 

international students. They also help to develop strategic partnerships 

with foreign governments and educational institutions. According to 

officials, Australia has a network of 25 international offices that are staffed 

with over 100 individuals, 15 of whom have been accredited by the 

Australian government to be education advisers, who work with the 

international education community to promote Australian education 

worldwide. In addition to conducting outreach activities, the network also 

collects and provides information on the international education market, 

including business opportunities in established and emerging markets, to 

higher education subscribers in Australia. According to United Kingdom 

officials, the United Kingdom relies on a network of international offices 

located in over 100 nations around the world to facilitate education and 

cultural linkages among the United Kingdom and potential students, 

foreign education institutions, and governments.11 Similarly, Germany 

relies on a global network of 48 information centers to promote Germany’s 

higher education system.12 The United States has a network of more than 

450 advising centers around the world, called EducationUSA Advising 

Centers. Centers are staffed by professional advisers, many of whom 

studied in the United States themselves and have received State 

Department-approved training about U.S. higher education and the 

advising process.13 While the reported levels of services and capabilities 

offered by the overseas information centers vary from country to country, 

 

11The United Kingdom conducts outreach to international students through the British 

Council, an independent nonprofit organization. The British Council provides information 

and guidance on cultural relations and education opportunities through its international 

network of offices. 

12The German Academic Exchange Service, Germany’s publicly funded independent 

national agency for the support of international academic cooperation, has created a global 

network of 48 information centers worldwide. These centers provide locally relevant 

information to potential students of German universities. 

13EducationUSA is a network of independent educational advising centers located in a wide 

variety of institutional settings around the world that receive government support in the 

form of staff training and advising materials from State’s Bureau of Educational and 

Cultural Affairs. Although the majority of the educational advisers are not employed by the 

United States government, the Department of State is responsible for the oversight of these 

centers to ensure that this independent network is focused on the EducationUSA mission 

of providing advice to students that is comprehensive and unbiased. The centers do not 

operate on behalf of specific institutions and programs. 

Page 14 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

government officials stressed that their network of offices is valuable 

because its staff possess expertise in international education, understand 

the education systems of the regions in which they operate, and have 

essential contacts, including contacts at education ministries and local 

higher education institutions. 

All governments we reviewed reported that ensuring that international 

students receive a quality education and experience abroad is another key 

component of their approach to outreach to international students. In the 

face of growing domestic and international demand for higher education, 

China has invested significant resources to enhance the institutional and 

human resource capacities of its higher education institutions in the last 

10 years. The steps taken to increase institutional capacity include 

encouraging private funding for China’s higher education and 

modernization of schools’ facilities and equipment. In addition, officials 

said that China has consolidated specialized schools, such as engineering 

and art schools, and added additional academic programs to create 

institutions with more of a comprehensive breadth of curricula, making 

them more adaptable to employment needs and improving the schools’ 

resources through economies of scale. Further, education officials said 

that China provides leadership training to its senior management staff 

through international exchange programs with various Western countries 

to enhance the human capacity of China’s higher education institutions. 

European countries are also taking these steps to help ensure that their 

higher education and research systems continuously adapt to changing 

needs, society’s demands, and advances in scientific knowledge, as well as 

to gain a “worldwide degree of attractiveness.” For example, under the 

Bologna Declaration of June 1999, European countries established a series 

of reforms to make European higher education more compatible and 

comparable across member states, including the adoption of comparable 

undergraduate and graduate degrees and a system of credits.Currently, 46 

European countries participate in the Bologna process.14 To increase the 

quality and effectiveness of education and training programs in the 

 

14Participating countries include Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, 

Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, 

Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Holy See, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, 

Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, 

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, 

Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, “the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia,” Turkey, 

Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. 

Page 15 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

European Union, the European Commission has also established working 

groups in 12 areas, including the education and training of teachers and 

trainers. 

To ensure overseas students have a positive educational experience, the 

UK Council for International Student Affairs, an education charity, acts as 

the UK’s national advisory body serving the interests of overseas students 

and those who work with them, according to officials from the United 

Kingdom. This advisory body encourages best practices, professional 

development, and institutional support for international students. For 

example, the UK Council for International Student Affairs provides 

guidance to students and higher education partners in a number of areas, 

such as immigration policies, financial planning, and cross-cultural issues. 

Further, the Australian government, through enacted legislation and 

regulations, provides “consumer protections” of overseas students. These 

protections include alternative course placement for students whose 

education provider cannot offer a particular course, and making refunds to 

students when no such placement is possible. Australia also established an 

international arm within its government to provide leadership across all 

levels of government and industry, ensure that overseas students have a 

quality study abroad experience, and support the country’s international 

education industry. 

