Executive Snapshot
Core Diagnosis
Nigeria has expanded access to education, with more than 40.1 million learners enrolled in public basic and secondary education. However, enrolment growth has outpaced the expansion of education system capacity, exposing weaknesses not only in classrooms, teachers and school infrastructure, but also in instructional capacity, institutional governance, data-driven planning and performance management. Unless investment strengthens both the physical and institutional foundations of the education system, learning outcomes will deteriorate, educational inequality will widen and Nigeria’s long-term human capital ambitions will remain out of reach.
Governance Implications
The capacity gap reveals more than constrained public financing. It also exposes weaknesses in long-term planning, infrastructure delivery, intergovernmental coordination and performance monitoring. The Digital Nigeria Education Management Information System (DNEMIS) provides an opportunity to shift from reactive investment decisions to evidence-based education planning. Realising that opportunity will require stronger institutional accountability, multi-year investment planning and performance-driven implementation across all tiers of government.
Key Data Points
40.1m – Learners enrolled in public basic and secondary schools
107, 042 – Public schools in Nigeria’s education system
60 – Learners per classroom
66 – Learners sharing each toilet facility
0.3% – Share of GDP allocated to public education
Policy Watchpoints
Over the next 24 months, success should be measured not simply by increases in enrolment but by improvements in system capacity. Four indicators merit close attention: annual growth in classrooms and school facilities; teacher recruitment and deployment aligned to enrolment trends; transition rates from primary to secondary education; and execution of education capital budgets. Together, these indicators will show whether Nigeria is strengthening the foundations of its education system or merely accommodating rising demand without improving learning conditions.
Strategic Context
When access expansion outpaces system capacity
Nigeria is home to one of the world’s largest school-age populations and continues to account for one of Africa’s largest populations of out-of-school children.[1] National education policy has rightly prioritised expanding access and increasing enrolment. Less attention, however, has been given to an equally important question: has the public education system expanded its capacity quickly enough to accommodate that growth?
This brief examines that question directly by placing Nigeria’s education indicators within their broader political and economic context rather than viewing them in isolation. It draws on the 2024/2025 Digital Nigeria Education Management Information System (DNEMIS)—the country’s most comprehensive national education dataset and an emerging governance infrastructure for education planning, resource allocation and performance monitoring—to assess whether the public education system has the institutional capacity to deliver quality education at the scale at which it now operates.
The evidence points to a systems capacity problem: infrastructure shortages, governance weaknesses and under-investment are constraining access to quality education and, with it, the country’s long-term development. Education system capacity is the ability of institutions to convert public investment into measurable learning outcomes through adequate infrastructure, qualified teachers, effective school leadership, reliable data systems and accountable governance.
Evidence and Data
The challenge is structural, not simply an enrolment problem
The 2024/2025 DNEMIS census shows that Nigeria’s education system now serves 40.1 million learners across primary, junior secondary, senior secondary, Islamiyya, Qur’anic and technical and vocational education institutions, underscoring the unprecedented scale of demand placed on public education.[2] Only 107,042 public schools serve this population, and the resulting pressure shows up consistently across the system:
● Roughly 60 students share a single classroom.
● 66 students share a single toilet.
● Infrastructure expansion has not kept pace with demographic growth.
Learner progression declines sharply beyond primary education. While approximately 29.1 million pupils are enrolled in primary schools, enrolment falls to 5.7 million in junior secondary and 4.3 million in senior secondary education. Such a steep decline is unlikely to be explained by household choice alone. Instead, it points to a system operating at its capacity limits, where constrained infrastructure, limited school places and uneven access increasingly restrict learners’ ability to progress through the education system.
Comparative Lessons
What regional peers reveal about sustained education investment
Investment in education is one of the foundations of sustained economic growth, higher labour productivity and long-term human capital development.[3] Yet Nigeria allocated just 0.3 per cent of GDP to public education in 2025—well below the level of investment seen in African peers that have achieved stronger education systems and better learning outcomes.[4] Every year that investment remains below regional benchmarks, the infrastructure gap compounds because enrolment growth consistently outpaces system expansion.
Algeria, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa and Tunisia all invest a substantially larger share of national income in education, translating sustained public investment into stronger education infrastructure, more capable institutions and higher levels of educational attainment.[5] Nigeria is not competing in isolation. It is competing with regional peers that have demonstrated the long-term returns of sustained investment in education through stronger institutions, better learning outcomes and more competitive workforces. Increasing education investment alone will not resolve Nigeria’s capacity crisis, but failing to narrow the investment gap will allow demand to continue outpacing infrastructure, further constraining the system’s ability to deliver quality education.
