Governments have money recorded for basic education, yet pupils still face damaged buildings, overcrowding and incomplete projects. A newer UBEC disclosure raises the national figure for unused released intervention funds to about ₦267bn, but states still owe the public a school-by-school account of what went wrong.
The question confronting Nigeria’s education authorities is brutally simple: if billions of naira have already been released to improve basic education, why are pupils still learning in deteriorating classrooms?
A UBEC report recorded ₦264.12bn in unspent matching grants as of 21 July 2025. By August 2026, the commission was reporting approximately ₦267bn in previously released intervention funds still unutilised, alongside more than ₦65bn in counterpart funding yet to be accessed.
Those figures do not prove that money was stolen. They do demand a more exacting test of government performance: which schools were meant to benefit, what was delivered, what remains unfinished and who is responsible for getting the work done?
The state-by-state figures reveal the scale of the problem. Benue recorded the largest reported balance at ₦19.18bn, followed by Imo with ₦14.12bn, Osun with ₦14.02bn, Kwara with ₦13.99bn and Delta with ₦13.40bn.
Together, the five states accounted for ₦74.72bn, or about 28.3 per cent of the reported total.
The figures are particularly troubling because they sit alongside accounts of damaged classrooms, overcrowded learning spaces, missing furniture and stalled renovations. In parts of Benue and Kwara, communities have continued to raise concerns about school buildings that require urgent intervention.
A later disclosure by UBEC in August 2026 added another dimension to the crisis. The commission said approximately ₦267bn in previously released intervention funds remained unutilised across the states, while more than ₦65bn in counterpart funding was yet to be accessed.
The two figures come from different reporting periods and are not accompanied by a comparable state-by-state reconciliation in the material reviewed. They should not be interpreted as proof that the same pool of money increased from ₦264.12bn to ₦267bn.
The central issue, nevertheless, remains clear: releasing education funds does not guarantee that children receive better schools.
The money, the classrooms and the unanswered questions
The 2025 figures indicate that substantial balances remained unspent in every geopolitical zone.
Beyond the five states with the largest reported amounts, Borno held ₦13.20bn, Anambra ₦12.67bn, Kano ₦12.15bn, Adamawa ₦11.38bn and Gombe ₦11.09bn. All 10 states had reported unutilised balances exceeding ₦11bn each.
The distribution challenges any suggestion that the problem is confined to a particular region or a small number of administrations.
In the South-South, Delta recorded ₦13.40bn, while Akwa Ibom had ₦8.09bn. Rivers had a reported balance of ₦329.28m.
In the North-East, Borno, Adamawa and Gombe recorded the three largest balances, while Taraba had ₦168.48m. Bauchi’s reported balance was ₦825.99m.
The South-West figures placed Osun at the top, followed by Ekiti with ₦8.40bn. Lagos had a reported balance of ₦1.85bn.
These figures do not establish the current cash balances in the various states. They describe the position recorded during UBEC’s monitoring exercise on 21 July 2025.
Nor does the annual report, as described in the published account, identify how much of each state’s balance related to particular schools, approved projects, contracts or outstanding implementation obligations.
That missing project-level information is central to accountability.
A state may have legitimate reasons for delaying a project, including procurement requirements, security challenges, incomplete documentation or the need to revise an approved action plan. But without documentary evidence, the public cannot determine whether a delay is justified, whether officials failed to act or whether a project has been abandoned.
The critical questions are therefore specific. Which schools were supposed to benefit? When were the funds released? Were contractors appointed? Were projects started? What milestones were missed? How much money remains available after accounting for valid commitments and actual expenditure?
The reported balances do not, on their own, establish theft or diversion. They do establish the need for clear answers about money earmarked for an essential public service.
Nigeria’s classroom deficit exposes the cost of delay
The condition of the education system makes the figures more consequential.
The Federal Ministry of Education’s Nigeria Education Statistics 2024 portal reports 39.8 million learners, 1,185,610 teachers and 725,778 classrooms. Its national learner-to-classroom ratio stands at 60.1, against a benchmark of 35 learners per classroom.