Public Diplomacy and 

Development 

Assistance Programs 

We Studied Share Key 

Characteristics 

The Programs We 

Reviewed Generally Offer 

Merit-Based Scholarships 

Targeted to Graduate 

Students 

The major scholarship programs we reviewed that support public 

diplomacy and development assistance goals typically select recipients 

using merit-based criteria, offer graduate-level study, and cover the cost of 

tuition and some other expenses. For example, the Australian 

Development Scholarships program selects high-achieving students, 

mostly for graduate-level study, through a competitive selection process 

that is coordinated between Australian officials and partner 

Page 16 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

governments.15 Selection criteria are usually established bilaterally 

between the Australian government and the applicant’s home government, 

and students who are nominated must also be accepted by the receiving 

higher education institution in Australia. The program awards 90 per

of its scholarships for graduate-level study, making a small percentage 

available to those wishing to pursue undergraduate or vocational study

Australian Development Scholarship awards include tuition, trave

insurance, and allowances to cover study materials, living expenses, and 

other participation-related costs. In addition, these awards may also 

English-language training, tutorial assistance, and a mandatory 4- to 6

week course designed to prepare students for life and study in Australi

According to program officials, approximately $45,000 in Australian 

dollars (about $38,000 U.S. in dollars) is awarded to selected student

tuition and other expenses per year. 

cent 

. 

l, health 

cover 

-

a. 

s in 

Although the European Union’s Erasmus Mundus program has differing 

ing 

n U.S. 

 

objectives, it also awards scholarships on the basis of academic merit to 

graduate students.16 In the past, the program offered scholarships only for

master’s-level study for 1- to 2-year periods, but will also begin offering 

scholarships for doctoral study for up to 3 years starting in 2010. Under 

this program, individual courses of study are developed by consortia of 

universities within the European Union and these consortia are given 

considerable latitude in selecting applicants. The program’s administer

agency recommends that each consortium assess the quality of eligible 

applicants based on criteria such as academic record, exam results, and

letters of recommendation. Unlike other scholarship programs we 

reviewed, the Erasmus Mundus program awards a fixed amount to 

recipients annually, which was 21,000 euros in 2008 (about $31,000 i

dollars).17 While tuition and fees vary widely among European universities, 

in most instances, the award amount is greater than the cost of 

15Applicants for the Australian Development Scholarships program may be nominated by 

their home government through a competitive selection process. All other applicants 

meeting the selection criteria may apply directly to the program under a separate 

application category. 

16The Erasmus Mundus program is a scholarship program funded by the European Union 

that aims to improve the quality of higher education in Europe and promote intercultural 

understanding through cooperation with non-European countries. 

17This comprises a fixed award of 5,000 euros plus 1,600 euros per month for 10 months. 

Should an Erasmus Mundus course comprise 12 study months per year rather than 10, the 

student will receive 24,200 euros per year. In 2010, the program will begin offering awards 

that vary with participation costs. 

Page 17 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

attendance, allowing recipients to use the balance of the award t

other participation-related expenses, according to program officials. 

o defray 

The U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student Program, which supports public 

ns 

elor’s 

 a 

e 

h.D. 

r a 

st 

cials, 

Similarly, other scholarship programs we reviewed, such as the Chinese 

, 

 to 

Although most scholarship programs we reviewed award merit-based 

onsider 

istered 

 

diplomacy goals, follows a similar approach in awarding merit-based

scholarships to graduate students. The program selects scholarship 

recipients through a competitive process that considers input from a

scholarship board, U.S. embassies, and other organizations. Applicatio

are generally restricted to students who meet certain citizenship 

requirements and who will have received the equivalent of a bach

degree prior to the start of the grant period.18 In selecting scholarship 

recipients, the program considers the applicant’s academic record and

research project proposal, among other factors. Once award recipients ar

selected, the Fulbright Foreign Student Program allows them to 

matriculate in either degree-granting or nondegree master’s and P

programs, some of which may be renewed for up to 5 years; however, 

most awards are for 1 or 2 years of study. Similar to other scholarship 

programs we reviewed, the scholarships awarded by the program cove

range of participation-related costs, including tuition, educational 

materials, travel, housing, living allowances (which vary by U.S. ho

location), orientation, and health coverage. According to program offi

these scholarships are awarded in amounts up to $60,000 per recipient 

annually, but on average total about $32,000 per year. 

Government Scholarships Program, the United Kingdom’s Chevening 

Programme, the U.S. Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Fellowship Program

and German Study Scholarships and Research Grants all award meritbased scholarships, primarily to graduate students. Though award 

amounts vary, the scholarships generally cover similar costs related

participation, including tuition, living, and other expenses. 

scholarships to graduate-level students, a few programs award 

scholarships for undergraduate or vocational study, and some c

need-based criteria in the selection process. For example, the U.S. 

Cooperative Association of States for Scholarships program, admin

18Candidates in countries with Fulbright Commissions must meet the citizenship criterion 

specified in an agreement between the United States and that country. In countries without 

Fulbright Commissions, candidates must be citizens or nationals of that country, or 

permanent residents qualified to hold a valid passport issued by that country. 

