Research and source material

# Client Research Packet

1. Client Overview

What the organization is and does

Verified facts (website + third-party): Hope Rises is the public brand for Hope Rises International, a Christian global health nonprofit focused on neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) such as leprosy (Hansen’s disease) and related conditions, combining medical intervention with explicit faith-based, gospel-centered partnership work. The organization emphasizes a model of working “with Christ-centered partners” and describes its mission as bringing “physical healing and enduring hope,” repeatedly linking “healing” to medicine and “restoration” to the Christian gospel. Verified facts (history and naming): Hope Rises International is formerly American Leprosy Missions and frames the rebrand as “new name, same mission,” explicitly stating the rebrand shifts attention from “a disease” to “people and hope,” while keeping leprosy central to the work. The organization states it has operated “since 1906.”

Who it appears to serve

Verified facts: Primary beneficiaries are described as people affected by leprosy and other NTDs, often experiencing disability, stigma, and isolation, especially in lower-resource settings. Secondary stakeholders the site speaks to directly include: - Individual donors (frequent CTAs to “donate,” “give now,” and donation FAQs). - Churches (a dedicated Churches page with involvement pathways and materials). - Research and technical partners (publications list and research program pages).

Where it appears to serve

Verified facts (offices): Hope Rises lists a U.S. office in Greenville, SC, a donation mailing address in Topeka, KS, and an Africa office in Accra. Verified facts (field scope): It positions itself as working “around the world” and lists partnerships with ministries of health in multiple countries and with international bodies. Strong inference: The “service area” is best understood as global program delivery (through partners) rather than local, geography-bound services.

Open questions to validate in interview: - Which countries are “priority countries” operationally today (not

just historically or via partner lists)? - Which program geographies are expanding or winding down after the rebrand?

Industry/category and market context

Verified facts: This is a nonprofit operating in the global NTD space. Market context (verified): World Health Organization estimates NTDs affect more than 1 billion people globally and reports nearly 1.5 billion people require NTD interventions (preventive and curative). WHO also reports 172,717 new leprosy cases detected globally in 2024, based on data from 188 reporting countries/areas/territories.

Likely business model and revenue-driving offers

Verified facts (organizational structure): The underlying legal entity is American Leprosy Missions Inc (EIN 13-5562163), with Hope Rises International used as a “trade name” on the site. Verified facts (revenue concentration): In FY ending June 2024, the org’s revenue is shown as $11.28M, with contributions comprising ~96.9% of revenue per extracted Form 990 data in ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer. Verified facts (fundraising offers surfaced on-site): - General donations and donation FAQs (tax deductibility, allocation policy, etc.). - Monthly donor framing (“Miracle Partners”) and a leverage/matching frame (“33x Match”), presented as core donor pathways on the Support page. - Seasonal and project-based “gift catalog” style giving with itemized gifts (diagnostic test, self-care kits, custom shoes, lymphedema kits, surgeries, training, etc.). - Church-specific partnership pathway and “World Leprosy Day” engagement tools. Strong inference: Primary revenue drivers are likely (1) individual giving (one-time + recurring), (2) church-based giving/ mobilization, plus (3) institutional grants and technical partnerships supporting research and field programs (supported indirectly by their partner ecosystem and program descriptions, but should be validated with internal revenue breakdown).

Open questions to validate in interview: - Current revenue mix (individual vs church vs foundations vs

government vs in-kind). - Which offers are strategically “hero” offers for growth over the next 12–18 months.

2. Service / Product-Line Map

Program-side “offers” (what they deliver in the world)

Verified facts (explicit pillars on site): On its “Our Work” page, Hope Rises groups program work into visible pillars that function like program lines: Training: equipping local leaders, pastors, and health workers for early diagnosis and care. Research: emphasizing a long legacy and current initiatives including vaccine and diagnostics. “Miracle Shoes”: protective footwear to prevent wounds, infections, disability. Medical shipments: shipping medicines/supplies to clinics and hospitals in partner regions. Water/WASH: improving water quality and sanitation in specific program regions (explicitly mentions work in India and Nepal on the Our Work page). Verified facts (church-network model described as a scalable program line): A “Christian Partnership” model is described in the Spring 2025 newsletter as a replicable, church-network-centered project approach (pastors trained to recognize symptoms, raise awareness, refer cases, and provide spiritual/emotional support).

Donor-side “offers” (how supporters can buy in)

Verified facts (structural priorities implied by nav and support content): - Donate (general): prominent in global site nav and Support page. - Monthly giving: framed as “Miracle Partners,” positioned as “heartbeat” of ongoing support. - High-leverage giving: “33x” medical supply impact framing. - Gift catalog giving: discrete gift items tied to program deliverables (diagnostic tests, custom shoes, lymphedema kits, etc.). - Church partnership package: watch, give, pray, awareness tools, and World Leprosy Day participation. - Legacy giving: positioned on Support page as “Leave a Legacy of Hope.”

Niche specialties and “signature” capabilities

Verified facts (distinctives visible in site architecture): - Strong leprosy and NTD educational content hub with FAQs and disease explanations. - Visible research depth: a Publications page that lists peer-reviewed publications; a Research & Vaccines page describing vaccine and diagnostic initiatives. - Strong partner ecosystem: explicitly “more than 50 Christian organizations, local churches, and faith-based groups,” plus named technical and institutional partners.

Open questions to validate in interview: - What proportion of program spend goes to each pillar (training

vs footwear vs WASH vs research vs shipments)? - How “Miracle Shoes” and “Medical Shipments” are operationally delivered (in-house vs partner-procured, sourcing strategy, QA). - Whether there are formal “program packages” donors can fund (beyond the catalog cards).

