ABSTRACT

This study was carried out to investigate the alternative funding potentials of Nigerian universities. The alternative sources of funding available to Nigerian universities that could be tapped for financial autonomy due to ownership, age and location of the universities were explored. This study adopted a descriptive survey design. Five research questions were generated and five null hypotheses were formulated to guide the study. A total of 1376 respondents made up of 1358 academic staff and 334 heads of academic and administrative units drawn from 3 federal, 3 state and 3 privately owned universities in South-East and South-South, Nigeria made up the sample for the study. An instrument named Alternative Source of Funding Potentials of Nigerian Universities Questionnaire (ASFPNUQ) was developed, validated and used for the study. The internal consistency reliability estimate of the questionnaire was determined using Cronbach alpha method. The internal consistency reliability estimates for sections B to D are .92, .82 and.78 with an overall reliability of .87 respectively. The data obtained were analyzed using mean and standard deviation to answer the research questions; Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and multiple regression analysis were used to test the hypotheses at 0.05 levels of significance. The major findings of the study were that federal, state and private universities differ significantly on the alternative sources of funding available that can be tapped for financial autonomy and the direction of the difference was significant across the federal, state and private universities; significant differences exist among 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation universities in the alternative sources of funding available that could be tapped for financial autonomy and trhere are similarities between the first and second and third generation universities; significant differences exist among universities located in urban, semi-urban and rural areas in the alternative sources of funding available that could be tapped for financial autonomy and  the direction of the difference was significant across the urban, semi urban and rural universities; there are significant differences in the problems which federal, state and private universities encounter in tapping or exploiting the alternative sources of funding available for financial autonomy with similarities existing between the federal and state universities and significant difference existing between the federal and private universities; significant differences exist among federal, state and private universities in the strategies that could be adopted to enhance the exploitation of alternative sources of funding for financial autonomy and the direction of the difference was significant across the federal, state and private universities as regards the strategies universities could adopt to enhance the exploitation of alternative sources of funding for financial autonomy. A major educational implication of the findings was that federal, state and private universities could adopt different strategies in tapping sources of funding for financial autonomy and this suggests that the National Universities Commission, in approving universities, does not only bother about the physical facilities but also the sources of funding available that can be tapped for financial autonomy. It was thus recommended that emphasis should be given to availability of strategies for tapping sources of funding for financial autonomy before the approval and accreditation of universities by the National Universities Commission and that uniform minimum standards should be maintained in federal, state and privately owned universities not minding their age and location.