What Counts as a Significant Change to an Australian Foundation Program in 2026?

A "significant change" to an Australian foundation program is not a matter of provider opinion. Under the Education Services for Overseas Students (Foundation Program Standards) Instrument 2021, as published on the Australian Federal Register of Legislation (as at September 2026), a provider must not make significant changes to a Foundation Program without approval from the ESOS agency for the provider, and the instrument lists three categories that count: changes to more than 25% of the total number of course units or subjects since the program was last approved, substantial variations to course delivery, and substantial changes to course nomenclature, duration, entry requirements, outcomes or structure. These provisions place duties on providers rather than declaring what any one student is entitled to, and they are general reference material rather than advice on an individual enrolment; a specific case needs to be read against the current official text and, where consequences are at stake, against professional advice.

Where does this definition come from, and who does it bind?

The instrument is made under section 176C of the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000, and it sets out the Foundation Program Standards for the purposes of subsection 176C(1) of that Act. The standards apply to a provider in the provision of a Foundation Program, including where any part of the program is delivered through arrangements with another party or parties, whether in Australia or overseas.

They do not apply to four categories: a course of education at a level that, under section 15 of the Australian Education Act 2013, constitutes primary or secondary education; an ELICOS; a course which leads to a qualification recognised under the Australian Qualifications Framework; and an undergraduate preparatory program delivered exclusively to non-student visa holders. For an agent checking whether the significant-change rule is even engaged, that carve-out list is the first gate.

Standard 1 fixes the shape of what is being regulated: a Foundation Program must be delivered as a standard or extended Foundation Program, by a CRICOS-registered provider, must provide an academic entry pathway to first year undergraduate study, and must be delivered in one or more full-time study periods with a minimum break of one week between study periods.

What are the three categories of significant change?

Is it a change to more than 25% of units or subjects?

The first limb covers changes, whether incremental or at one time, to more than 25% of the total number of course units or subjects from the time the Foundation Program was last approved by the ESOS agency for the provider. Two features matter for evidence work: the baseline is the last approval, not the student's enrolment date or the start of a calendar year, and separate small changes aggregate. A provider that has replaced a few subjects each year can cross 25% without ever making one large change.

Is it a substantial variation to course delivery?

The second limb is substantial variations to course delivery. The instrument defines scheduled course contact hours as the hours for which enrolled students are scheduled to attend, either online or in person, classes, course-related information sessions, supervised study sessions and examinations. Delivery is therefore measured in scheduled hours and mode, and the definition already treats online and in-person attendance as within the same concept — so a shift in mode is assessed for substantiality rather than being automatically outside the standard. English language learning may be delivered online or in person, and it includes formal class contact time plus regular, supervised self-directed study of English; formal class contact time does not include supervised self-directed study.

Is it a substantial change to name, duration, entry requirements, outcomes or structure?

The third limb names five attributes: course nomenclature, duration, entry requirements, outcomes and structure. Each has an anchor elsewhere in the instrument, which is what makes the limb testable:

Duration — a standard Foundation Program consists of at least 26 and no more than 36 teaching weeks; an extended Foundation Program consists of at least 37 and no more than 78 teaching weeks.
Entry requirements — for a standard program, completion of Australian Year 11 or a comparable level, English proficiency comparable to IELTS 5.5 overall with a minimum of 5 in all skills or equivalent, provider satisfaction as to academic ability, and at least 17 years of age at commencement (a student may commence at 16 only where the ESOS agency has granted the provider an exemption for the period, or remaining period, of the provider's CRICOS registration and the provider either has a substantial history of enrolling 16-year-old students without significant adverse feedback to the ESOS agency or has demonstrated appropriate welfare processes and resources for students of that age). For an extended program, the English benchmark is comparable to IELTS 5 overall.
Outcomes — the provider must hold a formal written agreement with a higher education provider, and course information must list the higher education courses available on successful completion, any required subjects, and the grades required.
Structure — the program must be a streamed or generalist program, students must complete three discipline-based subjects per study period, and a generalist program must include at least one subject in each of Mathematics, the Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, and either Science or Technology. A Foundation Program cannot include paid work experience.

How do the instrument's fixed numbers help you test "substantial"?

Only the first limb carries a numeric threshold. The other two turn on the word "substantial", which the instrument does not define numerically — so the practical test is whether the change moves the program off one of the fixed measurements set out elsewhere.

Measurement	Standard Foundation Program	Extended Foundation Program
Teaching weeks	At least 26 and no more than 36	At least 37 and no more than 78
Scheduled course contact hours	Minimum 720	No standalone minimum set out; English hours are set as a proportion
English language learning	Minimum 200 scheduled hours, of which at least 100 must be scheduled formal class contact time	At least 28% of scheduled course contact hours, with at least half of the minimum English hours as formal class contact time
English hour distribution	Spread consistently across the program and not undertaken in a block of full-time study	Same rule applies
Full-time	At least 20 hours of scheduled course contact hours per teaching week	Same definition applies

The instrument's own worked example for an extended program: one with 1,000 scheduled course contact hours must include a minimum of 280 hours of English language learning, of which a minimum of 140 hours must be formal class contact time. A change that pushes a program from 36 to 37 teaching weeks, or drops contact hours below 720, is not merely a timetable edit — it changes which band the program sits in.