That represents a substantial gap between the reported national position and the standard set for basic education.
The data must be interpreted carefully. The portal records information from 124,066 of 230,844 listed schools, a reporting rate of 53.7 per cent. The figures therefore do not constitute a complete census of every school in Nigeria.
Even with that limitation, the reported classroom ratio reinforces concerns about the adequacy of learning facilities.
Depending on approved state action plans and identified needs, UBEC intervention funds can support classroom construction and rehabilitation, desks, instructional materials, sanitation facilities and teacher development.
The exact number of classrooms that could be completed using the reported balances cannot be responsibly calculated without reliable project specifications, local construction costs, procurement records and expenditure breakdowns.
Such a calculation is not necessary to identify the governance problem. A substantial volume of education money was reported as unspent while schools faced documented shortages.
The test of public spending should be whether it produces functional classrooms, safe buildings, adequate learning materials and better teaching conditions, rather than simply whether money has been allocated or released.
Benue: ₦19.18bn reported unspent as school buildings deteriorate
Benue recorded the highest unspent matching-grant balance in the 2025 snapshot, at ₦19.18bn.
The figure has drawn attention because parts of the state have endured insecurity, displacement and damage to public infrastructure. Community representatives have cited attacks on communities as a factor behind the destruction of some school buildings.
A political office holder who spoke to The PUNCH on condition of anonymity questioned why the reported funds had not been used to rehabilitate damaged schools.
“Benue State has suffered a lot from Fulani herdsmen attacks, and several schools were destroyed in the process. My concern is, if the state government has this amount of money, why is it difficult to channel it towards renovating or rebuilding our schools?” the source asked.
The description of responsibility for the attacks is the source’s allegation; it does not independently establish the circumstances surrounding the destruction of each school.
A local government chairman from Benue North-East Senatorial District offered a different explanation. He disputed the implication that the reported balance demonstrated wrongdoing and claimed that the money was linked to a World Bank-assisted education programme awaiting project templates.
“It’s not an issue of corruption. The fund is a World Bank-assisted programme, and it is not peculiar to Benue alone. The World Bank is yet to release the funds because it is waiting for templates upon which the money is going to be spent,” he said.
The chairman also said he had heard that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission was investigating the matter.
“Though, we heard that the EFCC is investigating the issue,” he said.
No independently verified information in the material reviewed establishes the status or outcome of such an investigation.
The chairman’s explanation also raises a material discrepancy. UBEC’s reported position was that the funds had already been disbursed and remained unspent in state government accounts. The claim that the money was awaiting release by the World Bank does not, without further documentary explanation, reconcile with that account.
Resolving the discrepancy requires the state government and the relevant education authorities to publish the funding arrangements, account statements, project approvals and correspondence governing the grants.
The condition of individual schools makes the need for that information more urgent.
A report by an online media organisation, citing civic technology organisation MonITNG, said RCM Primary School in Adikpo, Mayange Mbayan, Ushongo Local Government Area, had been abandoned since 2023 despite residents’ reported appeals for renovation.
“Behind these broken walls are innocent children with dreams, ambitions and a future worth fighting for,” MonITNG was quoted as saying.
Pupils at LGA Primary School, Nbegha, in Buruku Local Government Area, have also reportedly continued learning in difficult conditions more than eight years after a windstorm damaged parts of the building.
These examples do not prove that particular UBEC funds were allocated to either school. They illustrate the gap between the infrastructure needs identified in communities and the lack of publicly established links between reported funding balances and completed projects.
The Benue Commissioner for Education, Dr Margaret Adamu, did not respond to calls seeking comment, according to the source report. The state SUBEB executive secretary, Dr Grace Adagba, also did not respond to subsequent enquiries.
Osun’s funding dilemma complicates the picture
Osun recorded the third-largest balance in the 2025 snapshot, at ₦14.02bn. Its government, though, has pointed to financial constraints affecting its ability to access additional UBEC matching grants.
