By Imtiaz Hussain Sindh spends billions of rupees on education every year, yet for millions of children the promise of a place in a classroom remains out of reach. The province has 40,992 government schools, but 2,944 are reported to be non-functional.
At the same time, about 7.3 million children aged between five and 16 are out of school. These figures expose a troubling gap between public spending and what families see on the ground. Official data says 5,219,784 students are enrolled in government schools. But enrolment alone cannot measure the health of an education system.
A school that exists only on paper, lacks teachers or basic facilities, or remains locked cannot provide an education, however large the allocation in the annual budget. The Sindh budget for 2025-26 allocated Rs39.53bn to college education, while Rs18.67bn under the School Specific Budget was planned for 31,633 government schools.
There are also separate allocations for rehabilitation and reconstruction. For Public School Sukkur, for example, Rs44.648m was earmarked in 2025-26, rising to Rs50.897m for 2026-27. Yet the central question remains unanswered: what has all this spending achieved? Sukkur district provides a useful illustration.
According to the Annual School Census 2024-25, the district has 1,149 government schools, of which 1,032 are functional and 117 are not. The most worrying feature is where these closures are concentrated. Of 974 primary schools, 116 are non-functional. In other words, almost all of Sukkur’s closed schools are at the primary level, where children first encounter formal education.
The contrast with higher levels is striking. Fifty-nine of the 60 elementary schools are functional, as are all 32 middle schools, 64 secondary schools and 19 higher secondary schools. This suggests that the province’s education crisis is particularly severe at the foundation stage. If children cannot enter or remain in primary school, later investment in secondary and higher education will struggle to compensate.
Sukkur’s government schools currently have 201,484 students and 6,149 teachers. Across the wider region, the picture is similarly mixed. Sukkur and Ghotki together have 2,875 government schools, of which 2,645 are functional and 230 are not. Ghotki alone has 1,726 schools, 113 of them non-functional, serving 227,240 enrolled students with 5,999 teachers.
These are not merely administrative statistics. Behind every closed school is a child who may have to travel further, leave education altogether or depend on an already stretched private system. For poorer families, especially in rural communities, the closure of a nearby government school can effectively mean the end of a child’s education. The government may reasonably point to funds released, construction schemes and reforms under way.
But spending cannot be treated as proof of progress. The real test is whether a closed school has reopened, whether teachers are present, whether children have returned and whether classrooms have become safe and usable places to learn. The education department therefore needs to move from broad promises to measurable outcomes. Every non-functional school should have a publicly stated reason for its closure. Is the problem a shortage of teachers, inadequate buildings, missing facilities, encroachment or something else? Each case should have a responsible authority, a budget and a clear reopening date.
There is also a need for greater transparency over school-specific expenditure. Parents should not have to rely on budget documents to know whether a school in their community has been repaired or staffed. Education spending should be tracked against results that ordinary people can see. The 2,944 closed schools across Sindh cannot be allowed to become a permanent feature of the province’s education landscape. Nor can the 7.3 million out-of-school children be reduced to a statistic repeated whenever education policy is discussed.
This is not simply an argument about whether Sindh is spending enough. It is an argument about whether public money is reaching the children for whom it is intended. A budget is only a means; education is the outcome. For a child waiting for a classroom, a teacher and a chance to learn, another allocation on paper means little. What matters is whether the school gate is open.
(The writer is a senior journalist, writer, and analyst, highlighting social issues, can be reached at news@metro-morning.com)