Page 18 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

by USAID, funds study for high-achieving, low-income students who might 

not otherwise have access to higher education.19 USAID officials say that 

by establishing relationships with impoverished communities in the 

sending countries, the Cooperative Association of States for Scholars

program has taken steps to ensure that the low-income populations 

targeted by the program are those that receive the awards. However,

officials also acknowledged that an applicant’s income or wealth may 

difficult to verify depending on the depth, soundness, and transparency of

the financial system in the applicant’s home country. Additionally, unlike 

most programs we reviewed, the U.S. Global Undergraduate Exchange 

Program awards all of its scholarships to undergraduate students. 

According to program officials, shorter, non-degree-granting schola

may be more appropriate for vocational or undergraduate participants 

because they help ensure students return and reintegrate into their hom

societies. However, program officials in the United States and abroad said

that undergraduate students’ career goals are often evolving and their 

career trajectories less well defined. For this reason, U.S. and foreign 

officials said that graduate students, who have already committed to a

field of study, may be better suited for some program goals, such as 

building leadership and making technological advances. See table 1 f

criteria countries used to select applicants for the scholarship programs 

we reviewed. 

hips 

be 

rships 

e 

or the 

 

19The Cooperative Association of States for Scholarships program received final funding in 

fiscal year 2008. These funds support the current cohort of students, whose training may 

last through 2010. A successor program, Scholarships for Education and Economic 

Development, will also provide higher education scholarships and training to 

disadvantaged young people in the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, 

Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, and Haiti, and supports U.S. economic and governance goals 

for the region by increasing human and institutional capacity. 

Page 19 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Table 1: Selection Criteria, Level of Study Targeted, and Length of Award for Selected Scholarship Programs 

Host government and program 

name 

Type of selection 

criteria considered Level of study targeted 

Length of 

awarda

Australian Endeavour Awards Merit Mostly graduate 2-3 years 

Chinese Government Scholarships 

Programb

Merit Graduate and undergraduate 1-7 years 

EU Erasmus Mundus Merit Only graduate 1-2 years 

German Academic Exchange Service 

Study Scholarships and Research 

Grantsc

Merit Mostly graduate 1 year 

UK Chevening ProgrammedMerit Mostly graduate 2-4 years 

U.S. Edmund S. Muskie Graduate 

Fellowship Program 

Merit Only graduate 1-2 years 

U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student 

Program 

Merit Only graduate 1-5 years 

Public diplomacy 

U.S. Global Undergraduate 

Exchange Program 

Merit Only undergraduate 0.5-1 year 

Australian Development Scholarships Merit Mostly graduate 2-4 years 

Australian Leadership Awards 

Scholarships 

Merit Mostly graduate 2-4 years 

U.S. Collaborative Research Support 

Programs 

Merit Mostly graduate 1-5 years 

Development 

assistance 

U.S. Cooperative Association of 

States for Scholarships 

Merit and need Vocational 2 years 

Sources: Australian Department of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations; Australian Agency for International 

Development; Chinese Ministry of Education; European Commission’s Education, Audiovisual, and Culture Executive Agency; U.S. 

Agency for International Development; and U.S. Department of State. 

Notes: Information is from academic year 2007 or is more recent. Time periods may have differed 

slightly among the reporting countries, so the data are generally but not directly comparable among 

programs. 

a

This represents the range of duration in academic years of scholarships awarded to students for 

postsecondary study. Length may differ depending on the level of study and whether the scholarship 

is renewed by the host country. 

b

The Chinese Government Scholarships Program offers full and partial scholarships for study in 

China to undergraduates, graduates, language students, and visiting scholars. c

Characteristics represent a combination of the German Academic Exchange Service’s two main 

scholarship programs: Study Scholarships for Graduates of All Disciplines and Research Grants for 

Doctoral Candidates and Young Academics. 

d

Characteristics represent the UK Chevening Programme’s core scholarship scheme. 

Programs Differ in Some 

Characteristics, Including 

Geographic Reach and 

Funding Levels 

Although the programs we studied share key characteristics, they also vary 

widely in their geographic reach, annual funding levels, and their annual 

participation levels. Many of the large public diplomacy programs we studied 

tend to make scholarships available to students from a wide range of 

countries, typically 40 or more, in order to maximize their diplomatic reach. 

Page 20 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

For example, the European Union’s Erasmus Mundus program, a public 

diplomacy program, awarded scholarships to students from 113 countries in 

2008, with no single region receiving more than 27 percent of the scholarships 

awarded. The agency administering the Erasmus Mundus strives to achieve a 

wide geographic balance, in part by ensuring that no more than a quarter of 

scholarships awarded by a particular consortium go to students from one 

country. Scholarships offered by the U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student Program, 

another public diplomacy program, also have a wide geographic reach, 

awarding scholarships to recipients from 143 countries in 2008. However, 

some public diplomacy programs have a more targeted reach. For example, 

the Australia Endeavour Awards has a regional focus, with over 80 percent of 

scholarships widely dispersed to students from Asian and Pacific countries. 

