By Prof Linda du Plessis, senior deputy vice-chancellor of the North-West University (NWU).
- The tragedy of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) story is that it reflects more than an institutional crisis; it reflects a deeper tension in public leadership in South Africa.
- NSFAS has grown from a support mechanism into the dominant driver of higher education spending.
- The most disturbing dimension of the NSFAS crisis is the erosion of ethical leadership.
- NSFAS did not fail because of one decision, one leader or one moment. It failed because a series of leadership responsibilities were neglected.
South Africa’s National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) was conceived as one of the most powerful instruments of social justice in the democratic era: an engine to open university doors to students historically excluded by poverty. Yet today, it stands as a case study not only in administrative failure, but in something far more troubling: a systemic failure of leadership. This was not inevitable. In fact, the seeds of the crisis were visible from the very beginning.
In 2016, amid the turbulence of the #FeesMustFall protests, then-president, Jacob Zuma, appointed a commission to assess the feasibility of free higher education. The Heher Commission carried out its work thoroughly, drawing on extensive financial modelling, policy analysis and stakeholder engagement. Its conclusion was unequivocal: South Africa could not sustainably afford universal free higher education. Instead, it recommended a carefully balanced, cost-sharing model with targeted support for the poor, income-contingent loans for the “missing middle” and contributions from those who could afford to pay.
The lesson here is stark: leadership begins with listening. Yet what followed was not the implementation of evidence-based policy, but a political decision that ignored the central findings of the very commission that had been established.
This is the first, and perhaps most important, leadership failure: when evidence is treated as advisory theatre rather than a guide to action, governance is hollowed out at its core.
From that moment onward, the system was set on an unstable trajectory. Policy ambition, while morally compelling, collided with fiscal reality. The Commission had warned that expanding higher education funding without a sustainable model would require massive increases in state spending and risk undermining quality and system viability. Despite this, implementation proceeded without a credible long-term financing framework.
Good leadership demands the courage to align ambition with reality. Promising what cannot be sustained is not visionary; it is irresponsible. The consequences are now visible in ballooning costs, persistent budgetary pressure and a system perpetually described as “unsustainable”. In less than a decade, South Africa has quietly shifted from funding universities to funding students and, in doing so, NSFAS has grown from a support mechanism into the dominant driver of higher education spending. This structural shift is reflected in the annual higher education budget, where direct subsidies to universities have grown modestly, at roughly inflation-level increases, while funding for NSFAS has doubled, rising from about R27 billion in 2019 to more than R54 billion today.
But poor policy choices alone do not explain what followed. The deeper problem lies in how those decisions were executed.
The rapid introduction of fee-free higher education created immediate pressure on institutions that lacked the systems, capacity and infrastructure to deliver at scale. NSFAS was suddenly expected not only to fund students, but also to manage complex processes, payments, accommodation and compliance at a level for which it had not been designed. Reports have highlighted that the shift to a centralised “student-centred model” demanded capabilities the organisation simply did not possess.
Here lies a second leadership lesson: execution is strategy. Policies do not fail because they are poorly worded; they fail because systems are not ready. Leadership is not about announcing reform; it is about ensuring it can be implemented.
As pressure mounted, weaknesses that had long been present began to surface more clearly. Parliamentary oversight processes later described a “prolonged period of collapse in governance”, during which warning signs were visible but not acted on. Annual reports were delayed, audits were qualified, irregular expenditure could not be fully quantified and internal controls proved inadequate.
No institution collapses overnight. Failure is cumulative. It grows quietly in the space where accountability is deferred and intervention postponed. Leadership failure, in this sense, is often not about what is done, but about what is left undone.
Perhaps the most disturbing dimension of the NSFAS crisis is the erosion of ethical leadership. Investigative reports have pointed to allegations of irregular procurement practices, conflicts of interest and blurred lines between decision-makers and service providers. Even where allegations remain contested, the pattern itself is deeply concerning.
Institutions do not operate in an ethical vacuum. Their culture reflects the values of those who lead them. When transparency weakens, governance boundaries blur and oversight fails to assert itself, the line between inefficiency and corruption becomes dangerously thin.
Equally concerning is how policy inconsistency has translated into real human cost. Decisions such as reducing accommodation allowances without adequate consultation or alignment with market realities contributed to a crisis in student housing, leaving many students unable to secure accommodation and, in extreme cases, vulnerable to exploitation.
This is a painful paradox: a policy designed to advance equity can, if poorly executed, entrench new forms of vulnerability. Leadership must be judged not only by intent, but by impact.
Underlying all of this is a final and fundamental lesson: sustainability is not a technical matter; it is a leadership discipline. Over time, NSFAS has grown into a massive funding instrument, serving hundreds of thousands of students and commanding tens of billions of rand annually. Yet growth without control has introduced new risks: inconsistent data, payment failures and uncertainty about whether funds are reaching their intended beneficiaries in the most efficient and equitable way.
Sustainability requires discipline, prioritisation and difficult trade-offs. It requires leaders who are willing to say not only “what is possible”, but also “what is responsible”.
The tragedy of the NSFAS story is that it reflects more than an institutional crisis; it reflects a deeper tension in public leadership in South Africa. The desire to address historical injustice is both necessary and urgent. But when that desire is disconnected from evidence, governance and accountability, it risks undermining the very institutions designed to deliver justice.
In the end, the lesson is clear.
NSFAS did not fail because of one decision, one leader or one moment. It failed because a series of leadership responsibilities were neglected: the responsibility to listen to evidence, to plan realistically, to implement carefully, to govern ethically and to act decisively when problems emerge. If there is any value in this failure, it is as a reminder that leadership is not measured by announcements, but by outcomes.
And the most difficult question of all remains: when we see the warning signs, who is willing to act?
Educational leaders must confront a difficult but necessary reality. While access to higher education, regardless of financial means, is both a moral and constitutional imperative, the current funding model is under increasing strain and is not sustainable. Expanding access without strong governance, efficient administration and fiscal sustainability risks weakening the system itself. The challenge is not whether to support access, but how to fund it in ways that are both equitable and sustainable.
Follow the link to the published press release here: https://news.nwu.ac.za/nsfas-crisis-when-leadership-ignores-evidence.
By Prof Linda du Plessis, senior deputy vice-chancellor of the North-West University (NWU). Visit North West University press office The tragedy of the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) story is that it reflects more than an institutional crisis; it reflects a deeper tension in public leadership in South Africa. NSFAS has grown from a