Institutional diagnosis
Governance weaknesses are deepening the capacity gap
Nigeria’s education capacity gap reflects three reinforcing failures: underinvestment, fragmented governance and weak execution. These weaknesses are compounded by the distribution of responsibilities across Nigeria’s federal system. The Federal Government sets national education policy, establishes minimum standards and provides intervention funding through agencies such as UBEC. State Governments carry primary responsibility for managing secondary education and share responsibility for basic education through State Universal Basic Education Boards (SUBEBs), while Local Governments, through Local Government Education Authorities (LGEAs), play a central role in administering primary schools. Without effective coordination across these institutions, planning, infrastructure delivery and performance monitoring become fragmented, limiting the system’s ability to respond to growing demand. These include inadequate long-term planning, delays in school construction, weak project oversight and the uneven distribution of schools across the country.[6]
Building the digital infrastructure for education accountability
A shared governance architecture requires a shared evidence base. DNEMIS provides the institutional platform through which the Federal Government, State Governments, SUBEBs and Local Government Education Authorities can plan infrastructure, monitor performance and coordinate investment using a common set of nationally verified indicators. Its strategic value therefore extends beyond data collection; it functions as national governance infrastructure that strengthens accountability, coordination and evidence-based decision-making across the education system.
While DNEMIS has significantly strengthened the availability of national education data, its long-term value will depend on how effectively it is embedded within state-level education management systems. The next phase of education reform should therefore support every State Government to develop integrated State School Management Information Systems that interface with DNEMIS, creating a seamless flow of information between Federal, State and Local Government institutions. To maximise their value, these systems should adopt common national data standards that ensure interoperability with DNEMIS, enabling seamless data exchange, consistent reporting and coordinated decision-making across the federation. This would establish a connected national digital public infrastructure for education rather than 36 separate state information systems operating in isolation.
Rather than relying primarily on periodic school census exercises, these systems should progressively generate real-time management information on teacher deployment, teacher qualifications and registration, pupil–teacher ratios, classroom utilisation, learner attendance, continuous assessment performance, BECE outcomes, SSCE performance, JAMB performance, transition rates, completion rates and learning outcomes. Together, these systems would transform DNEMIS from a national data repository into a fully integrated governance platform capable of supporting continuous planning, performance management and accountability.
Although DNEMIS represents a major advance, national reporting remains at approximately 57 per cent, limiting the completeness of the evidence available for decision-making. Increasing reporting coverage alone will not be sufficient. As DNEMIS expands, improvements in reporting must be accompanied by stronger data quality assurance, independent verification and periodic data audits to maintain confidence in national education statistics. Reliable, timely and comparable data are essential for effective planning, resource allocation and performance monitoring. Strengthening data quality will therefore ensure that education policies are guided by trustworthy evidence rather than incomplete or inconsistent information. Improving reporting coverage and ensuring that education data are routinely used to guide policy, resource allocation and school improvement will be essential if DNEMIS is to realise its full governance potential.
Physical infrastructure alone does not determine education system performance. The effectiveness of new investment ultimately depends on whether schools are staffed with qualified teachers, led by capable instructional leaders and supported by strong systems for curriculum delivery, assessment and continuous professional development. Persistent imbalances in teacher deployment, variations in teacher quality and limited use of learning outcome data reduce the return on infrastructure investment, particularly in underserved communities. Strengthening instructional capacity must therefore complement infrastructure expansion if increased access is to translate into improved learning achievement.
The effects of these institutional weaknesses are not evenly distributed. They disproportionately affect children from low-income households, who rely primarily on the public education system. When public schools lack the capacity to absorb demand, families either incur the higher costs of private education or withdraw their children from school altogether. The result is wider educational inequality, reduced social mobility and a persistent cycle of unequal opportunity.[7] Education system capacity extends beyond classrooms, teachers and physical infrastructure. It also depends on institutional capability, instructional quality, school leadership, integrated data systems, effective governance, accountability and the ability to improve learning outcomes. Strengthening these capabilities is essential to translating greater access into sustained improvements in education performance.
Political Economy
Why the capacity gap has persisted across administrations
Nigeria’s education capacity gap reveals more than limited public resources; it is also shaped by the political economy of education investment. For decades, infrastructure development has been driven largely by annual budget cycles rather than multi-year capital planning, leaving school expansion vulnerable to shifting political priorities, fiscal constraints and electoral cycles. Although the Federal Government provides national policy direction and intervention funding, responsibility for implementation is shared with State Governments and Local Government Education Authorities. In practice, weak coordination across these institutions has often delayed infrastructure delivery, weakened accountability and reduced the effectiveness of public investment. As a result, enrolment has expanded more rapidly than system capacity, with investment decisions frequently favouring short-term recurrent expenditure over long-term infrastructure development. Fiscal pressures, rising debt-servicing obligations and competing spending priorities have further constrained sustained investment in classrooms, sanitation facilities and teacher recruitment. The consequence is a structural capacity deficit that has deepened over time, with each administration inheriting infrastructure shortfalls that exceed the pace of expansion. Without reforms that strengthen multi-year investment planning, improve institutional accountability and embed DNEMIS at the centre of evidence-based decision-making, Nigeria is unlikely to close its education capacity gap, regardless of future gains in enrolment.
