Case Study: International Humanity Foundation

IHF Medan Center

The Client

The International Humanity Foundation is an international NGO with safe homes for children in Chiang Rai, Thailand and Nakuru, Kenya; as well as three education centers in Bali, Jakarta, and Medan (Indonesia). The organization functions primarily through the efforts of local staff, volunteers and an Executive Leadership team from all over the world.

Children playing outside the IHF Nakuru Center

The Challenge

• Update the IHF brand and online presence to better communicate the value of its work to stakeholders.

• Facilitate the development and publishing of impact stories

• Equip older youth in safe homes with employability skills and increase capacity of local staff

• Create volunteer program that prepares leaders to run IHF centers and streamline application process

• Brand Development -

Update wording of mission and vision; create core values

• Capacity Training -

Created internal reporting process and facilitated workshops in a PYD setting to equip young people and local staff to use reports to develop content and lead fundraising, media and outreach campaigns

• Web Development-

Update website, including revising copy and curating two annual reports.

• Programme/Project Design -

  Created the Global Leadership Development Volunteer Programm

Entrance to the IHF Bali Center

• Developed a more concise mission statement, a clearer vision statement, and created 8 core values that resonate with impacted children, local staff, executive leadership team and donors

• An effective social media content strategy

• Increased opens and link clicks on newsletters by 7%

• 3 workshops, 5 Written and video tutorials on shared reporting and uncovering impact stories.

• Increased engagement on Website with new volunteer programme and streamlined application process increased qualified applicants by 900%

Acknowledging but not Leading with COVID-19

By Zipporah Orbisi

FHG Quality Engineer and Consultant

Defining A New Normal in 2021 and Beyond:

Acknowledging but not Leading with COVID-19

The novel Coronavirus continues to be a very real epidemic that has hit many countries very hard. Many of us have lost loved ones amidst this fast-spreading illness, and for that reason, we have seen many of us  band together to show our remarkable collective strength and to assert a renewed belief in human-kind. It's interesting how a virus helped us to realize our likeness, those things we have in common. We truly became a global community. In moments of quarantine, we all longed to be social, we all wished for the health of our loved ones—family and friends. In all the races and creeds of the world none stood superior in immunity to the virus. Yet with all the progress we made, we are still witnessing devastating cultural and civil wars being fought all over the world—from ethnic conflict in Ethiopia’s Tigray region, to cities such as Aleppo and Damascus in the Middle East, to heightened racial tensions in the U.S. 

So what are we missing? 

Now that the world is slowly starting to emerge from the shadow of COVID-19 and reopen, there are several questions around Development that we must consider as we define a new normal in 2021 and beyond:

Photo by Tim Mossholder

Did the pandemic set us back in our  progress with communicating with communities? 

Are we still assuming that the main plight in every neighborhood is still COVID-19? 

Yes, COVID-19 should continue to  rank high on our list of global concerns. And of course we should  take every precaution recommended by the World Health Organisation and Centers for Disease Control to keep from spreading it.

However, the time has come to focus our efforts on rebuilding, and creating true sustainable change for people while preemptively increasing our global preparedness for future epidemics and pandemics. We must continue to trust our medical experts to focus on the COVID-19 crisis, while we do our part to define a new normal that benefits all people.

COVID-19 has done more than infected over 150 million people, including taking the lives of over 3 million people, globally. Over the course of this past year, people in both the Global South and the Global North have experienced harrowing economic effects, while others have more than tripled their net-worth. The gap in quality education widened exponentially as those who do not have access to the internet, did not have access to online-based, remote learning. Even as COVID-19 ravaged populations, neonatal conditions and HIV continued to be amongst the leading causes of death on the continent of Africa (According to a 2020 Statista Report).

We must continue to acknowledge COVID-19 and all its devastating effects. And as we seek to rebuild, one community at a time, we must be mindful that we cannot  lead with COVID-19, which is to say we cannot enter  communities, especially those that may be different from our own, and  make  the virus itself the center of everyone's attention, without first seeking to understand the community’s most urgent needs. 

In addition to impacting the health of individuals and demolishing economies, COVID-19 successfully managed to exacerbate the conditions of those who were already forced to live on the margins. Those who were already “at risk” faced even greater risk. The people “at-risk” were not simply the older population or those with pre-existing conditions. Everyone who has not been afforded the opportunity to create meaningful change for themselves and their community are “at risk”. Those who are vulnerable. Those who have been marginalized and underserved. Those who are often rendered invisible by the dominant society. These people still matter. And their plight is a serious one. Even after COVID-19 officially passes, their situation will continue to be a matter of life and death, the difference between mere survival and the opportunity to thrive.  

Rebuilding, defining a new normal once more, requires setting an agenda. But let us not fall back into the old habit of creating community, global and political agendas that only benefit the privileged few. Let us commit to the inclusion and well-being of every person. Let us first listen. Let us first seek to understand. Only then can we begin to offer true assistance and benefit people using our complementary areas of knowledge. It’s time to dream up and create a new normal, a better world, one that benefits us all. 

What is Meant by Global North vs Global South

At Findlay House Global, we consider the Global North and Global South binaries to be the least problematic way to distinguish the relative wealth between countries and continents, although geographically inaccurate.

The vast majority of other “versus” binary terms related to Development, for example -

First World vs Third World.

Developed vs. Developing.

Industrial vs Agrarian.

High Income vs Low Income.

are packed with value judgments. Those categories inherently suggest that countries in one category, for instance “First World”, are better than countries in the other.

We acknowledge that looking at international development using binaries on a whole is problematic.