Child's Heart Newsletter

Lwazi Village Outreach Newsletter

FBF Facebook page Feed Widget


    There is a fallacy in the author’s argument as to whether Big-Money, Top-Down is better or worse than Small Money, Bottom-Up. The model portrayed as Small Money, Bottom Up is an “old model” of development that has the “foreign influence” telling the locals what is going to be done on their behalf, and then expecting them to “approve” and/or “agree.” Unfortunately, this model is still being used, but it defies the documented proof of successful development efforts modeled after CHE (Community Health Evangelism - and the Chalmers Center’s “When Helping Hurts” (

    These are models where the outside “influencer” is not a foreigner but a national trained in the concepts and practices of wholeistic development. The community takes the ownership for identifying and prioritizing a development project, then seeks funds and resources within their own community to bring the project to fruition. These projects can be something that brings an advantage to the community as a whole (such as a well), or creates expanded employment opportunities for members of the community. Though this process can be slow, it results in a self-sustaining community empowered to seek out further opportunities.

    Another fallacy of this article is that the Small Money, Bottom-Up approach is “slow, but hunger and disease don’t wait.” This is a case of inappropriately evaluating the problems in the community. A relief strategy may be a better decision for addressing the immediate hunger and disease crisis that may be resulting in death. Then a development strategy can be pursued to address the chronic hunger and disease issues of the community.

    Does Foreign Aid Do More Harm Than Good?
    Some say yes, calling foreign aid a form of neo-colonialism that does not alleviate poverty, but in fact perpetuates it.
  • When Helping Hurts?

    7 worst international aid ideas
    Maybe their hearts were in the right place. Maybe not.

Childs Heart