Executive Snapshot
Core Diagnosis
The NELFUND tuition refund controversy is not an administrative backlog; it is a structural governance failure. Public funds disbursed for student welfare become trapped at the point of institutional receipt, because the Student Loans (Access to Higher Education) Act, 2024, created a disbursement vehicle without a corresponding enforcement mechanism. The accountability chain breaks in the gap between an institution receiving a duplicate payment and a student receiving their refund: NELFUND considers its obligation discharged, the institution faces no binding compulsion, and the student holds no direct claim against either party. That gap may run deeper than statute. Federal universities collect fees as Treasury Single Account-linked bodies, and reversing payments out of the TSA system is not the same operation as a private refund from working capital, a public financial management dimension this brief examines directly.
Governance Implications
Resolving the crisis requires restructuring the accountability chain linking federal disbursement, institutional receipt, and student benefit. South Africa’s experience with NSFAS shows that once a scheme suffers structural deficiencies in design, governance and implementation, incremental supervision does not fix it; structural reform does.
Key Data Points
· Over 1.5 million students have applied for or benefited from NELFUND support as of December 2025.
· ₦154.3 billion disbursed to 788,947 students across 262 institutions in the scheme’s first 19 months.
· 34 institutions are under joint NELFUND–EFCC investigation over unpaid tuition refunds.
· ₦927.98 million in unpaid upkeep allowances owed to 11,685 students, identified through a January 2026 reconciliation exercise.
· ₦71.2 billion of an initial ₦100 billion disbursement was flagged by the ICPC as diverted.
Strategic Context
NELFUND was established under the Student Loans (Access to Higher Education) Act, 2024,[1] to close Nigeria’s chronic higher-education financing gap, in a country whose education budget has persistently fallen short of UNESCO’s 15–20 per cent benchmark.[2] It was designed to disburse tuition and upkeep directly to institutions on students’ behalf, on the assumption that institutions would act as neutral pass-through agents rather than independent claimants on the funds.
Athena’s initial assessment of NELFUND, published within the scheme’s first year,[3] had already flagged the absence of a public transparency portal and regional disparities in loan distribution. Those warnings have since matured into the refund controversy this brief examines: a financing model that scaled rapidly without its oversight architecture keeping pace.
The stakes extend beyond individual delayed payments. Government-backed student finance depends on trust; if students believe duplicate payments go unrecovered or institutions can retain funds indefinitely, confidence in the entire scheme erodes, discouraging the access it was built to widen. NSFAS shows how quickly isolated administrative failures compound into a broader crisis of legitimacy.
How the NELFUND Tuition Disbursement Process Works
A student applies to NELFUND for a tuition loan. Universities generally require tuition payment before students can complete registration, access lectures, or sit examinations. Many students therefore pay fees before NELFUND approval to avoid losing an academic session. Because registration deadlines cannot wait for approval, many students pay tuition upfront. NELFUND later pays the same fee directly to the institution, which now holds two payments for one obligation and is expected to refund the student’s earlier payment.
It is at this handover, receipt by the institution, refund to the student, that the process breaks down. Reporting has documented institutions failing to notify students that funds were already received on their behalf, in some cases still demanding payment for fees settled on paper.[1] NELFUND’s Managing Director, Akintunde Sawyerr, has confirmed the Fund’s limited leverage here: “all we can do is to encourage the schools to refund to the students… we cannot force the money out of the schools.“[2]
The Accountability Chain and Its Breakpoint
The rest of this brief examines why that single handover point has become the weakest link in an otherwise well-intentioned financing chain.
Institutional Failure
A System Without Effective Enforcement
The failure is not disbursement, which is well-documented and procedurally routine. It occurs afterwards, once an institution has received a payment but before the student receives the benefit. No single body holds both the authority and the obligation to guarantee a timely refund. Three structural deficits compound the problem: no mandatory compliance mechanism, verification delegated to institutions whose incentives cut against prompt refunding, and no reconciliation framework aligning fee schedules with disbursement timelines. The Act empowered disbursement but granted no coercive authority over what recipients do with funds afterward. NELFUND’s own leadership has acknowledged this: it can only appeal to institutional goodwill, not compel repayment, a statement of design, not preference. The World Bank’s cross-country research on student-loan schemes finds the same pathology: government-run programmes struggle to pursue access and equity together once institutional incentives diverge, and equity is typically the casualty.[1] Self-verification compounds this further. Reporting has documented illegal deductions of ₦3,500 to ₦30,000 taken from students’ accounts after institutions had already received government funds, turning a safeguard into a point of capture.[2]
Evidence and Data
The Scale and Cost of the Breakdown
As of December 2025, NELFUND had received 1,265,509 applications and disbursed ₦154.3 billion to 788,947 students across 262 institutions.[1] Months earlier, the House of Representatives had confirmed ₦86.3 billion reaching 366,247 beneficiaries.[2] The population exposed to non-compliance is substantial and growing faster than oversight of it.