Additionally, the U.S. Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Program targets its 

scholarships exclusively to applicants from the countries that formerly 

constituted the Soviet Union. 

In contrast, the development assistance programs we studied tend to have 

a more targeted focus in order to better concentrate resources in 

particular developing countries. For example, Australia’s two largest 

development assistance programs—the Australian Development 

Scholarships and the Australian Leadership Awards—focus primarily on 

the Asia and Pacific regions, though the Australian Development 

Scholarships also awards approximately 9 percent of its scholarships to 

applicants from Africa. Likewise, the U.S. Collaborative Research Support 

Program also has some regional concentration, awarding nearly two-thirds 

of its scholarships to students from Africa and Latin America. In 2007, 

according to data provided by education officials, we estimate that China 

awarded roughly 20 percent of its scholarships to students from Africa. 

Some of the other development assistance programs we studied have an 

even more targeted focus. The U.S. Cooperative Association of States for 

Scholarships Program and its successor program, for example, have 

awarded scholarships exclusively to students from seven countries in 

Central America and the Caribbean during the past 5 years. A component 

of the European Union’s Erasmus Mundus program also targets its 

scholarships to particular regions based on the political and development 

assistance priorities of the European Union and of partner countries. 20 See 

appendix II for the percentage of scholarship recipients from each region 

 

20Partnerships, a component of the 2009-2013 Erasmus Mundus program, is supervised by 

the European Commission’s Directorate General Europe Aid Cooperation Office and is 

primarily concerned with funding study in the European Union for students from selected 

emerging and developing countries. 

Page 21 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

by scholarship program. Figure 6 provides an illustration of the differences 

in geographic reach typically found between the public diplomacy and 

development aid scholarship programs we reviewed. 

Figure 6: Percentage of Participants from Each Region for the U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student Program and the Australian 

Development Scholarships Program 

Source: GAO analysis, map (Art Explosion).

8%

9%

1%

81%

8%

9%

9%

16%

30%

Australian Development Scholarships

(development assistance)

U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student 

Program (public diplomacy)

South and Central Asia

Europe and Eurasia

Africa

Near East

Western Hemisphere

East Asia and the Pacific 29%

Notes: Totals may not equal 100 percent because of rounding. 

In addition to these differences, annual funding and participation levels 

vary widely among the programs we studied and change from year to year, 

though the largest programs we studied tend to have public diplomacy 

goals, as shown in table 2. For example, the European Union’s Erasmus 

Page 22 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Mundus program and the U.S. Fulbright Foreign Student Program, both 

public diplomacy programs, receive over $90 million in funding.21 One 

exception was the Australian Development Scholarships Program, the 

most well-funded development assistance program we reviewed, which 

received over $101 million in Australian dollars in 2008 ($84 million in U.S. 

dollars). However, most of the public diplomacy and development 

assistance programs we reviewed received less than $50 million in U.S. 

dollars in annual funding last year. Participation levels in 2008 also varied 

widely among the programs we studied, with programs awarding 

scholarships to as few as 67 recipients in the case of the U.S. Collaborative 

Research Support Program to as many as 3,747 recipients in the case of 

the Chinese Government Scholarships Program. 

Table 2: Award Amount and Expenses Covered for Selected Scholarship Programs 

Host 

government and 

program name 

Annual funding 

level 

(U.S. dollars in 

millions)a

Annual 

participation 

levelb

Maximum or 

average annual 

award amount 

(U.S. dollars)c

Expenses covered 

under scholarship 

award 

Public diplomacy Australian 

Endeavour 

Awards 

35 Australian 

dollars ($29) 

391 Maximum of 

52,800 Australian 

dollars ($44,289)d

Tuition,e

 travel, 

establishment allowance, 

a contribution to living 

expenses, and travel and 

health insurance 

Chinese 

Government 

Scholarships 

Programf 

Data not available 3,747 Data not available Tuition, travel allowance, 

educational materials, 

establishment allowance, 

a contribution to living 

expenses, and health 

insurance 

EU Erasmus 

Mundus 

93 euros ($136) 1,957 Average of 21,000 

euros ($30,761) 

Annual award is a fixed 

amount that typically 

covers tuition and may 

defray other 

participation-related 

expenses 

 

21Though the U.S. government is the primary source of funding for the U.S. Fulbright 

Foreign Student Program, participating countries and host universities contribute 

financially, both through direct cost sharing and indirect support. 

