Deserving students were denied funding because the higher education funding model is faulty, according to Auditor-General Nancy Gathungu.
In her report, Ms Gathungu noted that undeserving students, including those who had deferred their studies, were allocated money, thanks to the funding model’s numerous shortcomings.
The audit attributed the problems that the model is facing to lack of integration between it and the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Services (KUCCPS) system.
“The model is not integrated with the Kenya Universities Central Placement Service system to ensure seamless tracking of students from placements in the universities, to funding,” the report said as it poked holes into the model introduced in 2023.
It is this disconnect that the auditor says has made it difficult to track students throughout their academic journey as should be the case.
Without a proper link, some students get funds even before they are officially placed in universities.
“Others have been omitted due to missing or duplicated registration numbers.”
“A review of documents and interviews with the Fund’s management revealed critical challenges the model is facing. For instance; there is no coordination between the other government agencies dealing with the higher education students’ support,” reads part of the report.
Some of the students who benefited from scholarships had failed to report to university or had been expelled, according to the report for the year ending June 2024. It has exposed gaps that have left many students struggling to access funds, raising questions over the system’s viability.
“This raises concerns about the system’s ability to fairly allocate funds. As such, the effectiveness of control over scholarship management processes could not be confirmed,” the report reads.
When President William Ruto’s administration established the model, it was touted as the best funding approach as it was said to be student-centred thus, a panacea to inequality in the provision of education.
The model uses a Means Testing Instrument (MTI) to assess the financial needs of students who are then categorised in five bands.
The instrument is meant to ensure targeted support through scholarships, loans and household contributions. The audit found that MTI was flawed due to inaccurate data submitted by applicants, leading to miscalculations in aid distribution.
“Review of the means testing instruments (MTIs) used for placing students in bands against approved MTIs revealed variances between the approved MTIs and the system-configured MTIs. In the circumstances, students’ placements resulting from use of the unapproved MTIs were inaccurate,” reads the report.
It also emerged that lack of awareness about the funding model was a major challenge. The audit revealed that many students, especially those in marginalised regions, were unaware of how to apply for financial aid, limiting their chances of benefiting from the scheme, even as inclusivity emerged as a concern.
“Vulnerable groups such as students living with disabilities and those from remote areas have faced difficulties accessing funds,” notes the report.
“There were also emerging concerns on unique challenges, such as those faced by Muslim students who require Sharia-compliant financial products, further hindering inclusivity.”
Beyond the challenges, the audit warns that the sustainability of the fund is at risk due to low loan repayment rates.
“Loan repayment burden due to high unemployment and underemployment rates are making it difficult for graduates to repay their loans, increasing default rates and threatening the sustainability of the revolving fund,” the report said.
The report said the funding plan has also faced legal challenges. On December 2024, a court declared it unconstitutional, ruling that it was discriminatory and lacked public participation.
