Kenya's planned changes to university financing have sparked fresh concerns among education stakeholders, who warn that the proposed law could turn higher education into a heavier financial burden for students from poor families by making loans the main form of government assistance while leaving the future of scholarships uncertain.
The opposition centres on the Tertiary Education, Placement and Funding Bill, 2026, which seeks to overhaul the management of student financing and placement in universities and technical training institutions.
The proposed legislation is currently undergoing public participation organised by the National Assembly Education Committee, with unions and other stakeholders seeking changes to several provisions before it can be enacted.
One of the biggest concerns is the proposed establishment of the Tertiary Education Funding Authority (TEFA), which will take over responsibilities currently shared by the Higher Education Loans Board (Helb), the Universities Fund and the Tvet Funding Board.
The Bill proposes two central bodies to manage the system: the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Service, which will handle student placement, and TEFA, which will oversee financing.
However, stakeholders are questioning the decision to limit the proposed authority's funding mandate largely to education loans, warning that the arrangement could disadvantage learners who cannot afford to repay money borrowed to finance their studies.
Their concerns are particularly directed at Clause 44, which defines the purpose of the proposed fund as providing education loans, without expressly providing for scholarships and grants.
"The purpose of the fund shall be to provide funds to be granted as education loans under this Act," reads Clause 44 of the Bill.
The provision has drawn criticism from the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet), which wants the government to retain different forms of financial assistance depending on students' economic circumstances and the cost of their courses.
"Our proposal is that it should be amended to include full government funding to eligible students and trainees in form of grants, scholarships and or loans according to the need and nature of the cost," reads a proposal from the Kenya Union of Post Primary Education Teachers (Kuppet).
The union has pointed out that an earlier version of the legislation prepared by the Ministry of Education recognised both loans and scholarships as sources of support for eligible students.
However, the version subsequently published for public participation removed the express reference to scholarships, leaving education loans as the stated purpose of the fund.
Stakeholders fear this could force students from low-income households to borrow more money to complete their education, increasing the amount they owe by the time they graduate.
Under the current funding arrangement, students placed in the neediest category receive scholarships covering 70 per cent of their degree programme costs.
The Presidential Working Party on Education Reforms had recommended that vulnerable students receive 82 per cent in government support, while those considered extremely needy should receive 70 per cent.
The recommendations also stated that households in both categories should not be required to contribute towards the cost of education.
Education stakeholders now fear that the proposed law could weaken the protection previously recommended for disadvantaged learners if scholarships are not clearly included in the funding framework.
They argue that an arrangement dominated by loans would make it harder for students from poor backgrounds to pursue higher education without accumulating debts they may struggle to repay after leaving university.
The concerns have also been linked to constitutional guarantees on education, with stakeholders warning that the proposed funding structure could be inconsistent with Article 55 (a) of the Constitution on access to education and Article 20 (5) (b).
Apart from the scholarship question, Kuppet has challenged Clause 48, saying it fails to provide sufficient details on how the new financing system will work for students joining institutions as well as those already receiving government assistance.
The clause requires learners seeking financial support to apply to TEFA after gaining admission to a tertiary institution.
"On admission to a tertiary institution, a student or a trainee wishing to be funded shall apply to the Authority for the grant of an education loan," reads Clause 48 of the Bill.
The authority will be required to assess each application and notify the applicant of its decision within a period that will be prescribed.
However, the union says the proposed provision does not adequately explain the eligibility requirements for new applicants or what will happen to students who are already enrolled and receiving funding under the existing system.
This has raised fears that continuing beneficiaries could face uncertainty over whether their current support will be maintained, changed or discontinued once the new framework is introduced.
The Universities' Academic Staff Union (Uasu) has also called for major changes to the legislation, warning that Parliament should not pass it without addressing wider concerns surrounding the financing of public universities.
The union argues that the proposed law concentrates on individual student financing but does not provide a comprehensive framework for meeting the financial needs of public institutions.
"The Bill is principally a student financing statute. It should not be interpreted as a complete law on the financing of public universities. Parliament should make this boundary explicit," Vasu said.
Uasu wants Parliament to make substantive amendments to the Bill to address the funding and long-term sustainability of public universities, arguing that student loans alone cannot resolve the financial challenges facing the institutions.
The proposed repayment system has also attracted criticism, particularly the requirement that graduates begin repaying their loans within one year of completing their studies.
The Bill further proposes that deductions from borrowers' salaries should not exceed 25 per cent of their emoluments.
However, the unions want the legislation to recognise that completing university does not automatically mean a graduate has secured employment or a stable income.
They have called for a distinction between the completion of studies and the start of gainful employment, alongside a grace period for graduates who are unemployed or underemployed.
Stakeholders argue that requiring repayment without considering a graduate's employment status could place additional pressure on young people struggling to establish themselves financially after leaving university.
The submissions have placed several provisions of the proposed law under scrutiny, with education stakeholders calling for Parliament to address the gaps before introducing a new system that will determine how thousands of students access financial support for higher education.