Published: October 7, 2026
The University of Liberia cannot be expected to accommodate twice the number of students its campus was built for and deliver the quality of education the country needs without a substantial investment. Its request for $61.6 million deserves serious government backing.
At Tuesday’s budget hearing, UL President Dr. Layli Maparyan presented a 2027 plan costing $61,614,970. She said the university now serves about 30,000 students against an intended campus capacity of 15,000. The request covers additional classrooms, renovations, furniture and measures to address longstanding pay and promotion grievances.
These are the working conditions of a university. Their inadequacy affects whether students can learn, lecturers can teach and public money produces graduates within a reasonable time.
The Liberian Investigator supports the request. The Ministry of Finance and Development Planning should work with UL to validate its costs and provide for the plan in the 2027 budget. Lawmakers should defend the investment and insist that approved funding reaches the university when it is needed.
The budget hearing should move that work forward. Telling UL that it competes with other agencies states an obvious constraint. The harder responsibility is deciding what Liberia loses when higher education remains overcrowded and essential improvements are postponed.
The university’s classrooms help prepare the professionals on whom other public institutions and the wider economy will depend. Investment there has consequences far beyond the campus gates. A government seeking stronger health services, better infrastructure, agricultural development and more capable administration must take seriously the institutions educating the people who will do that work.
Maparyan’s warning about students spending eight to 10 years at the university deserves particular attention. She wants to reduce that period to four to six years and move to continuous academic semesters.
Not every delay can be attributed to funding. UL must examine course scheduling, academic administration and other obstacles within its control. But a predictable academic calendar also needs adequate teaching space, available lecturers and dependable operations.
For a student, an additional year can mean more transport costs, more spending on food and accommodation, and another year before full participation in working life. Families carry those costs even when they do not appear in the government’s accounts.
The state should judge education spending partly by whether it helps students complete their studies. A smaller allocation that leaves avoidable delays unresolved may simply shift the expense to households.
The classroom building planned for this year is an immediate test. Maparyan said it was not constructed because of “shifting priorities.” The hearing should establish which priorities shifted, who made the decision and what is required to get the building completed. A project intended to relieve overcrowding should have a clear place in the next budget, supported by a construction schedule and accountable supervision.
The empty Fendall hostel offers an equally concrete opportunity. According to Maparyan, it was handed over in March 2025 but remains unused because it lacks furniture. She acknowledged that the university could have been earning income from it.
That is an administrative failure UL must correct. It is also a reason to finish the investment already made. An unfurnished hostel cannot house students or generate the revenue expected of it. UL should present the cost of furnishing it, an opening date and a transparent operating plan. Government should help bring the facility into use.
Faculty and staff concerns require the same seriousness. Promotions following study leave, pay disparities and claimed increments should be reviewed against documented entitlements and clear criteria. Verified obligations should be costed and addressed through a published timetable.
At the same time, Maparyan’s proposed controls on adjunct costs and study leave, and her commitment to merit-based promotion, should proceed. Better funding and stronger management must advance together.
Her disclosure about the General Auditing Commission’s finding on staff retained beyond retirement requirements also calls for action. UL should resolve the affected cases fairly, establish the financial implications and report on implementation of the audit recommendations. The aim should be a credible personnel system that respects employees while ensuring that public resources serve the university’s academic mission.
These weaknesses do not erase the case for funding. They make a transparent funding agreement more necessary.
The university should publish a practical delivery plan showing what the requested money will purchase, which projects come first and when students should see improvements. Quarterly reports should compare allocations with actual receipts and expenditure, and record classrooms completed, facilities opened and progress toward a stable academic calendar.
Government must accept an obligation under that arrangement, too. An approved budget followed by uncertain or delayed releases will undermine even a sound plan. UL needs a disbursement schedule that allows it to organize teaching, procurement and construction responsibly.
This year’s $6.35 million renovation allocation, as described at the hearing, supports specified buildings. It should not be confused with the university’s entire current budget or treated as proof that its wider needs have been met.
UL should pursue useful reforms that require little money immediately. Restoring an honor roll, as the hearing’s chair urged, is one such measure. But recognition for high-performing students cannot provide the additional classrooms those students and their peers need.
Liberia should fund the university’s 2027 plan, scrutinize its implementation and demand results. If any component must be phased, the decision should come with a reason, secured financing for the first stage and a credible completion timetable.
Thirty thousand students cannot be accommodated adequately by another promise to reconsider their needs later. Give UL the resources to deliver—and hold its leadership responsible for delivering.
Discussion about this post