Page 23 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Host 

government and 

program name 

Annual funding 

level 

(U.S. dollars in 

millions)a

Annual 

participation 

levelb

Maximum or 

average annual 

award amount 

(U.S. dollars)c

Expenses covered 

under scholarship 

award 

German 

Academic 

Exchange Service 

Study 

Scholarships and 

Research Grantsg

33 euros ($48) 2,800 Maximum of 

30,000 euros 

($43,945)h

Tuition, travel, health 

insurance, living 

allowances, marital or 

child allowance under 

certain conditions,i

research allowance, and 

preparatory language 

instruction if necessary 

U.S. Edmund S. 

Muskie Graduate 

Fellowship 

Program 

$9 145 Average of 

$42,775 

Tuition, travel allowance, 

educational materials, 

housing, monthly 

allowances, and a 

preparatory orientation 

program 

U.S. Fulbright 

Foreign Student 

Program 

$95 3,204 Average of 

$32,000 

Tuition, travel allowance, 

educational materials, 

housing, monthly living 

allowances (which vary 

by U.S. host location), 

orientation, and health 

and accident coverage 

U.S. Global 

Undergraduate 

Exchange 

Program 

$8 452 Average of 

$20,400 

Tuition, travel allowance, 

educational materials, 

housing, monthly living 

allowances, and cultural 

experiences 

Australian 

Development 

Scholarships 

101 Australian 

dollars ($85) 

1,100 Average of 45,000 

Australian dollars 

($37,746) 

Tuition, travel,j

 visa 

expenses, establishment 

allowance, contribution 

to living expenses, 

preparatory language 

and academic courses, 

health care coverage, 

fieldwork 

Development 

assistance

Australian 

Leadership 

Awards 

Scholarships 

18 Australian 

dollars ($15) 

150 Maximum of 

62,000 Australian 

dollars ($52,006) 

Tuition, travel, visa 

expenses, establishment 

allowance, contribution 

to living expenses, 

leadership development 

program, health care 

coverage, study 

enrichment allowancek

U.S. Collaborative 

Research Support 

Programs 

$23 67 Average of 

$41,245 

Expenses covered may 

include tuition, travel, 

research equipment, and 

a contribution toward 

other expenses 

Page 24 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

Host 

government and 

program name 

Annual funding 

level 

(U.S. dollars in 

millions)a

Annual 

participation 

levelb

Maximum or 

average annual 

award amount 

(U.S. dollars)c

Expenses covered 

under scholarship 

award 

U.S. Cooperative 

Association of 

States for 

Scholarships 

$10 162 Average of 

$19,820 

Tuition, travel, education 

materials, visa 

expenses, housing 

expenses, a contribution 

toward living expenses, 

orientation including 

medical exams, program 

seminars and 

workshops, and a 

reentry seminar upon 

returning home 

Sources: Australian Department of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations; Australian Agency for International 

Development; Chinese Ministry of Education; European Commission’s Education, Audiovisual, and Culture Executive Agency; German 

Academic Exchange Service; U.S. Agency for International Development; and U.S. Department of State. 

Notes: Information is from fiscal year 2007 or is more recent. Time periods may have differed slightly 

among the reporting countries so the data are generally but not directly comparable between 

programs. For foreign programs, currency is converted to U.S. dollars at annualized exchange rate 

for the latest year data are available. 

a

Amount shown is the program wide funding level for the latest year data are available. This funding 

may cover expenses such as program administration in addition to scholarship awards. 

b

Number of scholarships awarded to students for the latest year data are available. 

c

Amount shown is the maximum or average amount (as indicated) awarded to scholarship recipients 

for the latest year data is available. 

d

Amount shown represents the maximum annualized scholarship awarded to Endeavour 

Postgraduate Award recipients. 

e

Dependent on the type of award, tuition fees are not payable under all Australia Endeavour Awards. 

f

The Chinese Government Scholarships Program offers full and partial scholarships for study in China 

to undergraduates, graduates, language students, and visiting scholars. 

g

Funding, participation level, and other characteristics represent a combination of the German 

Academic Exchange Service’s two main scholarship programs: Study Scholarships for Graduates of 

All Disciplines and Research Grants for Doctoral Candidates and Young Academics. 

h

In some special cases award amounts may include up to 45,000 euros ($65,917). 

i

Recipients may receive an additional 600 euros ($879) per year for each dependent accompanying 

them. 

j

In addition to roundtrip airfare, includes a reunion airfare entitlement for students with no family 

accompanying them. 

k

May include a contribution toward field research, academic support, conference participation, or the 

award holder’s reunion travel costs. 

According to foreign officials, some governments have revised scholarship 

program funding and participation levels in recent years to reflect 

changing national objectives, such as placing a greater emphasis on 

making their higher education systems more visible. For example, over the 

past 5 years, the European Union has increased funding levels for the 

Erasmus Mundus program by more than tenfold to 93 million euros ($136 

million in U.S. dollars) annually, and plans to spend 950 million euros 

Page 25 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

($1.39 billion in U.S. dollars) on the program over the next 5 years. 