The consequences are concrete. A January 2026 reconciliation exercise found ₦927.98 million in unpaid upkeep owed to 11,685 students, funds government had released but which never reached beneficiaries, not necessarily through fraud but through breakdown at the point of receipt.[3] Comparable schemes elsewhere show the same pattern, traced to bureaucracies simultaneously overstretched and under-resourced.[4] Separately, the ICPC flagged ₦71.2 billion of an initial ₦100 billion as diverted, and NELFUND has denied applications from ten schools found to have raised fees by up to 900 per cent.[5]
The Public Financial Management Dimension
The statutory gap is not the whole story. Federal universities collect tuition as government MDAs under the Treasury Single Account regime, via the CBN’s e-Collection platform.[1] Reversing a payment out of a TSA-linked account is not the same operation as refunding from working capital; it typically requires internal reconciliation and further approval before funds move.
This is not theoretical: universities describe refunds as contingent on internal reconciliation,[2] and student guidance now names the TSA mechanism itself as a source of delay.[3] If this holds, the diagnosis broadens: The Act may lack not just enforcement power but adequate integration with Nigeria’s public finance architecture. No authoritative public account exists of what the Accountant-General actually requires for such refunds, or on what timeline, a silence this brief treats as a governance concern in its own right.
Political Economy
The Political Economy of Delay
The controversy persists because key actors benefit from the status quo. Institutions under fiscal pressure have an incentive to treat disbursements as a revenue stream rather than a strict pass-through; holding duplicate payments is free working capital, and delay costs students, not institutions. This gap between disbursement authority and enforcement power is the scheme’s single most consequential design flaw. A related weakness, the absence of centralised fee verification, left institutions submitting largely self-reported figures in the scheme’s early stages, figures NELFUND itself has admitted were sometimes arbitrary. The burden of challenging discrepancies falls on students, the party least equipped to navigate the dispute.
Comparative Lessons
What Nigeria Can Learn From Other Systems
NSFAS in South Africa suffered a parallel collapse, severe enough that the responsible minister placed it under administration in 2026. [1] Its response was structural: disbursing allowances directly to students and accredited providers, removing the intermediary layer. Kenya took a different structural route, merging HELB, the Universities Fund, the TVET Funding Board and the placement service into one Tertiary Education Funding Authority, on the logic that fragmentation was itself a source of weak accountability.[2] Neither country added supervisory layers to an unchanged structure; both removed intermediaries and clarified who is accountable for funds reaching students.
Policy Pathways
Reform Priorities
Each reform is stated as a concrete mechanism, paired with the constraint most likely to obstruct it, the institution best placed to lead it, and a realistic timeline.
1. Verify Disbursement Before Payments: NELFUND, with NIBSS, should route tuition disbursements through a verified confirmation step: once an institution confirms a student’s fee has already been paid, NELFUND releases payment to the institution only after the student authorises it via a BVN/NIN-linked confirmation. Tuition remains legally payable to institutions throughout; what changes is that disbursement is contingent on the student’s real-time acknowledgement that no duplicate payment is being created. 12–18 months, beginning with federal universities.
Binding constraint: Requires a reliable, deduplicated student identification and bank-verification layer across 270+ institutions before it can go live nationally, and institutions must adopt a standard confirmation interface rather than ad hoc self-reporting.
2. Create a Centralised Fee-Verification Database: The Ministry of Education, NUC and NBTE should build a public, annually updated fee registry against which NELFUND disburses only verified amounts. 6–12 months.
· Binding constraint: Institutions must be compelled to submit fee schedules on a fixed annual cycle; without a legal filing deadline, the registry will lag reality.
3. Give NELFUND Statutory Enforcement Powers: The National Assembly should amend the Act to let NELFUND suspend non-compliant institutions and recover duplicate payments. One legislative session.
· Binding constraint: expect coordinated resistance from institutions with a financial interest in delay; passage needs active committee sponsorship and Presidential backing.
4. Introduce Real-Time Reconciliation and 48-Hour Notification: NELFUND and NBTE should build an automated matching system, paired with a rule requiring written notice within 48 hours of receiving funds. 9–12 months.
· Binding constraint: Requires upfront technical investment and institutional capacity-building across hundreds of bursary departments with uneven digital readiness.
5. Publish a Public Finance Refund Protocol: The Accountant-General, with NELFUND and the Ministry of Education, should publish a circular setting out the exact refund procedure for TSA-linked accounts, with a maximum timeline. 3–6 months.
· Binding constraint: Requires the OAGF to extend a prescribed procedure to a scheme it does not directly fund, and to coordinate across at least three agencies with no existing joint protocol. Without clear Ministerial backing, the circular risks being issued but not enforced.
At a Glance: Five Immediate Reforms
NELFUND should phase in direct disbursement to verified student accounts. The Ministry of Education, NUC and NBTE should build a public fee registry. The National Assembly should amend the Act to give NELFUND enforcement authority. NELFUND should introduce real-time reconciliation and 48-hour notification. And because delays may also stem from how the TSA handles reverse payments, the Accountant-General should publish a clear refund procedure, so legislative reform is matched by equivalent clarity in the public finance system institutions actually operate within.