What if the change is not significant?

Non-significant changes are still regulated. Under the instrument, a provider must submit changes which are not significant changes to the provider's Academic Board or equivalent for assessment and approval, and notify the ESOS agency for the provider. Separately, a provider may only deliver a Foundation Program if the curriculum has been approved by the ESOS agency for the provider upon registration and renewal of registration under Part 2 of the Act.

So the compliance question is never "approved or not approved". It is which route applies: ESOS agency approval before implementation for significant changes, or Academic Board (or equivalent) assessment and approval plus ESOS agency notification for the rest.

What should the approval record actually show?

A defensible record lets you reconstruct the decision without asking anyone to interpret it verbally. The elements worth locating are:

The date the program was last approved by the ESOS agency, and the curriculum version approved at that date — this is the baseline for the 25% count.
A unit and subject register as at that approval and as at now, with cumulative change tracking, since incremental changes aggregate.
Which limb of the definition the change is said to fall under, and the reasoning; if the provider treats it as not significant, the Academic Board or equivalent assessment and approval record together with the notification to the ESOS agency.
Delivery evidence: scheduled course contact hours per teaching week, whether those hours are in person or online, and for English, the split between formal class contact time and supervised self-directed study.
Curriculum equivalence evidence: a comparison of curriculum, set texts and assessment procedures between at least one Foundation Program subject and the corresponding Australian Year 12 subject, plus sufficient information for the ESOS agency to evaluate equivalence of course outcomes to an Australian Year 12 curriculum. The curriculum must also be open to independent scrutiny by the ESOS agency.
Course information consistency — prospectuses, brochures, syllabuses, website material and other documents designed to inform prospective students: stated entry requirements with a table of alternative English minimums, whether the program is streamed or generalist, the program structure and subject choice rules, and the pathways list with required grades, which must be updated annually.

The last item is often the fastest route in. Course information is dated, publicly visible, and describes the program as sold; comparing it with the version a student enrolled under shows what changed without relying on anyone's characterisation of the change.

Where the boundaries of the definition sit

Three limits are worth stating plainly. First, the list is inclusive — the instrument says significant changes "include" these three categories, so it is not a closed set. Second, the 25% figure attaches only to the first limb; there is no equivalent percentage for delivery or for nomenclature, duration, entry requirements, outcomes and structure. Third, a single alteration can engage more than one limb at once — shortening a program can be both a duration change and, if it moves the program across the 36/37-week boundary, a structural one.

These provisions also describe provider duties. They do not set out student visa rules, nor do they describe any remedy available to an individual student; consequences for a particular enrolment depend on requirements and decisions outside this instrument, and on the officially published position at the time.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 25% threshold applied per change or cumulatively?

Cumulatively. The instrument covers changes "whether incremental or at one time", measured from the time the Foundation Program was last approved by the ESOS agency for the provider. A series of small subject replacements can therefore add up to a significant change even though no single edit crossed the line.

Does moving classes online automatically count as a significant change?

Not automatically. It falls to be assessed under the limb covering substantial variations to course delivery, and the instrument gives no numeric threshold for that limb. Scheduled course contact hours are defined to include attendance either online or in person, so mode is part of the measurement rather than an automatic trigger.

Who approves a change that is not significant?

The provider's Academic Board or equivalent must assess and approve it, and the provider must notify the ESOS agency for the provider. Significant changes are different: they require approval from the ESOS agency before the provider makes them.

What distinguishes a standard from an extended foundation program?

A standard Foundation Program consists of at least 26 and no more than 36 teaching weeks and contains a minimum of 720 scheduled course contact hours; an extended Foundation Program consists of at least 37 and no more than 78 teaching weeks. Full-time means at least 20 hours of scheduled course contact hours per teaching week in both cases.

Does shortening a program's duration always count as significant?

Duration is named in the third limb, but only substantial changes to it qualify. The practical check is whether the new length moves the program out of its band — under 26 weeks, or across the 36/37-week boundary between standard and extended — or cuts scheduled contact hours below the 720-hour minimum for a standard program.

Do the standards apply when part of the program is delivered by another organisation overseas?

Yes. The standards apply to a provider in the provision of a Foundation Program including where any part is provided through arrangements with another party or parties, whether in Australia or overseas. They do not apply to primary or secondary education, an ELICOS, a course leading to an Australian Qualifications Framework qualification, or an undergraduate preparatory program delivered exclusively to non-student visa holders.

References

Federal Register of Legislation — Education Services for Overseas Students (Foundation Program Standards) Instrument 2021