THE refusal of some universities to refund school fees already paid by parents and students after the Nigerian Education Loan Fund subsequently settled the same tuition is an act of bad faith. It undermines one of the Federal Government’s most important interventions in higher education and betrays the trust of students and their families. It must end.President Bola Tinubu’s administration established NELFund to provide financial relief for indigent students and their sponsors. To prevent diversion of funds, the scheme pays approved tuition directly into the accounts of beneficiary institutions rather than to the students themselves.This remains the most effective payment model. It ensures that the money serves its intended purpose instead of being diverted by beneficiaries, thereby preserving the integrity of the intervention.However, because the scheme commenced midway into the academic session, many beneficiaries had already paid their tuition before NELFund’s intervention. Once NELFund later paid the same fees to the universities, a clear case of double payment arose, making refunds to the affected students and parents obligatory.The figures underscore the significance of the scheme. As of this month, NELFund has disbursed N282 billion to beneficiaries in public institutions. Besides tuition, the loan provides a monthly upkeep allowance and has enrolled 1.39 million students across 353 participating institutions.Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. President Bola Tinubu’s administration established NELFund to provide financial relief for indigent students and their sponsors. To prevent diversion of funds, the scheme pays approved tuition directly into the accounts of beneficiary institutions rather than to the students themselves.This remains the most effective payment model. It ensures that the money serves its intended purpose instead of being diverted by beneficiaries, thereby preserving the integrity of the intervention.However, because the scheme commenced midway into the academic session, many beneficiaries had already paid their tuition before NELFund’s intervention. Once NELFund later paid the same fees to the universities, a clear case of double payment arose, making refunds to the affected students and parents obligatory.The figures underscore the significance of the scheme. As of this month, NELFund has disbursed N282 billion to beneficiaries in public institutions. Besides tuition, the loan provides a monthly upkeep allowance and has enrolled 1.39 million students across 353 participating institutions.Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. This remains the most effective payment model. It ensures that the money serves its intended purpose instead of being diverted by beneficiaries, thereby preserving the integrity of the intervention.However, because the scheme commenced midway into the academic session, many beneficiaries had already paid their tuition before NELFund’s intervention. Once NELFund later paid the same fees to the universities, a clear case of double payment arose, making refunds to the affected students and parents obligatory.The figures underscore the significance of the scheme. As of this month, NELFund has disbursed N282 billion to beneficiaries in public institutions. Besides tuition, the loan provides a monthly upkeep allowance and has enrolled 1.39 million students across 353 participating institutions.Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. However, because the scheme commenced midway into the academic session, many beneficiaries had already paid their tuition before NELFund’s intervention. Once NELFund later paid the same fees to the universities, a clear case of double payment arose, making refunds to the affected students and parents obligatory.The figures underscore the significance of the scheme. As of this month, NELFund has disbursed N282 billion to beneficiaries in public institutions. Besides tuition, the loan provides a monthly upkeep allowance and has enrolled 1.39 million students across 353 participating institutions.Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. The figures underscore the significance of the scheme. As of this month, NELFund has disbursed N282 billion to beneficiaries in public institutions. Besides tuition, the loan provides a monthly upkeep allowance and has enrolled 1.39 million students across 353 participating institutions.Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Yet, while some universities promptly refunded the excess payments, others withheld the money. After repeated but futile efforts to recover their funds, frustrated students and parents were left with no option but to petition the anti-graft agencies.The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. The Managing Director of NELFund, Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed that about 34 institutions are under scrutiny over petitions received by the agency.He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. He said, “I can tell you that there are about 34 institutions that we are looking at, at the moment, to see what’s going on because of the petitions we’ve received… a lot of schools got double payment. Some from the students, some from us. Some of them have borrowed the funds, their parents have borrowed the funds, and they need to repay those funds.”That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. That is troubling enough. More disturbing is Sawyerr’s revelation that some institutions exploited NELFund’s prompt payment system by arbitrarily increasing their tuition fees, only for the agency to reject the inflated charges because they exceeded acceptable limits.Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Such conduct is opportunistic, unethical and unbecoming of institutions entrusted with moulding future leaders.Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Universities that should be partnering with a Federal Government agency to expand access to higher education are instead frustrating its objectives. That is indefensible.The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. The deeper problem is that too many Nigerian universities remain trapped in a lazy financial culture that depends almost entirely on tuition and government subventions. Such dependence is incompatible with the ideals of institutional autonomy and long-term sustainability.Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Universities operating under chronic financial pressure should embrace more innovative and legitimate sources of revenue to fulfil their academic mandate.Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Beyond government grants and tuition fees, well-managed universities cultivate strong alumni networks, attract donations from parents and friends, secure research grants, raise endowments, undertake consultancy services, commercialise research outputs, establish viable investments and pursue other legitimate income streams. Institutions committed to excellence do not resort to dubious practices to raise revenue.Related NewsKogi varsity gets research centre, digital libraryUniAbuja targets 10,000 students in distance learning driveSalary payment won’t avert fresh strike, ASUU tells AiyedatiwaAlumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Alumni are among a university’s greatest assets.Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Harvard University routinely raises between $1.1 billion and $1.4 billion annually from its alumni, parents and friends.The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. The University of Oxford earns about £31 million to £33 million annually through intellectual property, commercialisation and patenting activities.In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. In 2025, Stanford University’s primary investment vehicle, the Merged Pool, posted a 14.3 per cent net investment return, lifting its endowment to $40.8 billion.Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Nigerian universities should adapt these proven models to their own circumstances instead of clinging to practices that erode public confidence.At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. At a time when leading universities around the world rely on alumni, philanthropy, research commercialisation and sound investment strategies, the conduct of these 34 institutions sends a damaging signal. Having betrayed the confidence of their students, they will now have to work much harder to regain their trust and honour their refund obligations.The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. The behaviour of the affected institutions is regrettable on several fronts. Universities are more than centres of learning; they are second homes, while their administrators and lecturers stand in loco parentis to their students. By withholding money that rightfully belongs to parents and students, they have failed in that responsibility and driven their wards to seek redress from anti-graft agencies.Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Even if there were legitimate administrative reasons for delaying the refunds, the universities compounded the problem through poor communication. Their silence violated the elementary principles of public communication and corporate governance.Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Those who paid the fees deserve timely information about the status of their money. Failure to communicate creates distrust and breeds crisis. Worse still, prolonged silence inevitably fuels suspicion that something improper is being concealed.Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Major reforms encounter implementation challenges. But this misconduct by universities—institutions that ought to exemplify transparency, accountability and good governance—is one failure too many.This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. This anomaly must never become an accepted practice. The Ivory Tower must cleanse itself of corrupt tendencies and reclaim its moral authority.NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. NELFund deserves commendation for launching an investigation into the matter. But the probe must be comprehensive, those found culpable must be held accountable, and the findings should be made public.Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust. Universities are institutions of integrity, innovation and national development. They should lead society by example in probity, strategic thinking and responsible management, not become symbols of sharp practice and broken trust.