Why education capacity is an economic growth issue
Investment in education is one of the most important drivers of a country’s long-term human capital development and economic prosperity.[8] Persistent deficits in public education infrastructure constrain the development of human capital and limit the economy’s productive potential. By reducing workforce productivity and slowing innovation, they weaken long-term economic growth well beyond the education sector.[9]
The effects extend beyond the education system to household finances. Where public schools cannot meet demand, families are often compelled to pay for private education. For lower-income households, these additional costs can delay enrolment, increase the risk of children leaving school and divert limited household resources from healthcare and other essential needs.[10] Without decisive action, these capacity constraints will continue to weaken labour productivity, widen educational inequality, increase youth unemployment and erode Nigeria’s long-term economic competitiveness. Education governance must increasingly shift from measuring inputs to evaluating outcomes. DNEMIS creates the opportunity to systematically identify which schools, teachers, Local Governments and interventions deliver stronger learning outcomes, improve literacy and numeracy, raise transition rates and consistently perform well in BECE, SSCE and JAMB examinations, enabling more effective evidence-based decision-making.
Areas for Reform
A roadmap for rebuilding education system capacity
Because responsibility for education is shared across all three tiers of government, effective implementation will depend on clearly defined institutional roles, coordinated planning and mutual accountability.
1. National Education Capacity Expansion Framework
Lead Institution: Federal Ministry of Education (Within 12 months)
Develop and adopt a National Education Capacity Expansion Framework anchored in the Digital Nigeria Education Management Information System (DNEMIS) and the National Policy on Education. Use annual school census data to identify infrastructure gaps, set measurable annual expansion targets and prioritise underserved Local Government Areas. The Federal Ministry of Education should monitor implementation through annual DNEMIS performance reviews and reporting to the Federal Executive Council, linking infrastructure investment to verified education data and publicly reported performance indicators rather than discretionary project allocations.
2. Multi-year Education Infrastructure Financing
Lead Institution: Federal and State Governments (2027 Budget Cycle)
Increase capital investment in classrooms, sanitation facilities and learning infrastructure through the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), Annual Appropriation Acts and Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) intervention funds. Protect education infrastructure spending through legally backed multi-year capital commitments to improve continuity and delivery. The Federal Ministry of Finance, Budget and National Planning, in collaboration with the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly, should monitor implementation through annual budget execution reports and expenditure audits, ensuring infrastructure investment is sustained beyond annual budget cycles and aligned with long-term education capacity priorities.
3. Infrastructure Performance Scorecards
Lead Institution: Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) and State Universal Basic Education Boards (SUBEBs) (Within 18 months)
Institutionalise annual School Infrastructure Performance Scorecards using UBEC monitoring frameworks and DNEMIS data to assess classroom availability, sanitation facilities, teacher deployment, school utilisation and infrastructure maintenance across all states. UBEC should use the results to guide performance-based disbursement of intervention grants, supported by independent verification and public reporting, ensuring that funding decisions are linked to measurable infrastructure performance and strengthened accountability.
Beyond strengthening infrastructure planning, education governance should progressively adopt integrated performance management. State education management systems linked to DNEMIS should support annual learning outcome dashboards, school performance scorecards combining infrastructure and student achievement, teacher and principal performance monitoring, and publicly reported state education performance to strengthen accountability and continuous improvement.
4. State School Management Information Systems
Lead Institutions: State Ministries of Education, SUBEBs, TESCOMs and PPSMBs (Within 24 months)
Develop integrated State School Management Information Systems that interface with DNEMIS to capture real-time school-level information on teacher attendance, learner attendance, classroom utilisation, assessment performance, school leadership and learning outcomes. States should also improve DNEMIS reporting coverage beyond the current 57 per cent and use verified data to strengthen planning, performance management and continuous improvement across basic and secondary education.
5. Data-driven Teacher Deployment
Lead Institution: Teachers Registration Council of Nigeria (TRCN), State Ministries of Education, State Universal Basic Education Boards (SUBEBs), Teaching Service Commissions (TESCOMs) and Post Primary School Management Boards (PPSMBs) (Within 2 years)
Implement evidence-based teacher workforce planning using DNEMIS and integrated state education management systems to align teacher deployment, recruitment, instructional leadership and professional development with learner demand. SUBEBs should oversee basic education, while TESCOMs and PPSMBs should coordinate teacher deployment, principal development and instructional quality in secondary schools through annual workforce audits and school performance reviews.