3. Positioning Clues

What they repeatedly claim or promise

Verified facts (repeated site language): - Core framing: “Hope Through Healing” and “Hope starts with healing.” - Dual-outcome promise: physical healing plus enduring/eternal hope (explicitly Christian). - Strategy emphasis: partnering with local pastors and faith leaders to provide physical and spiritual care. - Stigma as a central enemy: leprosy’s harm is described as social rejection and shame, not only medical disease burden.

Differentiators that appear real (not just generic nonprofit claims)

Verified facts: - Faith-first partner selection: The Spring 2025 newsletter Q&A says they will not move forward with programs “based on secular partnerships,” with an exception carved out for technical/lab-focused projects. - Research credibility narrative: the Research & Vaccines page frames a long history of innovation (diasone in 1946, multi-drug therapy piloting, vaccine work since 2002), and the Publications page supports an R&D identity via externally hosted papers. - Church + clinic integration as a program engine (pastors identify/refer; clinics diagnose/treat; church provides ongoing community support).

Where positioning feels vague or easily copyable

Observed pattern (needs validation): Phrases like “hope,” “healing,” “restore dignity,” and “most marginalized” are emotionally resonant but widely used by faith-based global ministries. Their distinctive advantage is likely how they operationalize this (disease specialization + research + church referral networks), but that operational clarity is unevenly articulated across pages and may need sharper “system description” language.

Positioning opportunities to probe in the interview

High-value areas to clarify live: - The sharpest 1–2 sentence positioning versus similar leprosy/NTD charities (what they do that others do not). - Whether “Christian partnership” is primarily (a) a theological conviction, (b) an access strategy, (c) a sustainability strategy, or (d) all three, and how they want that framed publicly for SEO audiences. - How they define success: “ending leprosy,” “ending stigma,” “ending disability,” “improving detection,” and “vaccine progress” are different end goals that can imply different content priorities.

4. Voice and Messaging Clues

Likely voice traits (evidence-based clues, not final truth)

Observed from recent blog posts and cornerstone pages: 1. Faith-forward and devotional: frequent invocation of God’s provision, prayer, the gospel, and Jesus as motivation and the source of “true” restoration. 2. Warm, relational, donor-facing: heavy use of “we” and “you,” direct encouragement, and stories tied to actions donors can take. 3. Educational but non-technical: content uses practical explanations and “Key Takeaways,” but typically avoids heavy clinical jargon, even when describing treatment protocols. 4. Dignity-centered framing: consistent emphasis on belonging, reintegration, social shame, and the person beyond the disease. 5. Structured persuasion: frequent use of short sections, subheads, and in-post FAQs to guide readers toward a giving action.

Tone patterns

Observed tone range: - Home and impact pages: inspirational, high-level, mission-centric, “big horizon” faith messaging. - Blog: conversational and practical, often framed as donor education; includes stepwise guidance and FAQs, sometimes bordering on “guide” format. - Disease education page: more informational and direct, with explicit myth-busting and treatment facts.

Repeated phrases and conceptual hooks

High repetition / likely “brand mantra” candidates: - “Hope starts with healing.” - “Christ-centered partners,” “local pastors and faith leaders,” and “through the Church.” - “Restore dignity,” “break stigma,” “seen, valued, loved.”

Overused phrases and likely phrases to avoid

Overuse risk (observed): Frequent reuse of hope/healing/restoration language can become nonspecific without concrete anchors (numbers, mechanisms, proof points). Explicit “avoid” cue (verified): Their leprosy FAQ says it is not acceptable to use the word “leper” because it reinforces stigma; preferred language is “person affected by leprosy” or “Hansen’s disease.”

What to treat as hypotheses (needs validation in interview)

Whether they want the public voice to feel more like “ministry newsletter” versus “global health authority” depending on audience segment. Whether the post-2025 rebrand implies a deliberate shift in tone, lexicon, and content priorities (it likely does).

