NELFUND in the real Nigeria: Who is getting the loan, Who isn’t, and why awareness still fails

The Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) was introduced with a bold and necessary promise: to remove financial barriers to higher education by ensuring that no student is denied access because they cannot pay tuition. But months after launch, a critical question persists, has this ambition translated into real uptake across Nigeria’s states, or is the scheme still struggling to break through layers of misinformation, distrust, and bureaucratic hesitation?

On paper, NELFUND is one of the most socially important federal interventions of the post-fuel-subsidy era. It directly targets the economic chokehold that has kept millions of young Nigerians out of tertiary institutions. Yet the most defining factor of its success is not the portal, the eligibility rules, or the repayment structure; it is awareness. And here lies the biggest gap.

Across several states, sensitisation campaigns are happening, but unevenly. In some regions, town-hall sessions are organised with parents, students, school administrators, and community leaders; in others, the only awareness available is second-hand information from WhatsApp broadcasts and social media rumours. This fragmented rollout creates a false impression of national uptake. The reality is that a federal programme cannot succeed if the public it seeks to serve still misunderstands how it works.

Some assumptions about the scheme also deserve correction. Many parents believe the loan automatically indebts families or places them at risk of government harassment. That assumption is false; repayment is tied to future income, not family assets. Others think only students from public universities qualify but NELFUND covers public higher institutions broadly, including polytechnics and colleges of education. Still, these clarifications rarely reach the rural or economically disadvantaged communities that need the scheme the most.

Opposing opinions also exist. Critics argue that student loans are unnecessary in a system where tuition is already relatively low compared to global standards, insisting that the better option is to fully fund public tertiary education instead of encouraging debt. While that perspective is valid, it overlooks a key truth: even “low” tuition is unaffordable for thousands of Nigerian families living below the poverty line. A loan, if structured transparently, could be the bridge between aspiration and reality.

“Some assumptions about the scheme also deserve correction. Many parents believe the loan automatically indebts families or places them at risk of government harassment.”

But the gaps are real. First, sensitisation is too centralised. Abuja announcements do not translate to community-level understanding. Second, many institutions have not fully aligned their admission and billing systems with NELFUND requirements, creating operational bottlenecks. Third, there is little state-level ownership; governors, education commissioners, and local authorities have not been engaged deeply enough to create a unified messaging framework. A federal loan scheme cannot thrive in isolation from subnational structures.

There is also the deeper structural question: will the Nigerian labour market support a repayment system that depends on verifiable and consistent income? Until underemployment, informal work dominance, and stagnant wages are addressed, repayment may become a weak link that threatens the sustainability of the entire programme.

Still, solutions exist and they are practical.

The first is a coordinated national sensitisation blueprint that treats awareness as a developmental investment, not a publicity afterthought. Community leaders, school PTAs, NYSC corps members, local councils, student unions, and radio broadcasters should be strategically engaged as multipliers, not spectators.

Second, NELFUND must partner with state education ministries to launch zones of assistance, where parents and students can receive on-site guidance, especially in rural communities. A portal is only useful to people who understand it, trust it, and can navigate it.

Third, tertiary institutions must be supported and compelled to align their internal financial systems with NELFUND’s requirements. The burden cannot fall solely on students to reconcile institutional inefficiencies with federal processes.

Finally, transparency must be non-negotiable. Nigerians will only trust this system if they clearly understand eligibility, repayment rules, borrower protections, and default procedures. Misconceptions thrive in silence; clarity restores confidence.

NELFUND carries transformative potential. But without mass awareness, institutional cooperation, and labour-market realism, its promise risks being lost in translation. Nigeria cannot afford that loss. At a time when the country is battling youth unemployment, rising tuition costs, and deepening inequality, ensuring that every qualified student can access higher education is not just a federal duty; it is a national priority.