6. National School WASH Standards
Lead Institution: Federal Ministry of Education and Development Partners (Within 24 months)
Adopt and enforce National Minimum Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) Standards through the National School Quality Assurance Framework and the National School Health Policy, requiring all public schools to meet minimum sanitation and hygiene benchmarks. The Federal Ministry of Education, through the Federal Inspectorate Service, should incorporate WASH compliance into annual school quality assurance inspections and school accreditation processes, ensuring that adherence to minimum standards becomes a prerequisite for quality assurance, stronger accountability and sustained improvements in school infrastructure.
7. Targeted Support for Vulnerable Learners
Lead Institution: Federal Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and State Governments (Within 2 years)
Expand school feeding programmes, conditional cash transfers, scholarships and other education support schemes through the National Social Investment Programme (NSIP) and state social protection initiatives to improve school retention among vulnerable learners. The Federal Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs and Poverty Reduction, working with State Governments and the Federal Ministry of Education, should use the National Social Register and DNEMIS enrolment data to identify eligible beneficiaries, monitor attendance and link social protection benefits to verified school participation and learning outcomes.
8. National Framework for Learning Improvement
Lead Institution: Federal Ministry of Education, State Ministries of Education, Teaching Service Commissions (TESCOM) and SUBEBs (Within 24 months)
Develop and implement a National Learning Improvement Framework to strengthen instructional quality through continuous teacher professional development, instructional leadership, classroom observation, literacy and numeracy improvement, school improvement planning and principal development. The Federal Ministry of Education should establish national standards, while States, TESCOM and SUBEBs monitor implementation through annual school quality reviews and learning outcome assessments, ensuring that improvements in infrastructure are matched by measurable gains in teaching effectiveness and student achievement.
Conclusion
From reactive planning to evidence-based reform
Nigeria’s education challenge is no longer defined solely by access; it is increasingly one of system capacity. Expanding enrolment remains essential, but lasting improvements in learning outcomes will depend on whether investment in infrastructure, institutional capability, teacher deployment and public accountability keeps pace with rising demand. The evidence presented in this brief shows that the country’s education constraints are structural rather than temporary, requiring coordinated action across all levels of government to strengthen both the physical and institutional foundations of the education system. Closing these capacity gaps is therefore not simply an education imperative—it is a strategic investment in human capital, inclusive economic growth, social mobility and Nigeria’s long-term competitiveness.
DNEMIS provides Nigeria with more than a credible evidence base; it provides the governance infrastructure needed to coordinate planning, target investment and strengthen accountability across the education system. By giving Federal, State and Local Governments access to a common platform for monitoring performance and identifying infrastructure gaps, it creates the institutional foundation for moving from reactive planning to deliberate, evidence-based delivery. Combined with sustained investment, stronger institutions and greater accountability, it can enable a public education system that is better equipped to meet rising demand and strengthen the country’s human capital.
Nigeria has already taken an important first step by establishing DNEMIS and making the education system visible through a common national evidence base. The next challenge is to ensure that this visibility translates into better governance. Success will no longer be measured simply by rising enrolment or the number of classrooms constructed. It will be measured by whether Federal, State and Local Governments can use evidence to strengthen planning, improve teaching, support school leadership and deliver better learning outcomes for every child. That is the true measure of a high-performing education system.
Bibliography
Angrist, Noam, Simeon Djankov, Pinelopi K. Goldberg, and Harry A. Patrinos. “Measuring Human Capital Using Global Learning Data.” Nature 592, no. 7854 (2021): 403–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03323-7.
Gregory, Duyile, and Deborah Jegede. “Educational Planning in Nigeria: Problems and the Ways Forward.” Central Asian Journal of Literature, Philosophy and Culture 2, no. 2 (2021): 41–48. https://doi.org/10.51699/CAJLPC.V2I2.67.
Keji, Solomon A. “Human Capital and Economic Growth in Nigeria.” Future Business Journal 7, no. 1 (2021): 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/S43093-021-00095-4.
Nigeria Federal Ministry of Education. “Nigeria Education Statistics 2024 — Annual School Census.” July 10, 2026. https://emis.education.gov.ng/portal/.
Ojuolape, Adekunle M., and Sarina Mohd. “Determinants of Child Schooling in Kwara State, North Central Nigeria.” Cogent Social Sciences 10, no. 1 (2024): 2319377. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2319377.
World Bank Group. (2026, July 19). Government expenditure on education, total (% of GDP) – Nigeria | Data.https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GD.ZS?locations=NG