5. Competitor Landscape

Competitors are split into (a) direct fundraising competitors, (b) SERP competitors that dominate informational queries, and (c) aspirational/dominant players that shape the broader narrative or win high-authority rankings. Direct competitors The Leprosy Mission International - Why they matter: large, established leprosy-focused charity with extensive educational resources and a clear “end leprosy” target (0 by 2035). - Overlap: donor dollars, leprosy education keywords, stigma messaging, faith-rooted framing. - Apparent strengths: deep site architecture for leprosy informational queries (symptoms, contagion, what it looks like, treatment, etc.). - Messaging angle: “We can end the suffering caused by leprosy,” urgency plus finish-line framing. - Topics they appear to own: “what is leprosy,” “symptoms,” “is leprosy contagious,” “what does leprosy look like,” “cure for leprosy,” “leprosy in the Bible.” Lepra - Why they matter: leprosy and lymphatic filariasis focus with explicit inclusion and mental health support positioning. - Overlap: early detection, MDT, disability care, LF self-care, stigma reduction. - Apparent strengths: policy/government partnership language and person-centered wellbeing framing. - Messaging angle: prevention, diagnosis, disability aids, mental health support; working with governments and health systems. - Topics they appear to own: “leprosy mental health,” “disability aids,” “LF self-care groups,” “health education programs,” “reconstructive surgery access.” NLR International - Why they matter: global leprosy NGO with donor-facing claims about funding allocation and large-scale detection/treatment impact. - Overlap: early detection and treatment, disability prevention and rehab, leprosy program funding. - Apparent strengths: quantitative impact and efficiency messaging. - Messaging angle: “detect, treat and help rehabilitate... as early as possible.” - Topics they appear to own: “leprosy rehabilitation,” “early detection,” “where donation goes,” “program allocation.” Effect Hope - Why they matter: faith-inspired NTD organization with strong “impact reporting” positioning and multi-offer donor pathways (monthly, catalog, legacy, corporate giving). - Overlap: NTD portfolio, stigma, mental health counseling, health system strengthening, research output. - Apparent strengths: polished SEO-ready site taxonomy (Work, Programs, Where We Work, Research, Blog, Stories) and high-volume proof points. - Messaging angle: “faith inspired, people centred, impact focused,” with specific metrics. - Topics they appear to own: “NTD mental health counselling,” “health systems strengthening,” “NTD programs by country,” “impact reports.” Rising Star Outreach - Why they matter: India-focused leprosy work with a distinct “leprosy colony” community-dev model plus donor “expeditions” and child sponsorship angle. - Overlap: stigma, medical care, education/community development, leprosy prevention and screening. - Apparent strengths: experiential donor engagement and a tight geographic narrative (India). - Messaging angle: empowering families “to rise above the stigma” through education, medical care, community development. - Topics they appear to own: “leprosy colonies,” “sponsor a child leprosy,” “medical mission trip India leprosy.” FAIRMED - Why they matter: NTD operator with content framing leprosy, yaws, and elephantiasis as part of the broader NTD set; positioning leprosy as tied to poverty and stigma. - Overlap: leprosy basics, yaws, LF/elephantiasis, stigma education. - Apparent strengths: straightforward disease-content pages for SEO and broader NTD coverage beyond leprosy. - Messaging angle: leprosy is curable but concealed due to stigma; thrives where poverty and malnutrition exist. - Topics they appear to own: “yaws,” “elephantiasis,” “leprosy poverty connection,” “NTD overview pages.”

SERP competitors (informational gravity wells)

WHO (already cited above) - Why they matter: dominates “what is leprosy,” global stats, policy strategy, World Leprosy Day narrative. - Content theme: definition, epidemiology, elimination strategy framing, stigma and inequality. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention - Why they matter: high-authority medical content for U.S.-oriented leprosy queries (symptoms, clinical overview, treatment protocols). - Topics they own: “Hansen’s disease symptoms,” “leprosy treatment,” “clinical overview,” “public health guidance.” Health Resources and Services Administration - Why they matter: authoritative U.S. clinical/treatment guidance via the National Hansen’s Disease Program site, influential for medically oriented searches. - Topics they own: “recommended treatment,” “MDT regimens,” U.S.-specific protocols and updates.

Aspirational/dominant narrative and authority players

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation - Why they matter: shapes funding narratives and high-authority content around NTD elimination and investment logic. - Overlap: NTD framing, elimination goals, health equity.

6. SEO Opportunity Map

This map focuses on article/blog opportunities that can realistically convert into donor trust, church mobilization, partner credibility, and search visibility.

Major commercial themes to rank for (donor, church, and partnership intent)

Donation-intent clusters (commercial or mixed intent): - “leprosy charity,” “donate to leprosy,” “best leprosy charity,” “NTD charity,” “Christian medical charity,” “Christian global health ministry.” - Rationale: Their revenue is overwhelmingly contribution-driven and their site heavily pushes giving CTAs. Trust and accountability clusters (commercial or comparison intent): - “is [charity] legit,” “charity transparency,” “Charity Navigator rating,” “how much goes to programs,” “overhead vs impact.” - Rationale: They highlight financial transparency, audits, and give donors allocation policies and FAQs. Church-mobilization clusters (commercial or local/mixed intent): - “World Leprosy Day resources,” “World Leprosy Day church,” “leprosy sermon resources,” “church missions leprosy.” - Rationale: Their Churches and World Leprosy Day pages provide downloadable materials and explicit participation instructions. “Gift catalog” clusters (commercial intent, seasonal spikes): - “charity gift catalog,” “donation gift card (medical supplies),” “buy a goat style giving,” “alternative giving gifts.” - Rationale: They have a productized gift catalog with price points and tangible outcomes (diagnostic test, shoes, kits, surgery).

Major informational themes to rank for (mission-aligned, high-authority needed)

Leprosy core knowledge clusters (informational): - “what is leprosy,” “leprosy symptoms,” “is leprosy contagious,” “leprosy treatment,” “Hansen’s disease.” - Current asset: Their Leprosy & Related Diseases page includes extensive FAQs and disease explanations. - Competitive reality: WHO and CDC dominate many of these queries; Hope Rises can still compete by owning “faith + dignity + stigma + practical care” angles with citation-rich content. Other disease clusters (informational, under-defended on their site): - “Buruli ulcer,” “lymphatic filariasis,” “yaws,” “elephantiasis,” plus practical care queries (wound care, lymphedema self-care). - Current asset: They mention Buruli ulcer, LF, and yaws on their disease page and blog; recent posts have practical subtopics (footwear, MDT, home kits). - Gap: The site has some content but not a clearly structured “pillar + cluster” library comparable to large leprosy NGOs.