Moreover, some program officials from Australia told us that they 

anticipate funding and participation levels for the Endeavour Awards 

scholarship programs to continue to increase in the coming years. 

However, funding and participation for at least one major scholarship 

program have been reduced in recent years. Specifically, the number of 

scholarships offered by the United Kingdom’s Chevening Programme core 

scholarship scheme has declined from over 1,500 in 2004 to around 1,000 

in more recent years. 

Officials Highlighted 

Strategies They Say Are 

Key to the Successful 

Implementation of 

Scholarship Programs 

Officials that administer both public diplomacy and development 

assistance programs cite several strategies that they say facilitate program 

implementation and contribute to successful program outcomes. Some 

told us that offering preparatory courses or program orientation to all 

scholarship recipients enhances the students’ chance of success at the 

host university, and is particularly useful for students who require 

additional language, cultural, or academic skills. For example, the 

Australian Development Scholarships and Australian Leaderships Awards, 

both managed by the Australia’s Agency for International Development, 

requires scholars to complete a 4- to 6-week introductory academic 

program that covers information on life and study in Australia prior to the 

commencement of formal academic studies. In addition to this program, 

the Australian Development Scholarships also provides precourse English 

classes. Further, the Chinese Government Scholarships Program requires 

recipients who do not meet minimum language proficiency standards to 

take up to a year of intensive Chinese-language training upon arrival in 

China. Depending on the needs of the student, this language training may 

continue once their academic program begins. Similarly, to aid students in 

their transition to the United States, USAID requires all Cooperative 

Association of States for Scholarships recipients to participate in 

predeparture orientation training. During this training, participants also 

receive program-required health exams, and they complete the steps 

necessary to obtain their student visas. 

Some development assistance officials also highlighted the importance of 

aligning the courses of study offered by their programs with the human 

resource and capacity building needs of the sending country. For example, 

USAID officials said that fields of study offered by the U.S. Cooperative 

Association of States for Scholarships program are determined based on a 

review of the development needs and employment trends of the country. 

According to officials, this, along with the support of the sending 

countries’ governments and private business sectors, helps students to 

Page 26 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

obtain a job once they return to their country. In Australia, officials work 

with sending governments to identify the most acute development needs 

and consider these with the applicant’s proposed field of study when 

awarding scholarships. 

In keeping with their goal of advancing human resource capacity in 

sending countries, development assistance programs typically seek to 

return participants to their home country upon completing their program 

of study. For example, recipients of all Australian Agency for International 

Development scholarships are expected to return to their country of 

citizenship for at least 2 years after completing their scholarship program. 

To enforce this obligation, Australia requires development scholarship 

recipients to sign a contract agreeing to return to their home country for 2 

years. If they return to Australia before the 2-year period is up, they incur a 

debt to the Australian government equal to the full value of the 

scholarship. This operates as a strong disincentive for students to stay in 

Australia after completing their study program, and it results in a student 

return rate of 95 percent or better, according to Australian officials. 

However, this does not guarantee that students will stay in their home 

countries for 2 years. One official noted that many alumni choose to move 

to another country shortly after returning home. All USAID exchange 

visitors are required to sign a form in which they agree, among other 

things, to return home immediately upon completion of their program.22

Recipients of some USAID programs are also required to sign a contract 

agreeing to return home within 3 days of completing their program. 

According to USAID officials, this is effective in ensuring students return 

home and fulfill program objectives. Officials said that 86 percent of 

participants in its Collaborative Research Support Programs return to a 

developing country after graduation. 

Finally, officials noted the importance of developing active alumni 

networks. Officials told us that having strong alumni networks better 

enables them to reach future applicants, track alumni, and assess their 

careers and accomplishments as well as perceptions of their international 

study experience. These networks also provide a means through which 

alumni can receive support from their former host country and help 

facilitate enduring relationships between students and the host country 

 

22While scholarship programs sponsored by State have different goals than USAID 

programs, participants are also required to return home upon completion of the program, a 

requirement that is enforced through the visa process. 

Page 27 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
 

once their tour of study has ended. For these reasons, State encourages 

alumni of its exchange programs to connect through a central Web site 

that allows members to find fellow alumni, search for job opportunities, 

and participate in online discussion forums, among other activities. 

Officials at the Australian Agency for International Development stated 

that they are in the process of developing in-country alumni networks for 

their programs. Australian officials also noted that maintaining 

relationships with influential alumni may advance diplomatic and 

development assistance objectives. Other scholarship programs, such as 

the Erasmus Mundus program, have also created Web-based networks to 

facilitate contact with scholarship program alumni. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of State and USAID 

for review and comment. They both provided technical comments that we 

incorporated into this report where appropriate. In addition, cognizant 

officials from peer governments we reviewed were also provided sections 

of our draft report relevant to their programs and provided technical 

comments that were incorporated where appropriate. 

