The Burkinabè government has unveiled a new regulatory framework for non-governmental organisations, presenting it as a decisive turning point in the pursuit of transparency and operational effectiveness. Adopted on 24 September 2026 under the leadership of Captain Ibrahim Traoré, the measure obliges NGOs to allocate no less than 80 % of their resources to direct field investments.
The rationale behind the threshold
At first glance, the principle appears straightforward: curtail administrative expenditure so that a greater share of funding reaches the populations in need. Yet this logic warrants closer scrutiny.
Why a percentage fails to capture effectiveness
An NGO does not operate solely through equipment or infrastructure. It must also finance accounting, audits, logistics, project monitoring and the training of its teams.
Such expenditures can be indispensable.
An auditor does not build a health centre, but can prevent fraud. A logistician does not treat a patient, but ensures that supplies reach their destination.
Cutting these functions to meet an imposed ratio could therefore weaken control mechanisms.
The ambiguous scope of direct investment
This is one of the principal questions left open by the measure.
Constructing a health centre is easily identifiable. But what of the salaries of the staff who work there? Maintenance? Training? Transport of materials? Follow-up of beneficiaries?
Without a precise definition, applying the threshold may become complex.
The government must therefore clearly explain what falls within the 80 % and what is excluded.
A single rule for disparate missions
Not all NGOs follow the same model.
An organisation that builds schools will naturally incur more material expenditure. Another, specialising in training, legal assistance or social protection, will invest primarily in human skills.
Applying the same ratio to all risks penalising certain activities without demonstrating that they are less useful.
The danger of unintended consequences
An organisation unable to reach 80 % might be tempted to artificially adjust its budget.
It could reduce oversight positions or favour expenditures that are easily classified as direct.
Yet spending more in the field does not automatically yield greater results.
Effectiveness must be measured by impact: number of beneficiaries, quality of services, cost of interventions, outcomes achieved and sustainability of projects.
Alternative avenues for stronger oversight
If the genuine objective is to protect funding, the government has other means at its disposal: independent audits, publication of accounts, traceability of funds, project inspections and sanctions in cases of misappropriation.
These mechanisms verify the actual use of resources.
The 80 % threshold primarily measures their distribution.
A decision that must prove itself
The government of Ibrahim Traoré may legitimately demand greater transparency from NGOs. But a percentage guarantees neither sound management nor effectiveness.
The real question will therefore be simple: will this rule concretely improve the aid delivered to populations, or will it compel certain organisations to alter their operations solely to comply with an administrative ratio?
The outcome must be assessed on the facts.
For in an NGO, an expenditure that is not visible in the field may sometimes be precisely what ensures that the money arrives there.