Comparison, alternative, and problem-aware themes

High-value topic types where prospects search before they commit: - “leprosy vs Hansen’s disease” (terminology and stigma). - “how to end leprosy,” “leprosy elimination strategy,” “why leprosy still exists.” - “leprosy vaccine” and “LepVax” (news-driven spikes, high linking potential). - “medical supplies donation to Africa” and “how to ship medical supplies internationally” (they already published a long guide-style post). Obvious gaps vs competitors Gaps that appear real (based on site review and competitor patterns): - Competitors such as The Leprosy Mission have extensive leprosy informational subpages (look, cause, contagiousness, cure, symptoms), which can outcompete a single long FAQ page. - Lepra and others foreground mental health and inclusion as primary themes; Hope Rises talks stigma often but may have room to build a more explicit “mental wellbeing + reintegration” content cluster. - Effect Hope’s site architecture suggests stronger segmentation for donors (corporate giving, volunteer, donor portal, impact reports), which can produce additional SEO entry points beyond disease education. Defend, attack, expand priorities Defend (protect what they already have): - Leprosy FAQs and stigma language leadership (including explicit term guidance). - Their unique faith-based partnership model positioning (especially post-rebrand). Attack (topics competitors likely win today): - High-authority leprosy basics with an added “faith + dignity + reintegration + donor pathway” layer. - “Leprosy vaccine” explainers and updates tied to LepVax milestones and what donors actually fund. Expand (build new clusters adjacent to proven traction): - Practical care content: footwear, wound care, home kits, lymphedema management, reconstructive surgery, and “how early detection works.” - Church toolkits beyond event pages: “how to build an NTD missions month,” “prayer prompts + action guides,” “how to talk about stigma responsibly.”

7. Belief Topic Map

TOPIC-01: Leprosy is still here and still curable

Canonical question: What do people need to know in 2026 that corrects the “leprosy is ancient” myth without sensationalism? Primary keyword: leprosy cure Secondary keywords: is leprosy curable, leprosy treatment works, can leprosy be cured today, Hansen’s disease cure, leprosy MDT, leprosy early treatment, leprosy disability prevention, leprosy misconceptions Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: It captures high-volume myth-busting searches and sets up donor motivation with credible facts, especially around early detection preventing disability. Why the client should rank: Their site already teaches that leprosy is curable and connects cure to real-world access barriers and stigma. Competitor angles: WHO and CDC cover core medical facts; major leprosy NGOs frame urgency and “ending leprosy” timelines. Likely client point of view: Leprosy is curable, but people remain trapped by delayed diagnosis, stigma, and lack of access, so the goal is to restore both health and belonging. Interview probe questions: What is the simplest “truth set” you want every donor to remember about leprosy in 2026? What do people commonly believe that you most want to correct? What references do you trust most for statistics and claims (WHO, national data, internal reports)? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Needs careful sourcing and non-stigmatizing imagery/word choice; avoid outdated stats.

TOPIC-02: Early signs of leprosy and why early diagnosis matters

Canonical question: What are the earliest signs people should recognize, and what happens when diagnosis is delayed? Primary keyword: early signs of leprosy Secondary keywords: leprosy symptoms early stage, skin patches numbness, leprosy numb spots, leprosy diagnosis, leprosy nerve damage, Grade 2 disability leprosy, early detection leprosy, leprosy screening Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: It attracts informational traffic and supports the org’s emphasis on preventing lifelong disability and stigma through early action. Why the client should rank: They emphasize training and early detection via local leaders and clinics. Competitor angles: CDC/WHO dominate clinical descriptions; other NGOs publish symptom guides and “what does it look like” pages. Likely client point of view: Early recognition plus trusted local referral pathways are the fastest route to preventing disability and social isolation. Interview probe questions: In the contexts you serve, who is “first to notice” symptoms, and what blocks next steps? What do your partners do differently that speeds up diagnosis? What is your most defensible claim about the impact of earlier detection? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Ensure the content is framed for donor and community education, not as medical diagnosis advice.

TOPIC-03: How leprosy spreads and why most people are naturally immune

Canonical question: What’s true about leprosy transmission, and which myths cause harm? Primary keyword: is leprosy contagious Secondary keywords: how do you catch leprosy, leprosy transmission, leprosy spread droplets, close contact leprosy, leprosy immunity 95 percent, leprosy myths, can you get leprosy from touching Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Transmission fear fuels stigma; accurate education supports reintegration and treatment seeking. Why the client should rank: Their leprosy FAQ content already addresses transmission and immunity. Competitor angles: CDC/WHO content is authoritative; NGOs often frame “fear vs facts” to reduce stigma. Likely client point of view: Stigma drops when communities learn leprosy is not easily spread and treatment quickly stops infectiousness. Interview probe questions: Which transmission myths are most common in your partner communities? What education formats actually change behavior (church talks, clinics, radio, school programs)? How do you measure stigma reduction or increased treatment seeking? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Must be tightly sourced; avoid oversimplifying transmission nuances.

TOPIC-04: Why “leper” is harmful language and what to say instead

Canonical question: What language reflects dignity, and how does language change outcomes for people affected? Primary keyword: is the term leper offensive Secondary keywords: person affected by leprosy language, Hansen’s disease terminology, leprosy stigma language, respectful language disability, stigma-free language global health, leprosy discrimination language Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: This is a distinctive “belief” topic that also functions as evergreen educational SEO and reinforces the org’s dignity-first stance. Why the client should rank: Their site explicitly addresses this term and explains why it reinforces stigma. Competitor angles: WHO and leprosy advocacy networks emphasize stigma reduction; some NGOs promote person-first language. Likely client point of view: Words shape whether someone is treated as a neighbor or an outcast, so language is part of healing. Interview probe questions: What language guidelines do you want writers, churches, and partners to follow? Are there other commonly used phrases you want to retire? How do you handle biblical references that use older language while staying respectful? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Requires theological sensitivity for faith audiences while maintaining person-first framing.