The state’s Commissioner for Education, Dipo Eluwole, said Governor Ademola Adeleke’s administration had cleared outstanding counterpart-funding obligations covering five years after taking office in 2022.
“When Governor Ademola Adeleke assumed office, the last time counterpart funds were paid for Osun State to access UBEC funds was in 2018. On assumption of office, he went to the Universal Basic Education Commission, collected the data and offset the funds for 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023. He paid them off,” Eluwole said.
He said the government subsequently faced difficulty raising the required contribution for new grants, which he put at ₦3.5bn in the previous year and about ₦2.7bn in the current year.
The commissioner attributed the financial pressure partly to local government allocations that, he alleged, had been withheld since February 2025, as well as deductions connected to inherited debts and competing government obligations.
“Counterpart fund for UBEC is supposed to be paid from the local government funds, and the funds have not come,” he said.
He also described difficulties meeting commitments to public services, including a School for Persons Living with Disabilities, whose reopening had been delayed by outstanding payments to suppliers responsible for food and upkeep.
“The money for their feeding and upkeep per term is N46m, and we owe the suppliers for three terms. They refused to supply unless we pay. That is why their resumption was delayed. We can’t put them in the hostel without feeding them,” Eluwole said.
The account presents a serious funding challenge, but it does not settle the question posed by the UBEC figures.
Failure to provide counterpart funding for a new grant is different from failure to spend money already disbursed. Osun’s explanation for its difficulty accessing additional funds does not, by itself, establish the status or explain the historical origin of the ₦14.02bn reported as unutilised in July 2025.
To account for the full position, the government would need to disclose the dates and amounts of previous releases, the projects attached to them, expenditure to date and the remaining balances.
Its explanation should also be assessed alongside the records of the relevant local government funding arrangements.
Kwara disputes UBEC’s figure as schools struggle
Kwara recorded ₦13.99bn in unspent matching grants, placing it fourth among the states with the largest reported balances.
The figure contrasts with conditions documented at some public schools in the state.
At Warah Community Junior Secondary School in Ilorin West Local Government Area, a report published by The PUNCH in March described collapsed classroom ceilings, broken windows, peeling paint and deteriorating wooden supports.
Pupils reportedly learnt in overcrowded classrooms and makeshift shelters built by community members. Some sat on bare floors because of shortages of classrooms and furniture.
At Government Day Secondary School in Lafiagi, in Kwara North, photographs obtained by the newspaper reportedly showed dilapidated classrooms in the basic education section and a staff room without a ceiling, fan or windows.
Renovation work on senior classroom blocks and an examination hall was also reported to have remained incomplete after beginning in 2025.
The circumstances at those schools do not establish that the UBEC balances were earmarked for them. They do sharpen the question of how state education authorities determine project priorities and how the public can track the money intended to address them.
Kwara State Universal Basic Education Board Chairman Raheem Adaramaja disputed the reported figure when contacted.
“I don’t know the source. However, it is not true,” he said.
Asked for the state’s current balance or records showing the amount available and its utilisation, he replied, “We don’t have delay utilisation of funds,” but did not provide an alternative figure or supporting documentation in the account.
The discrepancy remains unresolved.
In 2022, Adaramaja said the state government had inherited more than 2,000 dilapidated school structures and paid ₦7.1bn in counterpart funding for the 2014–2019 period to access UBEC matching grants.
“The new administration paid a whopping N7.1bn counterpart funds for years 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019 to access the UBEC matching grants for those years,” he said at the time.
That historical statement does not explain the later reported balance or establish how much of the grants accessed under the earlier arrangement was spent on completed projects.
Kwara’s education authorities therefore face two distinct accountability tasks: reconcile the disputed balance with UBEC’s records and provide verifiable evidence of how released funds have translated into school improvements.
How the UBEC matching-grant system works
The Universal Basic Education Commission administers federal intervention funding intended to support primary and junior secondary education, with state governments and education boards responsible for implementation.
Under the matching-grant arrangement, a state generally must contribute at least 50 per cent of the relevant project cost and meet the applicable approval and documentation requirements before qualifying for the federal contribution.
