Informal conversations can sometimes reveal deeper policy gaps. A recent discussion with a colleague from Sierra Leone highlighted the role of a government office—the NGO Directorate—designed to ensure that non-governmental organizations operate not just as donor-driven entities but as partners aligned with national development priorities. This raised an important question for Lesotho: who ensures that NGOs working across sectors remain accountable to national goals as well as to their donors?
In Lesotho, NGOs and international partners play a critical role in service delivery, particularly in health, social protection, and community development. Organizations such as Mothers2Mothers and Baylor Foundation Lesotho are deeply embedded in national systems, often supported by external funding from partners like European Union, USAID, and Africa CDC. While this dual accountability—to both donors and government—is not inherently problematic, it exposes gaps in coordination, oversight, and alignment with national priorities.
Sierra Leone offers a useful model. Through its Ministry of Planning and Economic Development, the government has established an NGO Directorate that goes beyond simple registration. It oversees NGO registration and renewals, compiles annual reports, collects sectoral data, and conducts site visits. Under its National NGO Policy Framework (2023–2028), the Directorate also maintains a national database, monitors relationships between stakeholders, and shares information with local councils. This system ensures that NGOs are integrated into national planning and are accountable both to donors and the state.
By contrast, Lesotho’s framework appears more fragmented. NGOs are registered under the Societies Act and coordinated through bodies such as the Lesotho Council of Non-Governmental Organisations, while oversight is often handled through line ministries and project-based agreements. In sectors like health, partnerships exist with institutions such as the Lesotho Red Cross Society, but accountability mechanisms remain dispersed and inconsistent across sectors and districts.
This fragmented system creates a hybrid accountability structure where NGOs report to multiple entities—donors, ministries, and local partners—without a unified national framework to guide alignment with long-term development priorities. As a result, coordination depends heavily on individual ministries or projects, and national oversight remains limited.
Drawing lessons from Sierra Leone, Lesotho could strengthen its system without fully replicating the model. Establishing a central coordination unit within a planning ministry could help maintain a comprehensive database of NGOs, including their sectors, funding sources, and geographic coverage. Registration could be linked to ongoing oversight, requiring regular reporting and alignment with sectoral strategies. Ministries could play a stronger role in certifying whether NGO activities align with national plans, while district-level structures could be empowered to ensure local accountability.
Ultimately, the issue is not whether NGOs should prioritize donors or governments—they must respond to both. The real challenge lies in whether Lesotho has a coherent system to define priorities, track implementation, and ensure accountability. Sierra Leone’s experience demonstrates that effective oversight can strengthen, rather than constrain, civil society by aligning external resources with national development goals.