TOPIC-05: Ending leprosy stigma requires more than medicine

Canonical question: What causes stigma to persist after cure, and what interventions actually reduce it? Primary keyword: leprosy stigma Secondary keywords: discrimination against leprosy, leprosy social stigma, leprosy reintegration, stigma after leprosy cure, leprosy mental health, leprosy community education, leprosy myths and facts, stigma reduction programs Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Their messaging repeatedly frames stigma as a core problem; this can become a cornerstone content cluster. Why the client should rank: They publish stigma-focused posts and position church + clinic partnership as a pathway to reintegration. Competitor angles: WHO frames leprosy as tied to inequality and discrimination; NGOs promote education, inclusion, and rights-based approaches. Likely client point of view: The combination of truth (education), treatment access, and community presence (church support) is what restores belonging. Interview probe questions: What are your top 3 stigma drivers in the communities you serve? What’s the best story-free metric you can share about reintegration outcomes? Where does the church help uniquely, and where does it need guardrails? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Avoid paternalistic framing; emphasize agency and community leadership.

TOPIC-06: Leprosy in children and why prevention is urgent

Canonical question: What does child leprosy indicate about transmission, and what does it take to prevent disability in children? Primary keyword: leprosy in children Secondary keywords: child leprosy symptoms, leprosy early detection children, leprosy disability children, World Leprosy Day children, leprosy transmission kids, Grade 2 disability children, leprosy child cases percentage Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: The org’s World Leprosy Day page and WHO data create strong urgency content hooks tied to seasonal spikes. Why the client should rank: They publicly emphasize ending leprosy-related disabilities in children and connect giving to finding and curing children. Competitor angles: WHO covers global child case stats; NGOs use child disability prevention narratives in fundraising. Likely client point of view: Child cases are a red flag for ongoing transmission, and early diagnosis is the best disability prevention tool. Interview probe questions: What is your specific definition of “success” for child disability prevention? What interventions do you fund that most directly reduce child disability risk? How do you talk about children ethically without exploitative storytelling? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: High sensitivity around child imagery and claims; use careful sourcing.

TOPIC-07: What are neglected tropical diseases and why they are “neglected”

Canonical question: What makes an NTD “neglected,” and why does that neglect persist? Primary keyword: what are neglected tropical diseases Secondary keywords: NTD meaning, neglected tropical diseases list, why are NTDs neglected, NTDs and poverty, NTDs affect over 1 billion, tropical diseases in poor countries, NTD interventions Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Broad top-of-funnel entry point that can lead into leprosy and donor action; aligns to their recent donor-education post pattern. Why the client should rank: Their homepage and articles emphasize NTD scale, stigma, and partnership-based solutions. Competitor angles: WHO dominates definitions; global health NGOs compete on “why neglected” narratives. Likely client point of view: NTDs are neglected because they affect the poorest, and the response must combine medical tools with local trust networks. Interview probe questions: Which NTDs are truly central to your mission today beyond leprosy? How do you avoid “NTDs are many” content becoming too generic? What is your simplest explanation of “neglect” that a church audience understands? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Must keep this anchored in Hope Rises’ concrete programs to avoid generic global health content.

TOPIC-08: Buruli ulcer basics and why early treatment prevents lifelong scarring

Canonical question: What is Buruli ulcer, and why do people delay treatment? Primary keyword: Buruli ulcer Secondary keywords: Buruli ulcer symptoms, Buruli ulcer treatment antibiotics, flesh eating disease Buruli ulcer, Buruli ulcer in children, Buruli ulcer Africa, Buruli ulcer surgery skin graft, Buruli ulcer stigma Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Distinct disease niche with strong story relevance on their site, plus lower competition than leprosy head terms. Why the client should rank: They repeatedly feature Buruli ulcer in stories, impact descriptions, and partner-hospital narratives. Competitor angles: WHO and specialized NGOs provide medical summaries; broader sites often sensationalize “flesh-eating” language. Likely client point of view: Buruli ulcer is treatable, but stigma and lack of access delay care, so trusted referral networks matter. Interview probe questions: In your programs, what are the most common barriers to Buruli ulcer treatment? Which misconceptions cause the most harmful delays? What does “successful recovery” look like beyond closing the wound? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Avoid clickbait “flesh-eating” framing; tightly source claims.

TOPIC-09: Lymphatic filariasis and practical lymphedema self-care

Canonical question: What helps people manage lymphedema day to day, and why is morbidity management often underfunded? Primary keyword: lymphedema self care lymphatic filariasis Secondary keywords: lymphatic filariasis morbidity management, elephantiasis care, LF self care steps, lymphedema kit, washing and skincare lymphedema, disability prevention LF, LF swelling management Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Practical care queries align with their gift catalog items and long-form program posts, with strong conversion potential. Why the client should rank: They reference LF/lymphedema training and kit-based support as part of their approach. Competitor angles: Lepra and others publish LF self-care guidance; WHO materials anchor technical recommendations. Likely client point of view: The most compassionate care is often low-tech but consistent, and community-based training makes it accessible. Interview probe questions: What specific LF morbidity management practices do your partners teach? What supplies are actually essential versus “nice to have”? How do you describe outcomes in a donor-friendly but accurate way? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Clarify whether Hope Rises positions LF as a “related disease” versus a core pillar.

TOPIC-10: Yaws explained and why it’s still a problem

Canonical question: What is yaws, who does it affect most, and what does effective control look like? Primary keyword: yaws disease Secondary keywords: yaws symptoms, yaws treatment antibiotics, yaws tropical disease, yaws in children, skin ulcers yaws, yaws eradication, yaws prevention Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Lower competition niche that positions Hope Rises as broader-than-leprosy while still disease-specialized. Why the client should rank: Their “related diseases” page includes yaws as part of their educational framing. Competitor angles: NTD organizations cover yaws as part of NTD lists; fewer have strong, practical, accessible explainers. Likely client point of view: Yaws is a solvable problem when communities know what it is and clinics are equipped for fast treatment. Interview probe questions: Is yaws an active program focus or mainly an educational adjacency? What do you want the public to understand about yaws that they currently don’t? What partner capabilities matter most for yaws control? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Confirm program relevance to avoid “random NTD listicle” content.

