Title: From Trust to Transformation: Why Supporting Refugee-Led Organizations Must Be a National Priority
Across Kenya and the broader East African region, refugee-led organizations (RLOs) are quietly transforming the humanitarian landscape. Built from within displaced communities, these organizations are not only responding to immediate needs but also redefining what accountability, trust, and effective service delivery look like. Yet, despite their proven impact, RLOs remain underfunded, under-recognized, and often excluded from national-level decision-making spaces. If we are serious about advancing refugee-led advocacy, then strengthening RLOs is not optional it is essential.
RLOs exist because refugees have always supported one another. Long before formal humanitarian systems reached many communities, refugees organized themselves into networks of care, sharing resources, knowledge and protection. Today, these efforts have evolved into structured organizations delivering education, psychosocial support, livelihoods programs and community services. What sets RLOs apart is not just what they do, but how they do it.
At the heart of their effectiveness lies trust.
Unlike many international actors, RLOs are embedded within the communities they serve. They speak the same languages, understand cultural contexts, and experience the same daily realities. This proximity creates a powerful form of accountability one rooted in relationships rather than reporting frameworks. Community members can directly engage with RLO leaders, provide feedback, and demand transparency. As a result, RLOs are often perceived as more respectful, inclusive and responsive than external organizations.
This trust is not symbolic it directly improves outcomes. When communities feel heard and respected, they are more likely to participate in programs, share accurate information and collaborate in problem solving. In this sense, trust becomes a form of social capital that strengthens both service delivery and long-term resilience.
However, this strength is also where the challenge begins.
As RLOs gain visibility, they increasingly engage with donors and international partners. While this creates opportunities for growth, it also introduces a competing form of accountability upward accountability to donors. Funding often comes with strict reporting requirements, compliance standards, and predefined priorities that may not align with local realities. For many RLOs, this creates a difficult balance between serving their communities and satisfying donor expectations.
This tension can have serious consequences. When donor requirements dominate, RLOs may be forced to shift their focus away from community-driven priorities. Time and resources are redirected toward reporting instead of engagement. In some cases, local ownership is weakened, and the very trust that makes RLOs effective begins to erode.
At a national level, this challenge is even more significant. Despite their contributions, RLOs are rarely included in policy discussions or formal decision-making processes. Their insights grounded in lived experience are often overlooked in favor of top-down approaches. This exclusion not only limits the effectiveness of national strategies but also reinforces inequality within the humanitarian system.
To move forward, a shift in approach is urgently needed.
First, community accountability must be placed at the center of all support to RLOs. This means investing in systems that allow communities to actively shape programs, provide feedback, and monitor outcomes. Mechanisms such as community consultations, open forums, and refugee-led monitoring groups should be recognized as essential not optional. These systems strengthen transparency while preserving the relational trust that defines RLOs.
Second, funding models must evolve. Donors should move toward flexible, multi-year funding that reflects the realities of RLO operations. Simplified reporting requirements, co-designed with RLOs, can reduce administrative burdens while maintaining accountability. Direct funding rather than relying solely on intermediaries can also empower RLOs to take full ownership of their work.
Third, capacity-building should be reframed as partnership rather than correction. RLOs do not lack capacity they bring unique strengths that the humanitarian system needs. However, targeted support in areas such as financial management, governance, and compliance can enhance their sustainability and enable them to operate effectively at larger scales. When done collaboratively, capacity-building also strengthens trust between RLOs, donors, and governments.
Finally, national governments must formally recognize RLOs as key stakeholders in development and humanitarian response. This includes creating enabling policies for registration, ensuring access to funding opportunities, and including RLO representatives in national planning and coordination platforms. True inclusion goes beyond consultation it requires shared decision-making power.
The potential impact of these changes is significant. Strengthened RLOs can bridge the gap between communities and institutions, improve service delivery, and promote social cohesion between refugees and host populations. At a national level, they can contribute to more inclusive, responsive, and sustainable systems.
Most importantly, investing in RLOs shifts the narrative. It moves refugees from being seen as passive recipients of aid to active leaders of change. This is the core of refugee-led advocacy not just participation, but power.
In a world where displacement continues to rise, we cannot afford to ignore the solutions that already exist within affected communities. RLOs are not just partners in response; they are architects of a more equitable future. The question is no longer whether we should support them.
The question is whether we are ready to trust them and to act on that trust at a national level.
Ajabna Hassan-Executive Director- VOICE FOR EQUITY.