MSP | Income Generating Activities (IGAs)
We welcome external contributions. Please feel free to use the “comment” function to share your thoughts with us or suggest additional solutions you would like us to feature.
IGAs can help NGOs and NGO networks operating in humanitarian response contexts diversify their funding base, reduce dependence on foreign grants, and increase long-term resilience. One broad category is the rental or shared use of organisational infrastructure, where NGOs monetise assets they already manage. Organisations that own or lease offices, training centers, warehouses, vehicles, or meeting spaces can rent them to other NGOs, UN agencies, social enterprises, or private firms operating locally. For example, humanitarian NGOs with spare office space can lease desk space during non-peak periods, while networks can establish shared service hubs that generate income through membership or user fees. This approach is particularly attractive because it builds on existing investments and can generate relatively predictable revenue with limited mission drift, provided access policies remain aligned with humanitarian principles.
A second category involves providing fee-based services that align with the NGO’s core expertise and mandate. Many humanitarian NGOs already possess strong capabilities in areas such as needs assessments, community engagement, protection mainstreaming, monitoring and evaluation, logistics coordination, safeguarding, or humanitarian leadership training. These competencies can be packaged into consulting services, training courses, technical assistance, or facilitation support for other NGOs, local authorities, donors, or private-sector actors. NGO networks may be especially well positioned to offer such services collectively—such as coordinated training programmes, joint assessments, or advisory services—allowing income to be shared while strengthening members’ professional credibility and influence within the humanitarian system.
A third category includes establishing separate income-generating businesses or social enterprises whose profits are channeled back to support humanitarian work. These may include restaurants or catering services, transportation and logistics companies, printing or IT services, handicraft or agricultural enterprises, or recycling initiatives. In humanitarian settings, NGOs have also explored community-based enterprises that both generate income and create livelihoods for crisis-affected populations. While this model offers greater potential for unrestricted revenue, it also carries higher risk and requires clear legal separation, strong governance, and business expertise to avoid financial loss or reputational harm.
Across all models, careful consideration of market demand, legal frameworks, ethical risks, and management capacity is essential. Income-generating activities are most effective when they complement—rather than distract from—the organisation’s humanitarian mission and are governed with the same accountability and transparency expected of donor-funded work.
PROS and CONS
Pros: IGAs that leverage existing expertise and assets can be started with minimal initial investments; the adopter has control over the scale and scope of activities; income generated is generally flexible and can be used for overheads/core costs as well as activities or strategic investments.
Cons: Some countries are more restrictive than others when it comes to NGOs engaging in IGAs and generating profits (even if those are re-invested in the charity); it will likely be necessary to set up separate financial systems to manage the IGA; like any business venture, IGAs can fail if the demand fails to materialise or the quality of services is not deemed satisfactory; IGAs can be negatively affected by crises (insecurity, economic shocks, natural disasters) at a time when their income may be most needed; if successful, pursuit of IGAs may overtake the original mission of the NGO or network.
SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS
Return on Investment: Will the activity generate sufficient income to warrant the time, effort and start-up costs associated with its development and maintenance? How long will it reasonably take for the activity to generate income?
Mission synergy: Does the nature of the activity align well with the mission and values of the organisation? Does the IGA strengthen or harm the external image of the organisation?
Risk assessment: Could the success or failure of the IGA harm the communities served by the organisation? Does the activity expose the organisation to external threats (from competitors, lawsuits, etc…)?
Financial management: Can the current financial systems of the organisation handle new payment streams? Will these payments be made in cash or via Mobile Money or some other form?
EXAMPLES
The Kenya Red Cross (KRC) has developed a number of IGAs to complement its traditional funding sources, ranging from a medical training centre that closely aligns with its mission, to the development of a chain of business hotels, whose profits are channeled back to KRC.
In Syria, a non-profit named Ataa Relief has used their land endowment to generate income for their social interventions. Through renting their buildings and operating a profitable pistachio farm, they turn their assets into project funds.
Here at Response Innovation Lab, we have a consulting arm called RIL4U that specialises in providing consulting services to external humanitarian innovation teams from international NGOs, UN agencies and innovation funds. The income from these activities helps cover the salaries of staff and other core costs.
In many countries, Oxfam Shops and other similar charity-owned retail outlets, provide both income for the host organisation and livelihood opportunities for local vulnerable individuals. These stores usually function as second-hand goods stores, receiving donated clothing, equipment and decorative items, refurbishing them as needed and reselling them to customers.