Uniform costs shock parents as schools defy policy

For thousands of parents enrolling new Form One learners this week, the start of the 2026 school year has brought more financial shock than relief.

What should be a moment of pride and academic transition has instead become a struggle for survival, as the cost of compulsory school uniforms at some institutions now rivals — and in some cases exceeds — tuition fees themselves.

A recent investigation has uncovered a growing and largely unregulated uniform monopoly within parts of Zimbabwe's education system, where parents are effectively compelled to buy uniforms directly from schools or from selected suppliers at prices far above market value.

This is happening despite a standing Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education directive that explicitly bars schools from acting as sole uniform suppliers or forcing parents to purchase from designated outlets.

However, evidence gathered — including receipts, payment instructions and admission letters — shows that many schools continue to flout the policy, leaving parents with little choice but to comply.

With only about 30 000 boarding school places available nationwide, competition for admission has become intense. Investigators found that some schools are exploiting this scarcity by bundling uniforms and levies into non-negotiable "packages", effectively holding admission hostage to upfront payments.

Although Government policy promotes a free-market approach, allowing parents to source uniforms wherever they find the best value, the reality on the ground is forced spending and opaque pricing.

One receipt seen by CheckPoint highlights the scale of the problem. At Murewa High School, tuition fees were set at US$526, while the compulsory uniform package alone was invoiced at US$1 310.

"They just give you one big number," said a mother who requested anonymity for fear of victimisation.

"They told me it's US$1 800 to start, and going forward your termly fee will be US$520. When I asked how much of that US$1 800 was for the uniform so I could compare prices elsewhere, the clerk just said it's a ‘package deal' and non-negotiable."

Another parent said the practice allows schools to sidestep Government transparency rules by concealing uniform costs within inflated entry fees.

"The jump from a US$1 800 initial payment to a US$520 recurring fee suggests that nearly US$1 300 is being swallowed up by administration and kit costs," the parent said.

For Mr Irvine Chivanza, the pricing model amounts to outright exploitation.

"It's a clever bit of accounting, but it's still exploitation," he said.

"If I don't pay the full US$1 800, my child does not get a place. They have turned our children's education into a high-end retail transaction."

At St John's High School Chikwaka, the total cost for school uniforms, a furniture levy, a textbook combination and a church levy has been set at US$855, in addition to school fees of US$608 and an infrastructure development levy of US$500.

At Hama High School, incoming Form One learners are required to pay a total of US$1 120, comprising US$450 in tuition and boarding fees and US$670 for uniforms. Although Hama High is regarded as relatively affordable, parents remain sceptical.

"In my opinion, Hama is one of the most affordable boarding schools," said one parent.

"However, one has to wonder how the uniform package reaches US$670, when the same items would likely cost about US$200 if bought elsewhere."

Investigators also established that while some schools channel all payments through a single official account, others require parents to deposit money into separate accounts — including private ones designated for uniforms and ancillary charges — further blurring accountability.

In some schools, authorities reportedly cross-check uniform receipt books and single out pupils whose names do not appear, accusing them of wearing "wrong uniforms" and instructing parents to "do the right thing" to comply with the dress code.

Not all schools are engaging in the practice.

Institutions such as Marondera High School allow parents to purchase uniforms from reputable external suppliers, while several Harare schools, including Kuwadzana 1 High School, have moved toward compliance.

"This year we are pleased that the school is adhering to Government regulations," said Tinashe, a parent.

"Last year it was mandatory to buy uniforms from the school before paying tuition, and failure to do so could result in a student losing their place. This year the policy is more flexible, even allowing us to pay just half of the tuition fees upfront."

Globally, education systems that enforce exclusive uniform supply arrangements have faced criticism for deepening inequality.

In countries such as South Africa, Kenya and the United Kingdom, regulators have intervened to curb single-supplier models after studies showed they inflate costs, exclude poorer families and undermine access to education.

UNESCO has repeatedly warned that hidden education costs, including uniforms, are a major barrier to school retention in low- and middle-income countries, with unaffordable uniforms often leading to delayed enrolment or exclusion.

Zimbabwe's situation reflects these global concerns, but with weaker enforcement and fewer consumer protections.

Education experts warn that uniform monopolies risk commercialising access to public education, distorting school governance and entrenching inequality between families who can absorb sudden costs and those who cannot.

When schools begin to operate like exclusive retailers rather than public service institutions, trust in the education system erodes, and learners become collateral damage in a system where admission depends more on purchasing power than merit.

Comment from the implicated schools could not be obtained by the time of publication.

Primary and Secondary Education Minister Torerayi Moyo issued a stern warning to school heads.

"The Ministry maintains a strict policy to protect parents from financial exploitation," Moyo said.

"Non-compliant school heads face disciplinary action. Uniform policy is clear: parents have the absolute freedom to procure uniforms from suppliers of their choice. Forcing parents to use specific outlets is prohibited.

"Any complaints regarding fees or uniforms should be reported directly to Ministry command centres at district, provincial or head office level for immediate investigation."

As schools reopen, the key test for authorities will be whether this policy remains ink on paper or becomes a lived reality for parents already stretched beyond their limits