Makinde’s Education Budget Does Not Reach The Classroom | By Maroof Asudemade

There is an important distinction we must make whenever we discuss education funding in Oyo State: budgetary allocation is not the same thing as money actually spent on education.

On paper, the administration of Governor Seyi Makinde has consistently presented education as a priority. In 2021, for instance, the governor announced an education allocation of ₦56.3 billion, representing about 21 per cent of the state budget.  In 2024, education received ₦90.65 billion, or 20.88 per cent of the ₦434.2 billion state budget.

These figures look impressive. But the experience of pupils and teachers in many public schools raises a fundamental question: where is the money going, and how much of it is actually reaching the infrastructure that children see every day?

This is where expenditure performance becomes more revealing than budget headlines.

An assessment by Invictus Africa found that Oyo State spent only 16.66 per cent of its education capital budget in 2021—about ₦1.29 billion out of ₦7.73 billion. In 2022, actual spending was about ₦2.25 billion against a ₦6.99 billion capital allocation, representing 32.18 per cent.

Capital expenditure is particularly important because this is the part of the education budget that should translate into classrooms, laboratories, toilets, furniture, ICT facilities, school rehabilitation and other physical learning infrastructure.

That distinction helps explain the contradiction that many Oyo residents see: a government can announce that more than 20 per cent of its budget is going to education, while children are still learning in overcrowded classrooms, buildings are deteriorating, furniture is inadequate and essential learning facilities remain unavailable.

The Oyo State Government’s own 2024 budget-performance report also illustrates why allocations alone cannot tell the whole story. It recorded ₦111.33 billion as the final education budget for 2024 and ₦69.07 billion in year-to-date expenditure, representing 62 per cent performance against the final allocation. The figures also varied considerably across subsectors: tertiary education, for example, recorded 49.1 per cent performance.

There is therefore a legitimate difference between saying “we budgeted for education” and saying “we delivered the education infrastructure that the budget was intended to provide.”

The problem becomes even more significant when expenditure data are incomplete. Invictus Africa’s more recent assessment reported that between 2022 and 2025, only 36.2 per cent of identified gender-responsive education funding was spent.

This should concern everyone—not merely politicians and education officials.

A child does not learn inside a budget document. A child learns inside a classroom. The child does not sit inside a percentage allocation; he sits on a chair, writes on a desk, reads under a roof and uses a toilet. A science student needs a functioning laboratory. A young learner needs textbooks and other instructional materials. A school needs water, sanitation, electricity and a safe environment.

When these things are absent, the consequences are not captured by the size of the appropriation alone.

This is why the conversation about Oyo education must move beyond the repeated celebration of percentages. The more important questions are: How much was released? How much was spent? On what projects? Where are the projects? Were they completed? And are pupils actually benefiting from them?

The Governor’s claim that substantial percentages of the state budget are allocated to education can be factually correct as an appropriation claim. But allocation is only the beginning of public expenditure. The real test of an education budget is what ultimately appears in the classroom.

If billions are appropriated but a significant portion of the capital component remains unspent or inadequately tracked, then it should not surprise anyone that many public schools continue to struggle with infrastructure and learning materials.

Oyo’s children deserve more than impressive budget percentages. They deserve classrooms that are safe, properly ventilated and adequately furnished; laboratories where science can be taught practically; functional toilets and water facilities; instructional materials; and schools that provide an environment in which learning can genuinely take place.

Ultimately, education should not be measured only by how much government says it has allocated, but by what the child can actually see, touch and use in school.

That is where the real scorecard begins.