Bursaries scandal: Auditor flags irregularities in funds for needy students

Millions of shillings allocated for county bursaries to support needy students may be vanishing into the pockets of unscrupulous officials, newly released audit reports reveal.

The reports by Auditor General Nancy Gathungu expose widespread manipulation of bursary schemes across several counties, including inflated beneficiary lists, duplicated admission numbers, undocumented disbursements and extensive flouting of bursary laws and procedures.

The findings raise fresh concerns about graft within the devolved units and cast doubt on whether bursary funds—established to keep vulnerable learners in school—are reaching the intended beneficiaries.

The reports for the financial year ending June 30, 2025, were tabled in the Senate last week before Parliament went on recess.

Counties created bursary funds to complement allocations under the National Government Constituency Development Fund and cushion thousands of students at risk of dropping out.

But the Auditor General’s latest assessment shows systemic weaknesses, poor oversight and in some cases deliberate manipulation possibly to siphon public funds.

In Trans Nzoia, the County Elimu Bursary Fund was singled out for serious irregularities.

The auditor found that the fund disbursed Sh35.92 million to secondary schools during a period when the bursary board did not sit at all.

Even more troubling was the revelation that the board had not been gazetted, contrary to Section 12(4) of the Trans Nzoia County Elimu Bursary Act, 2014, which requires the county executive member for education to publish board members' names in the county gazette.

The county also failed to provide priority lists submitted from villages to ward bursary committees, raising doubts about the transparency of the selection process.

Additionally, the fund ignored its own guidelines requiring that five per cent of bursary allocations go to learners with disabilities and at least 30 per cent to students in vocational training institutions.

Samburu county recorded some of the most glaring anomalies.

In addition to unsupported bursary transfers and irregular allocations, the auditor flagged unsupported withdrawals, questionable scholarship grants and excessive administrative spending.

Many discrepancies highlighted in the previous year’s audit remain unresolved.

During the year under review, Samburu irregularly disbursed Sh25.68 million.

The auditor found no minutes from county or ward bursary committee meetings, undermining the legitimacy of the disbursement process.

Several students with identical admission numbers and names received duplicate bursary allocations, leading to irregular double payments amounting to Sh1.81 million.

Further, bursaries totaling Sh517,700 were paid to 107 students who shared admission numbers but appeared as different individuals within the same institutions.

Another Sh105,000 disbursed to 11 students could not be authenticated because the applications lacked admission letters or student numbers.

The audit also noted that the county lacks a comprehensive database of beneficiaries and does not follow up on the academic progress of funded students.

In West Pokot, hundreds of needy students missed out after the county failed to release 97 per cent of the bursary money allocated for the year.

The auditor warned that such underutilisation undermines the fund’s core objective and results in poor service delivery.

Further irregularities dating back to 2021 were also cited, including unsupported or irregular cash withdrawals, missing accountability documents and bursary payments made without supporting records.

Tharaka Nithi county was also faulted for violating its bursary legislation.

The auditor found that the county bursary board awarded Sh2.26 million to students in 25 learning institutions without recommendations from ward bursary committees, contrary to Section 16(b) of the Tharaka Nithi County Bursary Fund Act, 2014.

Siaya county’s bursary system was flagged for unsupported committee allowances, irregular disbursements to universities, inflated administrative costs, and the absence of an internal audit unit to monitor compliance.

In Laikipia, the bursary fund continued operating despite the expiry of the board’s mandate, with the county failing to renew or reconstitute the fund’s leadership.

In Wajir, thousands of learners may have been locked out after the county utilised only Sh85.48 million of the Sh211.48 million allocated for bursaries, a shortfall the auditor warned may have negatively affected needy students.

The auditor flagged irregularities in the disbursement of bursaries in Nandi, where the county could not account for Sh50.24 million disbursed to TVETs, VTCs, secondary schools, and special needs education.

The county had disbursed Sh79.57 million to the institutions, but only Sh29.33 million were supported by acknowledgment receipts.

“In the circumstances, the accuracy and completeness of the bursary transfer amount of Sh79.57 million could not be confirmed,” the report states.

Further, the bursary fund was not subjected to internal audit to establish how the funds were utilised as required by law.

In Mombasa, several needy students could have been denied bursary after the county reported acute under-expenditure of the bursary budget.

The management spent Sh221.33 million out of the total receipts of Sh342.17 million, resulting to under-absorption of Sh120.84 million.

“The underfunding and under-absorption affected implementation of planned activities and impacted negatively on service delivery to the citizens,” the report states.

In addition, the report states that the county has failed to account for issues flagged in the previous years.

They include irregular procurement, unconfirmed bursary awards and disbursements, and unsupported cash transactions.

The auditor also fingered the funds administrator for failing to register it with the office of the Data Protection Commissioner to safeguard the personal data of students and parents.

In Turkana, the auditor faulted the county for failing to put in place risk management strategies to safeguard the funds.

“The management has not implemented effective, efficient and transparent financial management and internal control systems due to lack of a management policy, disaster recovery plan or business continuity plan and ICT strategic plan,” the report states.

In Bungoma, the report reveals that the bursary scheme committee issued "excess" bursary awards to some 948 students contrary to its own resolution.

The committee had resolved to issue bursaries to national schools and other learning institutions at the rate of Sh19,000 and Sh13,000 per beneficiary.

“In the circumstances, management was in breach of the bursary’s distribution criteria,” the report reads.

“This irregularity undermines the scheme’s ability to foster fairness, equity, and equal opportunity in access to basic education."

In Kakamega, the auditor questioned the legality of the county education fund after she established that it was created without an enabling act or primary legislation.

The fund has also been operating without a proper or substantive county education fund committee as required in law.

In Muranga, Gathungu flagged opaqueness in the issuance of bursary funds.

The audit revealed that the list of successful applicants for the bursary was not publicised on the public notice board. Further, successful applicants were not notified in writing.

This is contrary to section 7 (g) of the Murang’a County Education Scholarship Fund Act, 2014, which states that the functions of the committee shall be to display all public notice boards particulars of the successful applicants, including amounts awarded to them.

In addition, Section 9(5) of the Act states that if the committee rejects the application, it shall notify the applicant of such rejection in writing and the reasons thereof.

INSTANT ANALYSIS

Across the counties, the audit paints a troubling picture of bursary programmes plagued by weak oversight, mismanagement and in some cases outright fraud. With repeated findings of duplicated beneficiaries, unsupported payments, lack of documentation, expired boards, and massive underutilisation of funds, the reports raise questions about whether county bursary schemes are serving the poor or enriching a select few at their expense.