Government’s Shs5.5b financial support to Uganda Premier League clubs for the 2026/27 season is intended largely to improve player welfare, with accountability likely to determine whether the intervention becomes a long-term arrangement.
UPL board chairman Arinaitwe Rugyendo has confirmed that the money is expected to be released by government for the 18 top-flight clubs, bringing into clearer focus a funding process that has been more than a year in the making.
‘That money is supposed to go towards the welfare of the players,’ Rugyendo told NTV SportKnights on Monday night.
The confirmation follows months of discussions between government, football authorities and Premier League clubs over how the domestic game should be supported as Uganda prepares to co-host the 2027 Africa Cup of Nations with Kenya and Tanzania.
Documents previously seen by Daily Monitor show that the UPL board began formally lobbying government for direct support in April 2025, when it wrote to First Lady and Minister of Education and Sports Janet Kataha Museveni seeking discussions on the development and financing of the country’s top-flight competition.
The league subsequently developed a proposal seeking approximately Shs6 billion annually, arguing for direct investment in clubs as an important part of strengthening the domestic football structure.
Momentum
Those discussions eventually gathered momentum as government intensified preparations for Pamoja 2027 and sought ways of improving the environment in which locally based players train and compete.
The Shs5.5 billion allocation is slightly below the Shs6 billion originally sought by the UPL, but represents the most substantial direct government intervention in the league in recent years.
Under the arrangement communicated to the clubs, government directed that the funds be channelled through the National Council of Sports and ultimately reach the individual clubs rather than being administered through the Federation of Uganda Football Associations.
That approach differed from an earlier position under which FUFA had proposed that government support intended for Premier League clubs be deposited through the federation.
The distinction is important because the UPL board had independently lobbied government for direct financial support and clubs are now expected to take responsibility for how their allocations are spent and accounted for.
Rugyendo could not commit to the Shs5.5 billion becoming an annual government allocation, saying the future of the arrangement will depend partly on how football handles the first intervention.
‘We are still talking and this is a good start. How we manage these finances will determine how much can come from government,’ he said.
That makes accountability as important as the size of the allocation itself.
‘I want to see clubs account for every coin they receive, so that the funds are properly utilised, and other sports like rugby and volleyball can also benefit,’ Rugyendo said.
‘We must manage these finances well as required because this can also be the start of government funding other national competitions in basketball, rugby, volleyball and the likes.’
Accountability
The emphasis on accountability also comes at a time when financial reporting is becoming increasingly important for Premier League clubs.
Under FUFA’s amended club licensing regulations for 2026/27, clubs are required to record all income and expenditure to allow for audits or reviews of their financial statements, with failure to maintain proper financial records potentially affecting licensing for the following season.
Player welfare, however, is expected to remain central to the government intervention.
While clubs have traditionally relied on owners, sponsorship, gate collections and other commercial income to meet salaries, bonuses, medical costs and other player-related expenses, financial capacity varies considerably across the Premier League.
Government support could ease some of those pressures, although the ultimate impact will depend on how much each club receives and the controls attached to expenditure.
Discussion
Rugyendo believes the intervention should also prompt a wider discussion about the structure through which football resources are managed.
‘People should understand that football in Uganda is structured much like the United Nations, with different levels and bodies working together. We need to look at this structure and find ways to make it more effective,’ he said.
The UPL allocation is also part of a broader government conversation about providing more support directly to clubs.
In May, NCS general secretary Bernard Ogwel said the Council was considering increasing support to clubs, arguing that some clubs had demonstrated stronger organisation and accountability than their governing associations.
And government though NCS had previously provided assistance to clubs involved in continental competitions.
The latest example is Kitara FC, who received Shs150 million from NCS to support their CAF Confederation Cup campaign against Somalia’s Mogadishu City Club.
Kitara had requested Shs200 million before government approved Shs150 million towards their continental preparations.
Operational plans
NCS funding guidelines already require beneficiaries of government support to provide budgets, operational plans and accountability for money received, reinforcing Rugyendo’s argument that the UPL’s ability to account for the Shs5.5 billion could shape future decisions.
For the Premier League, this season represents more than an injection of cash. After years of lobbying, the clubs have secured the government intervention they had been seeking.
The next challenge is demonstrating that the money can improve the lives of players, strengthen clubs and be accounted for properly.
Success could make the Shs5.5 billion the beginning of sustained government investment in domestic club football, failure could make it a on season experiment.