Kenya’s ambitious new university funding model, intended to revolutionize higher education financing, remains in a state of uncertainty following a decisive blow from the High Court, which declared it unconstitutional in December 2024. Justice Chacha Mwita cited a lack of legal framework, discriminatory elements based on financial ability, school type, age, and ambiguous criteria like “household income,” and insufficient public participation as key reasons for the ruling, a decision hailed as a victory by students and civil society groups who had long protested the model’s perceived unfairness. The National Student Caucus celebrated the ruling as an opportunity for national reflection on tertiary education funding, echoing the sentiments of thousands of students who had earlier taken to the streets in September 2024, decrying the increased financial burden placed on them and their families, with over 10,000 students even appealing their assigned funding allocations. Parents, too, voiced relief, having expressed fears that the new model would lock out deserving students due to unaffordable costs and flawed categorization through the Means Testing Instrument (MTI). The Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), a key petitioner in the case alongside the Elimu Bora Working Group and a Students’ Caucus, framed the model as a manifestation of “neoliberal” policies that commodify education, emphasizing the need for a funding approach that prioritizes accessibility and equity for all Kenyans, as education is considered a fundamental public good.  

Despite the High Court’s firm stance, the government has swiftly appealed the decision, with Education Cabinet Secretary (CS) Julius Ogamba reaffirming the commitment to the model’s core principles of ensuring no needy student is left behind and highlighting that the government had doubled funding to universities in the past two years. While acknowledging the initial challenges and inaccuracies in the Means Testing Instrument (MTI), the government is actively working on revisions, with a special committee appointed by President William Ruto submitting a preliminary report proposing changes and aiming for a re-introduction by September to coincide with the admission of new first-year students. However, this legal tug-of-war has created a significant impasse, leaving universities in a precarious financial situation. Professor Daniel Mugendi, chair of the Public Universities Vice Chancellors’ Committee, warned of an impending crisis if the matter is not resolved promptly, highlighting the difficulties in running institutions with delayed fund disbursements, especially for first and second-year students who cannot access government support as the allocated funds are held by the Higher Education Loans Board (HELB) and the Universities Fund (UF) awaiting court direction. The Universities Fund (UF) Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Geoffrey Monari, also voiced concerns that the suspension could exacerbate the already mounting public debt for universities, emphasizing the intended benefits of the new model in alleviating financial strain and granting universities independence to commercialize research. Currently, universities are navigating the uncertainty by agreeing not to demand fees from first and second-year students until the issue is resolved through the courts, while relying on the older Differentiated Unit Cost (DUC) model for continuing students.  

As the legal battle continues, stakeholders are actively proposing alternative solutions and voicing their concerns about the long-term implications. Private universities, through the National Association of Private Universities in Kenya (NAPUK), have seized this moment to advocate for a fundamental shift towards a loan-based funding model, suggesting the establishment of a unified National Students Financial Aid Corporation (NSFAC) to streamline financial assistance across both public and private institutions and move away from a “social-welfare orientation.” This proposal reflects a broader debate about the sustainability and equity of higher education financing in Kenya, especially considering historical funding disparities where private universities received significantly less government support under the DUC model. The ongoing uncertainty has left many first and second-year students in limbo, unsure of the fees they will ultimately be required to pay, with some even facing difficulties in enrolling or sitting for exams due to the funding crisis, as universities demand outstanding fees based on the now-unconstitutional band system. Furthermore, an audit report revealed significant operational challenges and management flaws in the initial implementation of the new funding model, including a lack of coordination between key agencies like the UF, HELB, and the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Service (KUCCPS), raising concerns about the efficiency and fairness of fund allocation and the long-term sustainability of the fund given low loan repayment rates. The path forward remains unclear, but the need for a resolution that addresses both the financial sustainability of universities and the accessibility of higher education for all qualified Kenyan students is more pressing than ever.  

References:

People’s Dispatch Kenya’s High Court delivers blow to neoliberal university funding model

Business Daily Hundreds of students locked out of varsities as finance woes persist

KBC Private Universities offer middle ground proposals on funding model

Nation Ogamba: Improved draft for new varsity funding model ready

Capital News High Court declines to lift orders quashing new University Funding Model

Nation Hundreds fail to report to universities over funding crisis