TOPIC-11: Treatment for leprosy and what MDT really involves

Canonical question: What does modern MDT treatment look like in real life, and what support helps people complete it? Primary keyword: multidrug therapy leprosy Secondary keywords: MDT leprosy duration, leprosy antibiotics rifampicin dapsone clofazimine, leprosy treatment 6 months 12 months, leprosy reactions, leprosy adherence support, MDT blister packs Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: High-intent educational traffic; clarifies “cure” as a process and creates credibility with both donors and informed audiences. Why the client should rank: They’ve already published an MDT-focused post with practical framing and FAQs. Competitor angles: CDC/HRSA/WHO provide clinical guidance; NGOs present donor-friendly explanations. Likely client point of view: Treatment is proven and accessible in principle, but adherence and follow-up require local systems and community support. Interview probe questions: Which parts of MDT are hardest for patients in your partner contexts (travel, stigma, side effects)? What do donors misunderstand about “free MDT” versus “free access to care”? How do you discuss reactions and disability prevention without sounding clinical or scary? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Keep medical claims aligned with WHO/CDC guidance and cite heavily.

TOPIC-12: Leprosy reactions and disability prevention after “cure”

Canonical question: Why do some people continue to suffer after completing MDT, and what ongoing care prevents disability? Primary keyword: leprosy reactions Secondary keywords: Type 1 reaction leprosy, ENL leprosy reaction, nerve damage after MDT, ulcer prevention leprosy, leprosy self care, disability prevention leprosy, leprosy follow up care Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Differentiates the org from simplistic “just cure it” narratives; aligns with dignity, mobility, and reintegration themes. Why the client should rank: They talk about care beyond treatment (footwear, wound care, follow-up) and have related content. Competitor angles: Clinical institutions own technical explanations; NGOs can win by translating into practical and compassionate guidance. Likely client point of view: Healing continues after bacteria are cleared; long-term care protects function and restores confidence. Interview probe questions: What do your programs fund that most directly prevents post-treatment disability? How do you talk about “lifelong consequences” without implying hopelessness? What is the most common preventable complication you see? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Consider a two-layer approach: plain-language overview plus a sourced technical appendix.

TOPIC-13: Protective footwear for leprosy and why mobility is dignity

Canonical question: Why is footwear essential medical prevention for nerve damage, not just a “nice extra”? Primary keyword: protective footwear for leprosy Secondary keywords: leprosy shoes, custom insoles leprosy, plantar ulcer prevention, leprosy neuropathy feet, CAD CAM orthotics leprosy, diabetic-like foot care leprosy, offloading insoles Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: It aligns with a unique “productized” program (shoes) and high specificity SEO. Why the client should rank: They have a detailed footwear post and gift catalog items tied to custom shoes. Competitor angles: Some NGOs discuss disability aids and footwear; fewer publish detailed tech-and-practice content. Likely client point of view: Mobility is a gateway back to school, work, and community life, so prevention is restoration. Interview probe questions: What are your most credible outcomes tied to footwear (ulcer reduction, return to work, reduced infection)? How do you decide between high-tech (CAD-CAM) and low-tech fabrication? What do donors misunderstand about the cost and logistics of footwear programs? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Avoid overclaiming; clarify what evidence is internal vs published.

TOPIC-14: Wound care and home self-care kits for skin NTDs

Canonical question: What belongs in a self-care kit, and how do kits change outcomes when clinics are far away? Primary keyword: wound care kit Secondary keywords: self care kit leprosy, skin NTD wound care, home health kits NTDs, dressing change instructions, infection prevention at home, hygiene kit donation, bandage kit charity Search intent: informational + commercial (mixed) Why this topic matters: Strong bridge between practical education and donor conversion (kit-based giving). Why the client should rank: They published a detailed home health kits post and sell kit-like gifts via the catalog. Competitor angles: NGOs often mention kits but do not explain design principles (dignity, stigma, local sourcing). Likely client point of view: Kits work when paired with training, follow-up, and referral pathways, not as standalone handouts. Interview probe questions: What outcomes do you track for kit distribution (healing, clinic referrals, infection reduction)? What is your philosophy on local sourcing versus imported supplies? Where do kits fail, and how have you corrected that? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Clarify infection-control standards and safeguarding practices.

TOPIC-15: Clean water, sanitation, and hygiene as NTD prevention

Canonical question: How directly does WASH reduce NTD harm, and what does “WASH + NTD” programming look like in practice? Primary keyword: WASH and neglected tropical diseases Secondary keywords: water sanitation hygiene NTDs, clean water prevents disease, hygiene and skin infections, WASH program India Nepal, toilets and disease prevention, handwashing and NTDs, water poverty disease cycle Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: WASH is widely searched and can introduce donors to NTD prevention logic; it also links to a visible program pillar. Why the client should rank: Their Our Work page explicitly connects WASH gaps to NTD spread and disability-driven poverty. Competitor angles: Large NGOs dominate WASH; niche opportunity is “WASH + skin NTDs + stigma + church networks.” Likely client point of view: Infrastructure plus local education and behavior change protects communities from preventable disease and isolation. Interview probe questions: What is your most distinctive WASH approach versus general WASH charities? What are your best measurable WASH outcomes (households reached, school programs, behavior change)? How do churches participate in WASH work without politicizing it? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Needs clarity on what Hope Rises directly funds versus what governments/partners implement.

