A transparency measure that raises fundamental questions
The Burkinabè government presents its new NGO regulation as an instrument of transparency and efficiency. Adopted on 24 September 2026 under the presidency of Captain Ibrahim Traoré, it requires NGOs to devote at least 80 % of their resources to direct investments in the field.
The principle appears straightforward: reduce administrative costs so that more money reaches the populations. Yet this logic deserves closer scrutiny.
An 80 % threshold does not equal effectiveness
An NGO does not operate on equipment and infrastructure alone. It must finance accounting, audits, logistics, project monitoring and the training of its teams.
These expenditures can be indispensable.
An auditor does not build a health centre, but he can prevent fraud. A logistician does not treat a patient, but he ensures that supplies reach their destination.
Cutting these functions to satisfy an imposed ratio could therefore weaken control mechanisms.
What exactly counts as a direct investment?
This is one of the main questions left open by the measure.
The construction of a health centre is easy to identify. But what about the salaries of the staff working there? Maintenance? Training? Transport of materials? Follow-up with 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.
One rule for very different missions
Not all NGOs follow the same model.
An organisation that builds schools will naturally have 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 an unintended effect
An organisation unable to reach 80 % could be pushed to artificially alter its budget.
It might cut control positions or favour expenditures that are easily classified as direct.
Yet spending more in the field does not automatically produce more results.
Effectiveness must be measured by impact: number of beneficiaries, quality of services, cost of interventions, results obtained and sustainability of projects.
Oversight can be strengthened through other means
If the goal is genuinely to protect funding, the government has other tools 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 mainly measures their distribution.
A decision that will have to prove itself
The government of Ibrahim Traoré can legitimately demand greater transparency from NGOs. But a percentage guarantees neither sound management nor efficiency.
The real question will therefore be simple: will this rule concretely improve the aid delivered to populations, or will it force certain organisations to change how they operate solely to comply with an administrative ratio?
The outcome must be assessed on the facts.
Because within an NGO, an expenditure that is invisible in the field may sometimes be precisely what ensures that the money arrives there.