Conclusion
The Cost of Inaction
This controversy was not unforeseen. Athena’s initial assessment of NELFUND warned that weak transparency and thin institutional oversight left it exposed. This brief is that warning made real: institutions withholding funds not out of malice, but because nothing obliged them not to.
The point is not institutional credit. It is that early warnings, left unaddressed, do not correct themselves; they mature into the crisis analysts had already named. The reforms this brief prescribes are not new ideas: fewer intermediaries, centrally verified fees, statutory enforcement powers, a published public financial management procedure for refunds. What is new is the cost of continuing to wait. A known weakness, left unfixed, is not an implementation failure. It is a failure of accountability; one flagged in time to have been prevented. And the damage compounds quietly: every unresolved refund weakens confidence not simply in NELFUND, but in the wider principle of government-backed student finance.
Bibliography
Albrecht, Douglas, and Ziderman Adrian, “Student Loans: An Effective Instrument for Cost Recovery in Higher Education?” The World Bank Research Observer 8, no. 1 (1993) https://academic.oup.com/wbro/article-abstract/8/1/71/1661936
Athena Centre for Policy and Leadership, Assessing the Early Impact and Implementation of NELFUND: A Policy Brief, Athena Perspective Newsletter, February 2025, https://cms.athenacentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Athena-Perspective-NewsletterAssessing-The-Early-Impact-And-Implementation-Of-Nelfund-A-Policy-Brief.-.pdf.
Folasade Boriowo, “Nigeria: Probe NELFUND Disbursements,” Federal Ninistry of Education May 1, 2025, https://education.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/MINISTRY-PROBES-ALLEGED-ILLEGAL-DEDUCTIONS-FROM-STUDENTS-NELFund-BY-UNIVERSITIES.pdf
Inuwa Suleiman, “NANS NELFUND Tuition Refund: 2026 Student Guide to Paybacks,” https://www.androidpols.com.ng/2026/07/nans-nelfund-tuition-refund.html.
Mboto Harry Ivan, “KUCCPS, HELB and TVET Funding Board to Merge into Single Authority as Ruto Government Approves Reforms,” TUKO, February 10, 2026. https://www.tuko.co.ke/education/617539-kuccps-helb-tvet-funding-board-merge-single-authority-ruto-govt-approves/
Naidu Edwin, “NSFAS Placed under Administration amid Governance and Audit Collapse,” Mail & Guardian, May 4, 2026, https://mg.co.za/news/education/2026-05-04-nsfas-placed-under-administration-amid-governance-and-audit-collapse/
Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation, “Treasury Single Account – TSA/E-Collection,” https://oagf.gov.ng/initiative/treasury-single-account-tsa-e-collection/
Ogunshakin Nike, “What You Need to Know About NELFUND Reimbursements in UNILAG,” University of Lagos, May 22, 2025, https://unilag.edu.ng/what-you-need-to-know-about-nelfund-reimbursements-in-unilag/.
Okpale Favour, “NELFUND Disburses ₦154.3bn to 788,947 Students as Applications Hit 1.26 Million,” BusinessDay Nigeria, December 15, 2025, https://businessday.ng/education/article/nelfund-disburses-n154-3bn-to-788947-students-as-applications-hit-1-26-million/.
Ozibo Rozalia, “NELFUND Identifies ₦927.98 Million Unpaid Student Upkeep Arrears, Cites Technical Issues,” Nairametrics, January 14, 2026, https://nairametrics.com/2026/01/14/nelfund-identifies-n927-98-million-unpaid-student-upkeep-arrears-cites-technical-issues/
Ozibo Rozalia, “NELFUND Urges Institutions to Refund Students over Disbursement Delays,” Nairametrics, November 16, 2025, https://nairametrics.com/2025/05/28/reps-probe-nelfund-over-alleged-fraud-in-student-loan-disbursement-in-nigeria/
Sahara Reporters, “House of Representatives Reopens Probe of Tinubu’s Education Loan (NELFUND) over Alleged Infractions,” September 11, 2025, https://saharareporters.com/2025/09/11/house-reps-reopens-probe-tinubus-education-loan-nelfund-over-infractions.
State House, “In Detail: The Student Loan (Access to Higher Education) Act, 2024,” April 4, 2024, https://statehouse.gov.ng/in-detail-the-student-loan-access-to-higher-education-act-2024/.
Taiwo Kafilat, “Nigeria’s Education Budget Still Falls Short of UNESCO Benchmark in 2025,” Dataphyte, April 7, 2025, https://new.dataphyte.com/topic/education/nigerias-education-budget-still-falls-short-of-unesco-benchmark-in-2025.
UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2010: Reaching the Marginalized (Paris: UNESCO, 2010), https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000190223.locale=en.