In this paper, the author conducts an analysis of actors’ belief systems in the policy of access to healthcare for college students. So far, this policy has not been analyzed from a political perspective. For a theoretical background, the author uses advocacy coalition framework because actors’ belief systems are one of its main concepts. The key idea of this theory is that actors will try to translate their beliefs into actual policy. Therefore, the author asks the following research question: What similarities and differences exist between belief systems of actors that participate in the policy of access to healthcare for college students? Data for the analysis was collected through semi-structured interviews and then coded according to the rules of qualitative content analysis. Actors’ belief systems are then presented in a tripartite structure proposed by the chosen theory and compared. We have identified four groups of actors that differ in policy core beliefs and secondary aspect. Majority of actors advocate for change in healthcare for students but disagree over which solution would be best for achieving improvements. Other actors either don’t recognize the problem of access to healthcare for students or think that there is no need for change. To conclude, only by conducting negotiations and building trust these groups can overcome their differences in the best interest of students.