TOPIC-16: Medical supply donations and the truth about “shipping supplies to Africa”

Canonical question: What is the right way to support medical supply delivery without creating waste or customs problems? Primary keyword: donate medical supplies to Africa Secondary keywords: ship medical supplies internationally, medical supply donations customs, humanitarian medical shipments, how to send medicine overseas, medical supplies charity shipping, in-kind donation pharmaceuticals, ethical donations Search intent: informational + commercial (mixed) Why this topic matters: High search interest and donor curiosity; can reduce harmful “in-kind dumping” while positioning Hope Rises as operationally competent. Why the client should rank: They already wrote a long guide-style post on shipping medical supplies and highlight medical shipments as a program pillar. Competitor angles: Many NGOs avoid this topic or handle it superficially; others provide logistics guides. Likely client point of view: Done right, shipments fill real clinic gaps; done wrong, they clog systems. The difference is partner-led demand and tight documentation. Interview probe questions: What is your actual shipment model (procure vs donated, QA, partner request process)? How do you reconcile “we can’t accept donated items” on FAQs with “33x match” and shipment language? What should donors stop doing immediately because it backfires? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Potential reputational risk if inconsistent; needs precise wording and policy clarity.

TOPIC-17: “33x impact” claims and how to talk about leverage credibly

Canonical question: How do you calculate leverage claims (like $1 equals $33 of supplies), and what proof do you provide? Primary keyword: donation impact multiplier Secondary keywords: donation leverage claims, how charities calculate in-kind value, pharmaceutical donations valuation, medical supplies valuation, charity impact math, 33x match Search intent: comparison + informational (mixed) Why this topic matters: Trust is a conversion lever; donors increasingly scrutinize “multiplier” claims. Why the client should rank: They publicly promote leverage framing and financial transparency. Competitor angles: Some NGOs avoid explicit multipliers; others publish audited in-kind valuation notes. Likely client point of view: Multipliers are real when based on verified in-kind valuations and partner demand, but must be communicated with humility and transparency. Interview probe questions: How is the 33x figure derived, updated, and verified? What caveats do you want included (timing, needs, valuation method)? What is your standard of evidence before marketing an impact claim? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Requires alignment between finance, ops, and marketing to avoid overclaiming.

TOPIC-18: Leprosy vaccine progress and what LepVax actually means

Canonical question: What is LepVax, where is it in trials, and what impact could a vaccine realistically have? Primary keyword: LepVax Secondary keywords: leprosy vaccine, LepVax trial Brazil, Phase 1b leprosy vaccine, leprosy prevention vaccine, BCG protection leprosy, leprosy vaccine timeline, leprosy transmission prevention Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Timely, linkable, high-authority potential; differentiates the org as research-forward. Why the client should rank: They claim long-term investment in LepVax and publish press updates about clinical trials. Competitor angles: Research institutions and foundations publish trial news; leprosy NGOs cite vaccine as future tool. Likely client point of view: A vaccine may become a crucial prevention tool, but the near-term work remains early detection, treatment access, and stigma reduction. Interview probe questions: What is the clearest, simplest explanation of LepVax for non-scientists? What do you fund directly in vaccine development versus enable through partnerships? What claims will you not make until later trial results exist? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: Must avoid implying efficacy before results; keep current status updated.

TOPIC-19: Diagnostics for skin NTDs and why lab capacity changes everything

Canonical question: Why are NTDs hard to diagnose, and what innovations are improving speed and accuracy? Primary keyword: leprosy diagnostic test Secondary keywords: skin NTD diagnostics, Buruli ulcer PCR, rapid diagnosis NTD, false negatives leprosy, lab network West Africa, point of care testing NTD, diagnostic target product profile leprosy Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Differentiates Hope Rises as technical and systems-minded; supports donor confidence for “boring but essential” investments. Why the client should rank: They describe lab networks, diagnostics challenges, and innovation initiatives as part of their work. Competitor angles: WHO publishes diagnostic guidance; research orgs publish technical papers; NGOs translate into program narratives. Likely client point of view: Faster diagnosis prevents lifelong disability and reduces stigma by shortening the time people live untreated and isolated. Interview probe questions: Which diagnostics investments are most important right now (lab networks, mobile PCR, training)? What is the “before vs after” timeline difference you can defend? How do you keep diagnostic content accessible without losing accuracy? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Needs a clear boundary between clinical guidance and general education.

TOPIC-20: Drug-resistant leprosy and why resistance monitoring matters

Canonical question: How serious is drug resistance in leprosy, and what is the role of resistance surveillance tools? Primary keyword: drug resistant leprosy Secondary keywords: antimicrobial resistance leprosy, leprosy rifampin resistance, dapsone resistance leprosy, leprosy surveillance, Hansen disease AMR, HARP leprosy database, leprosy treatment failure Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: Builds credibility and thought leadership; helps fundraising for research tools that are not emotionally obvious. Why the client should rank: They publicly reference resistance-focused initiatives and research partnerships. Competitor angles: Academic and CDC sources cover AMR; NGOs can contextualize for program impact. Likely client point of view: Resistance is a future threat that must be addressed now through better data, faster interpretation, and smarter treatment strategies. Interview probe questions: What are the most responsible statements you can make about resistance prevalence and risk? What role do your partners play (data collection, lab capability, clinical decisions)? How do you avoid fear-based messaging while still communicating urgency? Sensitivity level: careful Notes: High technical risk; requires strong sourcing and careful editing.