The arrangement is designed to make states share responsibility for financing basic education rather than depend solely on federal transfers.
This creates two related but separate problems.
The first is access. States that fail to provide the required counterpart funding or satisfy other conditions may be unable to obtain additional matching grants.
The second is utilisation. Funds that have already been released may remain unspent because projects have not progressed, approved plans are incomplete, procurement has stalled or implementation has failed.
The ₦65bn-plus reported as counterpart funding still unaccessed in August 2026 belongs to the first category. The roughly ₦267bn in previously released intervention funds described by UBEC belongs to the second.
The distinction matters. A policy response that concentrates only on helping states access fresh grants will not resolve the problem of money already released but not used.
UBEC has previously identified slow utilisation, non-compliance with fund-use guidelines, alleged diversion, tax-remittance failures, procurement irregularities and departures from approved action plans among the management problems encountered at state level.
These concerns do not establish that any particular state or official diverted the funds under review. They identify risks that monitoring and financial disclosure should address.
In August 2026, UBEC also announced the development of a digital Basic Education Action Plan Management System intended to streamline the preparation and submission of state action plans and reduce administrative delays.
The system could help improve coordination and planning. Its effectiveness will depend on whether better documentation translates into timely implementation, transparent procurement and verifiable improvements at school level.
The legal duty to provide basic education
The Free, Compulsory Universal Basic Education Act 2004 provides that every government in Nigeria must provide free, compulsory and universal basic education for every child of primary and junior secondary school age.
The law also establishes the financing structure for the programme, including the requirement for states to contribute not less than 50 per cent of the total project cost to qualify for the federal block grant.
The legal obligation was reinforced by a Federal High Court judgment delivered by Justice Daniel Osiagor on 9 October 2025 in a case brought by human rights lawyer Femi Falana and Hauwa Mustapha. The judgment was publicly reported on 28 November 2025.
The court held that the Federal Government, the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory have a statutory obligation to provide free, compulsory and universal basic education.
Falana has criticised the failure to deploy education funds and called on governors to utilise released intervention money while meeting the requirements for accessing counterpart grants.
His argument places the debate beyond financial administration. Public education is a statutory responsibility, and the consequences of delayed implementation fall on children whose access to safe and adequate schools depends on government delivery.
The practical question for public officials is no longer simply whether a funding scheme exists. It is whether the scheme is being implemented in a way that fulfils the obligations set out in law.
What governments must disclose
The size of the reported balances calls for a transparent, independently verifiable account of what happened to the money and what remains to be done.
Each state government and SUBEB should publish a reconciliation covering the date and amount of every relevant release, the administration that received or inherited the funds, approved projects, procurement decisions, contractors, expenditure, outstanding commitments and the current balance.
The information should identify schools and locations rather than rely on broad statements about education spending. It should show which projects were completed, which remain unfinished, why deadlines were missed and whether funds were lawfully returned or reallocated.
Independent physical inspections would help establish whether the structures reported as completed exist, whether they meet the required specifications and whether pupils and teachers can use them.
UBEC, in turn, should publish a comparable, updated state-by-state account that distinguishes unspent released funds from unaccessed counterpart grants. It should explain any differences between earlier balances and later aggregate disclosures, while setting out the corrective measures and deadlines agreed with each state.
Where the records show legitimate administrative delays, governments should explain how they will be resolved. Where contracts or financial transactions raise credible questions, the relevant oversight and investigative bodies should follow the evidence.
A financial balance alone cannot establish corruption. Equally, a denial or an assurance that funds are being managed properly cannot substitute for verifiable accounts.
The public should not have to choose between a government’s explanation and a disputed figure when the underlying records can settle the matter.
For children learning in damaged classrooms, the difference between money released and money spent is not an accounting technicality. It is the difference between an intervention announced in government records and a school improvement they can actually experience.
Until the states reconcile the figures, disclose the projects and demonstrate the results, billions intended to strengthen Nigeria’s basic education system will remain a measure of public spending that has yet to prove its value.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
Join the debate; let’s know your opinion.