Tag Archives: higher-education

2024 KCSE Certificates Release: Urgent Action Required

Posted on by

The Ministry of Education has announced the release of 2024 KCSE certificates, kicking off the week of April 27, 2025, a deadline that couldn’t come at a more critical time. Education CS Julius Ogamba has pressed students and guardians to pick up certificates urgently, warning that the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Service (KUCCPS) portal closes on April 30. With over 962,000 candidates having sat the exams and only 246,391 securing the minimum C+ grade needed for university admission, timely collection is non-negotiable for those hoping to lock in their higher education spots. Yet, this milestone is clouded by a stubborn and illegal practice: the continued withholding of certificates by school principals chasing unpaid fees, despite the Kenya National Examinations Council (KNEC) Act of 2012 outlawing the behavior. Top education leaders, including PS Julius Bitok and Government Spokesperson Isaac Mwaura, have slammed the practice as a violation of students’ rights, but many principals remain defiant. PS Bitok has now issued a blunt circular demanding immediate certificate release and compliance reporting within 14 days, reflecting the Ministry’s boiling frustration with rogue school heads who continue to treat legal orders as suggestions.

A Report by Kisii TV

Fed up with defiance, the Ministry is now raising the stakes, moving from warnings to hard action. CS Ogamba has made it plain: starting the week after certificates are released, principals who still withhold them will face disciplinary and legal consequences. This marks a sharp turn — no more polite memos, no more ignored directives. But even more critical is a deeper systemic fix in the works: plans are advancing to pull certificate collection entirely out of schools’ hands. Under the new model, students will pick up their documents directly from Sub-County Directors of Education (SCDE) offices, a shift that aims to kill the problem at its root. It’s a bold move, built on the successful pilot earlier this year when KCSE result slips were sent through SCDE offices. Stripping principals of the power to hold certificates hostage cuts out the middleman and restores certificates to their rightful owners — the students. Beyond logistics, this strategy is about restoring trust in the education system itself: showing that once a student earns a certificate, no one — not even a principal — should stand between them and their future.

The next few weeks will be the true test of whether this shake-up delivers real change. For the 2024 KCSE candidates, quick access to certificates is the key that unlocks university admission, job applications, and life plans that can’t wait. For principals who defy orders, this time the consequences are meant to be real — legal action, career-ending sanctions, public accountability. And for the education system as a whole, the shift to SCDE offices could become a model for breaking down entrenched administrative abuses that have long crippled student mobility. But this won’t happen automatically: it’ll require tight coordination across counties, clear instructions to SCDEs, public communication campaigns, and a Ministry willing to enforce its own rules without flinching. If it works, it will not just be a victory for this year’s candidates — it will set a new standard for fairness and efficiency in how Kenyan education treats its students. Either way, the clock is ticking, and the Ministry’s next moves will show if it’s serious about turning bold words into bold action.

References:

The Standard KCSE Certificates to be collected from government offices, not schools

Daily Nation KCSE 2024: Highest university qualifiers recorded in eight years

Kenyans.co.ke KNEC to Release 2024 KCSE Certificates This Week As KUCCPS Portal Closes

Kenyans.co.ke KCSE Certificates to Be Collected from Govt Offices Instead of Schools

Kenya’s University Funding Legal Dispute Explained

Posted on by

The Court of Appeal’s recent intervention in the ongoing university funding dispute in Kenya has further complicated an already volatile situation. On March 26, 2025, the appellate court suspended the High Court’s ruling that had previously declared the Variable Scholarship Loan Funding (VSLF) model unconstitutional. This decision temporarily reinstated the controversial funding framework, allowing the government to resume its implementation while the appeal is heard. The suspension was granted based on arguments from the Higher Education Loans Board (HELB) and the Universities Fund (UF), both of which warned that halting the VSLF model would cripple their ability to allocate funds, potentially leading to financial instability and even the closure of multiple institutions. Former HELB Acting CEO Mary Muchoki emphasized in an affidavit that the High Court’s ruling could result in the indefinite closure of universities, underscoring the gravity of the situation. Similarly, former Universities Fund CEO Geoffrey Monari defended the VSLF model as a more equitable and cost-effective funding mechanism, cautioning that the previous decision could trigger a crisis in university financing. By suspending the High Court’s ruling, the Court of Appeal sought to balance the urgent need to sustain university funding with the concerns raised regarding the legality and fairness of the model. However, this move introduces another layer of uncertainty, as universities, students, and policymakers must now navigate an unpredictable legal landscape while awaiting a final resolution.

A Report by KTN News Kenya

To mitigate the immediate fallout and provide transparency, the Court of Appeal issued several directives aimed at ensuring that students, universities, and other stakeholders remain informed about the potential implications of the ongoing legal battle. The court instructed the Attorney General, HELB, and the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Service (KUCCPS) to disseminate detailed information about the VSLF model to all relevant parties within 14 days. This included clear communication to current beneficiaries and prospective applicants that the funding framework could still be subject to further changes. Additionally, the appellate court mandated the establishment of an appeals mechanism within the same timeframe, allowing students dissatisfied with their funding allocations or categorization to seek redress. These directives were an attempt to address the concerns raised by the High Court regarding the lack of transparency and due process in the implementation of the VSLF model. Nonetheless, the broader financial challenges facing Kenyan universities persist, as public institutions continue to struggle with substantial funding deficits while private universities remain burdened by unpaid government sponsorship funds. Although the temporary reinstatement of the VSLF model might alleviate some immediate financial pressures, the long-term sustainability of higher education funding in Kenya remains a pressing issue that requires a more comprehensive and permanent solution. The shift towards increased household contributions under the VSLF model raises additional concerns about affordability, particularly for students from low-income backgrounds, who now face the prospect of significant debt accumulation through student loans.

The current funding controversy is part of a broader historical shift in Kenya’s higher education financing strategy, transitioning from the Differentiated Unit Cost (DUC) model, which had been in place since 1995, to a more individualized, means-tested approach. Under the DUC model, public universities received block funding based on student enrollment and the costs associated with different academic programs, with the government initially expected to cover 80% of the unit cost. However, persistent underfunding led to financial distress for universities, necessitating alternative approaches. In May 2023, the government introduced the VSLF model, which sought to provide direct funding to students through a combination of scholarships, loans, and household contributions, assessed via a Means Testing Instrument (MTI). While this shift was designed to target financial aid to the most economically vulnerable students and encourage universities to diversify their revenue sources, it has sparked concerns about access and equity. The ongoing legal uncertainties surrounding the VSLF model have further exacerbated these concerns, as students remain unsure about their financial obligations, and universities continue to grapple with inconsistent funding. Moving forward, Kenya must establish a stable, transparent, and equitable university financing system that balances institutional sustainability with student accessibility. This requires strengthening legal frameworks, improving the MTI to ensure fairness, enhancing government investment, and exploring diversified funding sources such as public-private partnerships and alumni contributions. Without such reforms, the country risks entrenching financial instability in its higher education sector, limiting opportunities for students, and undermining national development objectives.

References:

Jijuze Impact of Kenya’s Court Decision on University Funding

The Standard Court of Appeal suspends ruling on university funding model

Kenya News Agency Govt reaffirms commitment to new varsity funding model

All Africa Kenya: COA Temporarily Allows Impementation of New University Funding Model


Impact of Kenya’s Court Decision on University Funding

Posted on by

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.  

A Report by Citizen Digital

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