Agency Comments 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of State and USAID, 

relevant congressional committees, and other interested parties. In 

addition, the report will be made available at no charge on the GAO Web 

site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me 

at (202) 512-7215 or Scottg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Office of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff that made major contributions to this report are 

George A. Scott 

listed in appendix V. 

irector, Education, Workforce, 

curity Issues 

D

 and Income Se

Page 28 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Appendix I: 

Methodology 

Objectives, Scope, and 

Page 29 GAO-09-379 

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

This appendix discusses in more detail our scope and methodology for this 

study. The goals of this study were to determine (1) the objectives the 

United States and selected peer governments seek to advance through 

higher education for international students and the approaches they 

employ to attract international students, and (2) the characteristics of 

major United States and peer government programs that fund higher 

education for international students in support of public diplomacy and 

development goals. 

To carry out these objectives, we interviewed government officials and 

industry experts in the United States and in selected peer governments, 

analyzed public diplomacy and development assistance scholarship 

programs, and reviewed studies and evaluations related to the United 

States and peer governments’ efforts to support international higher 

education. In addition, we provided the U.S. agencies and peer 

governments the opportunity to review and comment on the draft report 

sections that are applicable to them and incorporated their comments 

where appropriate. 

We conducted our work from March 2008 to April 2009 in accordance with 

all sections of GAO’s Quality Assurance Framework that are relevant to 

our objectives. The framework requires that we plan and perform the 

engagement to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence to meet our 

stated objectives and to discuss any limitations in our work. We believe 

that the information and data obtained, and the analysis conducted, 

provide a reasonable basis for any findings and conclusions. 

We selected two U.S. agencies and five peer governments for review. 

Though many U.S. agencies are involved in promoting U.S. higher 

education to international students, we limited our scope to the 

Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development 

because they are primarily responsible for funding programs aimed at 

public diplomacy and development assistance, a principal interest of our 

congressional requestor. We applied a range of criteria to select a 

judgmental sample of four countries for review: Australia, China, 

Germany, and the United Kingdom. First, we identified countries that had 

the largest global share of international student enrollments using 2008 

data from the Institute for International Education. To capture recent 

trends in student mobility, we also considered each country’s growth in 

Overview 

U.S. Agency and Peer 

Government Selection 

Higher Education 
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

international enrollments, comparing the 2008 data to 2000 base year data 

from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 

(OECD).1

 Further, to ensure a more global perspective of the international 

education landscape, we reviewed a geographically diverse set of 

governments that, collectively, attract students from a wide range of 

countries. We also conferred with embassy and government officials as 

well as industry experts to obtain their recommendations on which 

countries to visit and review based on their knowledge of international 

education. We ensured that our selection included both English and nonEnglish-speaking countries. In addition to selecting individual countries, 

we also reviewed the European Union (EU) based on its international 

education efforts on behalf of EU member countries, many of which are 

top destinations for international students.2

 While our selection of 

countries included some of the nations that are most active in recruiting 

international students, it is not representative of all nations that have these 

types of programs. 

We selected 13 programs—9 public diplomacy and 4 development 

programs—for review. Though many of the governments we reviewed may 

fund a number of smaller scholarship programs, we limited our study to 

scholarship programs that receive at least $8 million annually, or the 

equivalent in local currency, and award at least 50 scholarship awards 

annually based on the information we received. In addition to the funding 

and participation level consideration, these programs were also identified 

by officials in the United States and peer governments as being most 

important to the success of their country’s international education efforts. 

However, there may be other scholarship programs offered by peer 

governments that met our established criteria, but were not included in 

the report due to our inability to acquire sufficient information about these 

programs. 

Program Selection 

 

1

OECD is an international organization in which governments can compare policy 

experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practices, and coordinate 

domestic and international policies. OECD collects data, monitors trends, and analyzes and 

forecasts economic developments and other areas. Exchanges between OECD 

governments flow from information and analysis provided by OECD. 

2

EU member countries include Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, 

Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, 

Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, 

Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. 

Page 30 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Finally, it should be noted that in many cases the programs we reviewed 

address multiple objectives, including public diplomacy and development 

objectives, and for the purposes of this report, these programs were 

categorized as either public diplomacy or development assistance 

programs, depending on their primary focus. We studied programs that 

offer scholarships to students for vocational, undergraduate, or graduatelevel study for any length of time. We did not include scholarships for 

outbound students funded by sending governments. While our focus is on 

programs that receive host government funding, some of these programs 

are funded or administered jointly with other governments or 

nongovernmental organizations. 

