- NEMIS access was to help ascertain the validity and veracity of data on the student population.
- The auditor said it was not possible for her to confirm whether schools received the Sh59 billion subsidy.
Image: EDUCATION MINISTRY TWITTER
The Education ministry is embroiled in a fresh scandal after failing to account for about Sh2 billion.
The money is in respect of government subsidies to primary, secondary schools and tertiary colleges.
The anomalies have been flagged by Auditor General Nancy Gathungu in her review of the Early Learning and Basic Education department’s accounts for the year ending June 2021.
The infractions, the audit reveals, were pointed out in disbursement to inexistent schools, inflation of student numbers and duplication of allocations putting the PS Julius Jwan-led department on the spot.
Most of the transactions were executed in the year 2020. Similar problems were captured in the 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 audit reports.
President Uhuru Kenyatta made changes in the ministry in February 2021 and named Jwan to take over from PS Belio Kipsang.
In the latest audit, it has emerged that the ministry did not provide data on the number of students per school at the time of the disbursement amid cases of inflation of student numbers.
At the same time, most schools did not raise an acknowledgement receipt as evidence of receipt of funds in the respective bank accounts.
There were incidents where money was disbursed to schools that had the same bank account numbers as well as duplicated payments.
Gathungu said it was not possible for her to confirm whether schools received the Sh59 billion subsidy for free secondary school, after no school raised an acknowledgement receipt.
Also queried is Sh137 million that was paid to 225 secondary schools, whose bank account numbers format differed significantly from those supported by the national banking system.
“There were no confirmation receipts from the benefiting schools. It was not possible to confirm whether the bank account numbers were correctly captured and concerned schools received the funds,” Gathungu said.
Also flagged was a disbursement of Sh834 million to 1,933 schools, which shared the same Teachers Service Commission school identification numbers.
The names of the schools and the referenced subcounties were different. “The management (ministry) did not explain the cause of the anomaly.”
Gathungu further decried that the ministry irregularly denied her access to the student enrollment data in the National Education Management Information System, following restrictions by management.
“The failure to grant access to the system contravenes Section 9(e)(i) of the Public Audit Act, 2015, which states that the auditor general or an officer authorised shall have unrestricted access to all books, records, returns, reports, electronic and documents of entities,” the auditor said.
The law also grants the auditor express access to any property or premises used or held by state organs or public entities that are subjected to audit.
“It was therefore not possible to validate the data used for disbursement of subsidies to schools,” Gathungu said in the report tabled in Parliament.
The audit unearthed that some Sh8.3 million was disbursed to schools that had the same bank account numbers, even though the names and subcounty of the schools were different, indicating an error in the transmission.
“The anomaly was not explained and there was no evidence of refunds provided to indicate the correction of the error,” the auditor general said.
Some Sh2.7 million was made to 12 primary schools that shared the same bank account numbers in the NEMIS system “implying there could have been duplication in disbursement.”
“No explanation for this discrepancy has been made,” Gathungu said, further flagging a variance of 438 pupils in respect of special needs schools that were paid Sh684 million.
In the said case, the enrolment data used reflected variances in the number of students used as a basis for the computation of the disbursement.
Also questioned is Sh305 million disbursed to foreign missions. No documentation was provided to support the transactions. Auditors were given an unsupported statement of expenditures of Sh261 million.
The audit also flagged disbursement of Sh394.7 million and Sh70.2 million to 32 primary teachers training colleges and four diploma teachers training colleges respectively.
“The colleges have not confirmed receipt of these transfers in any way. Further, no accountability statements for these transfers have been provided to confirm that the funds were applied for the intended purpose,” Gathungu said.
“The colleges have never prepared financial statements for audit as required by the Public Audit Act, 2015.”
Also queried was Sh638 million disbursed to secondary schools in October 2020.
The money was disbursed to some 3,808 schools in respect of operation account and 3,810 schools for tuition account.
“The basis of identification of the beneficiary schools was not supported by any documentation, in form of claims from the benefiting schools or evidenced by any duly approved management report.”
The ministry has been queried for failing to provide an exception report from the system, to indicate that the benefiting schools had not received the earlier disbursement.
“A sample of the schools included in the list had been included in the schools that had received their regular disbursement on time and therefore any payment was duplication,” the audit reads.
Payments to 31 schools, it emerged, were made to bank accounts whose format did not conform to the national banking system of coding.
None of the schools raised an acknowledgement receipt in the system. Schools are required to upload the receipts into the system.
The audit has also flagged the disbursement of Sh22.1 million paid to 82 secondary schools in the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands – each receiving Sh270,000.
Management said the money was meant to support needy students in the ASALs. However, no documentation was provided to support the basis of identification of the needy schools.
“Further, no policy guidelines or directives were provided to support the commitment and payment of these funds by the ministry. There was also no acknowledgement of receipt by the benefiting schools.”
(Edited by Bilha Makokha)