Bibliography: leaves 76-77. / Given the striking inequality of access to tertiary education in South Africa, a National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) is of great importance. Since the present NSFAS has insufficient funds and lacks a long-term plan, the objective of this study is to contribute to the development of proposals for a comprehensive, sustainable NSFAS. More specifically, the aims are to: ( 1) throw light on the current status of student financial aid at universities and technikons; (2) highlight implications for the NSFAS; and (3) consider the future role of institution-based schemes. The paper begins by drawing lessons from a selection of international literature. The main body of the text is based on responses to a survey questionnaire which included both multiple-choice and open-ended questions. All twenty-one universities and twelve out of fifteen technikons submitted written replies. The paper presents and analyses quantitative and qualitative data describing financial and administrative aspects of institutions' schemes for assisting undergraduate/pre-diplomate, full-time students. The survey revealed that half of the total resources available for financial aid came from the Tertiary Education Fund of South Africa and a quarter from institutions' general operating budgets. The remaining contributions came from various donors including Provincial Governments, non-governmental organisations, international agencies and South African private sector firms. Bursaries, and to a lessor extent loans, are the main types of financial aid received by needy students. Scholarships and sports awards are allocated according to merit rather than financial need. Differences (such as sources and types of aid) are identified between the financial aid schemes of universities and technikons, and of historically black and historically white institutions. Comparisons of aggregate data with figures presented by the National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE) showed similarities in some instances, but the NCHE's projection of gross student needs in 1996 was far greater than the resources reportedly available to institutions from all sources. Institution-based schemes do not always comply with the lessons from international experience: the aggregate bursary/loan mix is favourable; the degree of cost recovery is inconclusive; targeting of needy students is sound in theory but difficult in practice; and mortgage-type loans, rather than internationally recommended income-contingent loans, are the norm, and they have substantial hidden subsidies. Implications for the NSFAS include the following: standardisation of the means test and the definition of "legitimate" study costs is desirable on equity grounds; administrative difficulties experienced by financial aid bureaux impact on the NSF AS and therefore more resources are required in this area. With regard to the future role of institution-based schemes: a levelling of the playing fields with respect to the contributions by institutions themselves to financial aid is suggested; institution-based loan schemes may be viewed as complementary to the NSFAS (in that they target students with different characteristics), which provides a theoretical reason for the creation of a centralised mortgage-type loan scheme to harness private sector capital. Such decisions need to be based on detailed assessments of efficiency which are beyond the scope of this paper.