A major part of our study involved interviewing officials from the United 

States and selected governments, as shown in table 3. Officials included 

government executives, program administrators, and industry 

stakeholders. During these site visits, we also collected relevant 

documents, including those dealing with funding, scholarship amounts and 

number of scholarships, program evaluations, and program goals. In some 

cases, officials were not able to provide us the information in the detail 

requested, and in these instance, we noted that in the report. Moreover, 

because of the nature of this study, we were not able to independently 

verify or assess the reliability of the data provided by the foreign countries 

we reviewed. We also did not independently verify the foreign laws and 

declarations discussed, but instead relied on our discussions with foreign 

officials and the documents we collected. 

Site Visits and 

Interviews 

Page 31 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Table 3: Governments and Agencies Reviewed as Part of Our Study 

Governments Agencies 

United States • U.S. Department of State 

• U.S. Agency for International Development 

• Institute for International Education 

• NAFSA: Association of International Educators 

• American Council on Education 

Australia • Australian Embassy in United States of America 

• Australian Agency for International Development 

• Department of Education, Employment and Workforce 

Relations 

• Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 

• Australian Group of Eight 

• Universities Australia 

• The Australian National University 

People’s Republic of 

China 

• Embassy of the People’s Republic of China in the 

United States 

• Ministry of Education 

• China Scholarship Council 

• Chinese Education Association for International 

Exchange 

• State Administration of Foreign Experts Affairs 

• Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with 

Foreign Countries 

• The Office of Chinese Language Council International 

Confucius Institute Headquarters (Hanban) 

• National Center for Educational Development 

Research-Tsinghua University 

European Union • Directorate-General for Education and Culture, 

Cooperation and International Programmes 

• Education, Audiovisual, and Culture Executive Agency 

• Delegation of the European Commission to the USA 

Germany • German Embassy in the United States 

• German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) 

United Kingdom • United Kingdom Embassy in the United States 

• The Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills 

• The Foreign and Commonwealth Office 

• The British Council 

Others • Embassy of France in the United States 

• Embassy of New Zealand in the United States 

Source: GAO. 

Page 32 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

To provide some context for understanding government efforts to support 

public diplomacy, development assistance, or other objectives through 

higher education, we also reviewed a number of studies dealing with the 

global landscape for international higher education. Our review included 

research from organizations such as the Institute for International 

Education (IIE), NAFSA: the Association of International Educators, as 

well as government agencies of the selected peer governments. We also 

reviewed relevant program documents, including agency strategic plans 

and evaluations of scholarship programs, when available. 

Literature Review and 

Program Data 

Page 33 GAO-09-379 Higher Education
Appendix II: Percentage of Scholarship 

Recipients from Each Region by Scholarship Appendix II: Percentage of Scholarship Program 

Recipients from Each Region by Scholarship 

Program 

Percentage of scholarship recipients by region of origin 

Host government and 

program name 

Total number 

of scholarship 

recipients Near East

Europe 

and 

Eurasia Africa

South and 

Central 

Asia 

Western 

Hemisphere

East Asia 

and the 

Pacific

Australian Endeavour 

Awards 

403 6 9 0 38 2 44

EU Erasmus Mundus 

Program 

1,957 6 9 14 17 27 27

UK Chevening 

Programmea

1,051 15 17 13 11 14 30

U.S. Edmund S. Muskie 

Graduate Fellowship 

Program 

145 0 66 0 34 0 0

U.S. Fulbright Foreign 

Student Program 

3,204 9 30 8 9 29 16

Public 

diplomacy

U.S. Global 

Undergraduate Program 

452 25 20 0 19 17 19

Australian Development 

Scholarships 

978b 0 1 8 9 0 81

U.S. Collaborative 

Research Support 

Programs 

67 1 0 28 13 36 21

Development 

assistance 

U.S. Cooperative 

Association of States for 

Scholarships 

162 0 0 0 0 100 0

Sources: Australian Department of Education, Employment, and Workplace Relations; Australian Agency for International 

Development; European Commission’s Education, Audiovisual, and Culture Executive Agency; U.S. Agency for International 

Development; and U.S. Department of State. 

Notes: Information is from fiscal year 2007 or more recent and represents the latest year for which 

region of origin information is available. Percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding. 

a

Characteristics represent the UK Chevening Programme’s core scholarship scheme. 

b

Number of scholarships awarded in 2007. 

Page 34 GAO-09-379 Higher Education 
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 

Acknowledgments 

George A. Scott, Director, (202) 512-7215 or scottg@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Sherri Doughty, Assistant 

Director; Tranchau Nguyen, Analyst-in-Charge; Christopher Lyons; Daniel 

Novillo; Eve Weisburg; Susannah Compton; Alexander Galuten; Martin De 

Alteriis; Jess Ford; and Helen Hsing made key contributions to this report. 

Page 35 GAO-09-379 Higher Education

GAO Contacts 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(130836) 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its Web site newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.” 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information. 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, DC 20548 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548 

Public Affairs 

Please Print on Recycled Paper