The Uganda National Examinations Board (UNEB) has warned that the modest pay given to examiners risks undermining morale, retention, and potentially the integrity of the country’s assessment system, as Parliament considers increased funding under the 2026/27 National Budget Framework Paper.
Appearing before Parliament’s Education and Sports Committee on February 18, 2026, UNEB Executive Director Dan Odongo revealed that examiners marking the Primary Leaving Examination (PLE) are paid just UGX756 per script, while those marking the Uganda Certificate of Education (UCE) and Uganda Advanced Certificate of Education (UACE) receive UGX1,260 and UGX1,488 respectively.
To illustrate the value of the pay, Odongo compared it to the price of a roadside snack in Kampala.
“I like boiled groundnuts,” he told MPs. “A very small amount in a kavera costs UGX1,000. Yet an examiner who sweats to mark a full script does not earn enough to buy even that small kavera.”
UNEB is proposing that PLE marking fees be increased to UGX1,000 per script, creating a funding gap of UGX244 per script.
For UCE, where the Competency-Based Curriculum (CBC) has introduced more analytical and descriptive marking, UNEB is proposing an adjustment from UGX1,260 toward UGX1,500 per script, though examiners are demanding UGX2,000.
At UACE level, where the marking fee currently stands at UGX1,488, the Board considers UGX2,000 per script a more realistic rate, leaving a shortfall of UGX512 per script.
The funding concerns extend to invigilation. UNEB pays chief invigilators UGX45,000 per examination session to cover transport and meals, an amount Odongo described as inadequate given rising costs of living. The Board estimates UGX60,000 as a more realistic rate, creating a UGX15,000 gap per invigilator.
“We know the cake size,” Odongo told MPs, referencing budget constraints. “But UGX45,000 is not sufficient for transport and feeding while on duty.”
The concerns come weeks after Parliament approved a recommendation to increase examiners’ fees during debate on the 2026/27 National Budget Framework Paper.
Achia Remigio, Vice Chairperson of Parliament’s Budget Committee, told the House in January that the current marking rates are disproportionately low compared to the workload, especially under the new CBC framework, which emphasizes competency, critical thinking, and structured assessment over rote learning.
“The Board is struggling to retain the numbers of examiners required,” Achia said. “The recent 5% increase is just a drop in the ocean. UNEB needs a gradual 25% increment to attract and retain examiners amidst rising costs of goods and services.”
The Board is seeking approximately UGX62 billion to bridge its broader operational gaps, including marking, invigilation and assessment reform implementation.
MPs warned against underfunding the examinations body, recalling the 2024 incident when UACE examiners temporarily abandoned marking in protest over low pay.
Emmanuel Ongiertho (Jonam County) cautioned that persistent underpayment could reopen vulnerabilities in Uganda’s assessment system. “If we know where UNEB has come from, we used to have serious cases of malpractice,” Ongiertho said. “When you don’t fund such critical areas, you create gaps for malpractice.”
Uganda’s examinations system has, over the past two decades, undergone reforms to strengthen credibility following historical concerns over leakage and marking irregularities. UNEB’s mandate, established under the UNEB Act, includes conducting and managing national examinations and ensuring fairness, validity and reliability in assessment.
Concerns were also raised about whether per-script payment encourages speed over accuracy. Molly Asiimwe (Rwampara County) questioned how UNEB prevents examiners from rushing through scripts to maximize earnings.
Odongo acknowledged that in earlier years, pay was directly tied to the number of scripts marked, which sometimes encouraged recklessness. However, the Board has since introduced digital allocation systems that pre-assign scripts before examiners arrive.
“You come knowing exactly how many scripts you are going to mark,” Odongo explained. “If you fail to mark that number, they can be reallocated.”
He added that UNEB uses a “conveyor belt” marking system where scripts pass through multiple examiners to ensure accuracy and eliminate bias, a quality assurance approach aligned with international best practices in high-stakes assessments.
Beyond examiner pay, UNEB is also pushing for a revision of examination fees charged to candidates. According to Odongo, the unit costs were last approved nine years ago and have not been adjusted despite inflation and expanded assessment requirements.
“The rates we charge per candidate for PLE, UCE and UACE were approved about nine years ago,” he said. “Inflation and changes in the assessment landscape have significantly altered our operational costs.”
Uganda’s annual national examinations involve hundreds of thousands of candidates across the three levels. With the phased rollout of the Competency-Based Curriculum, aligned with the National Curriculum Development Centre reforms, assessment demands have become more resource-intensive.
Several MPs, including Phillips Lokwang (Napore West), Janet Okori-Moe (Abim Woman MP) and Julius Acon (Otuke East), backed UNEB’s funding request.
Okori-Moe described UNEB as central to Uganda’s education system. “Whoever goes to school must pass through UNEB,” she said. “UGX62 billion is not too much compared to what is required to ensure the success of the Competency-Based Curriculum.”
Education experts note that assessment credibility underpins public trust in the entire education sector, affecting university admissions, public service recruitment and professional certification.
With Uganda implementing the Competency-Based Curriculum at lower secondary and preparing for further reforms at advanced level, sustainable financing of examination systems is emerging as a critical policy question.
As Parliament finalizes allocations for the 2026/27 budget, the debate over examiners’ pay is no longer simply about allowances, it is about safeguarding the integrity of Uganda’s national assessment framework at a time of sweeping curriculum transformation.