TOPIC-21: Integrated “skin NTD” strategy versus disease-by-disease programs

Canonical question: Why does an integrated skin-NTD approach matter, and when does it outperform single-disease programs? Primary keyword: skin NTDs Secondary keywords: integrated case management NTDs, skin NTD program model, leprosy Buruli ulcer integrated screening, syndromic skin disease approach, NTD case detection integration, integrated referral pathways Search intent: informational Why this topic matters: This is a program-design “belief” topic that can attract partners, funders, and sophisticated donors, not just casual readers. Why the client should rank: Their program descriptions and publication record imply systems-level work and cross-NTD approaches. Competitor angles: Global health academic sources and some NGOs promote integrated care models; others remain disease vertical. Likely client point of view: Integration reduces missed cases, lowers stigma by normalizing skin checks, and strengthens local systems. Interview probe questions: Do you consider yourselves an “integrated skin NTD” organization or leprosy-first with add-ons? What are the strongest examples where integration clearly improved outcomes? What tradeoffs exist (training complexity, data burden, partner readiness)? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Clarify target audience for this content (funders/partners vs general donors).

TOPIC-22: Why the Church is positioned as a frontline health partner

Canonical question: Why does Hope Rises believe the Church is an effective conduit for health access and stigma reduction? Primary keyword: faith based health partnerships Secondary keywords: church and global health, faith leaders community health, Christian hospital partnerships, church referral health model, faith and public health collaboration, gospel and healthcare ethics Search intent: mixed (informational + commercial) Why this topic matters: This is their central differentiator post-rebrand and a major driver of how they want to be understood. Why the client should rank: They explicitly describe a church-network model and a strategic move toward Christian-only partnerships for non-technical programs. Competitor angles: Faith-based NGOs frame “serving like Jesus”; secular organizations may frame “community trust actors” without religious claims. Likely client point of view: Local churches have trust, proximity, and long-term presence, enabling early referrals and durable support after treatment. Interview probe questions: What is the most “search-friendly” way to explain your theology-informed model without alienating general audiences? What safeguards ensure care is never conditional on religious participation? What outcomes are specifically better because of church involvement? Sensitivity level: restricted Notes: High sensitivity around proselytization perceptions; needs precise language and governance clarity.

TOPIC-23: How to choose a trustworthy global health charity

Canonical question: What should donors look for when evaluating a global health or disease-focused charity? Primary keyword: how to evaluate a charity Secondary keywords: Charity Navigator score meaning, nonprofit transparency, audited financial statements charity, charity overhead ratio, program expense ratio, trustworthy charities, questions to ask before donating Search intent: comparison + informational (mixed) Why this topic matters: Supports donor conversion and reduces friction for “is this legit” searches, especially for a rebranded organization. Why the client should rank: They highlight audited financials, donor FAQs, and third-party ratings. Competitor angles: Charity evaluators provide rating frameworks; nonprofits often write “how to choose a charity” pieces to build trust. Likely client point of view: Donor trust grows when an organization is transparent, independently evaluated, and clear about how funds are used to transform communities. Interview probe questions: Which third-party ratings or standards matter most to you, and why? How do you talk about overhead responsibly (without implying overhead is “bad”)? What are the top 5 donor questions you want answered on-page before someone gives? Sensitivity level: normal Notes: Must align with finance/legal language and avoid attacking other nonprofits.

8. Snapshot Prep Notes

Draft positioning hypothesis (to validate)

Hope Rises is a Christian, leprosy-and-skin-NTD-specialist global health nonprofit that differentiates through a church-network referral and reintegration model plus credible research and innovation initiatives (vaccine, diagnostics, resistance tools).

Likely primary audience

Christian individual donors and donor households who want “gospel in word and deed” impact, and respond to narratives about dignity, inclusion, and healing.

Likely secondary audiences

Church missions leaders looking for a concrete global partner, participation events, and materials. Foundations and technical partners interested in research, diagnostics, and system strengthening. Likely offers (what drives action) General giving, recurring giving, and gift-catalog giving. World Leprosy Day seasonal giving and church participation.

Likely differentiators (most defensible)

Faith-first partnership strategy with a defined exception policy (technical projects may include secular partners). Long institutional history (since 1906) paired with modern R&D efforts (LepVax, diagnostics). Stigma reduction as a stated core outcome, with reintegration described concretely (school, market, employment, church participation). Claims that may need clarification or evidence “One billion people are in isolation from NTDs” (needs precise sourcing and language alignment with WHO estimates). Gift impact and multiplier framing (example: “33x impact”) and how it is calculated and audited. What counts as “program impact” versus “outputs” (training counts, kits distributed, diagnostics processed, etc.). Obvious confusion or inconsistency to resolve The site’s FAQ says they cannot accept donated items like supplies or clothing, while the brand strongly promotes medical shipments and leverage framing; this is not necessarily inconsistent, but it requires clear explanation (procured shipments vs accepting ad-hoc donated goods).

Open questions Atlas should validate live

What “Hope Rises” wants to be known for first: leprosy specialist, NTD specialist, Christian partnership model, or research innovation. Which donor segment is the growth engine (monthly partners vs churches vs large gifts). The specific editorial stance on medical authority language: how far they want to go in “medical explainer” content vs “donor framing.”

9. Voice / Style Prep Notes

Five likely voice traits (hypotheses based on current copy)

Faith-centered certainty (God’s provision, prayer, gospel language is normal). Compassionate clarity (plain explanations tied to dignity and belonging). Action-oriented encouragement (frequent CTA structure, “Act Now,” “Give Now”). Structured educational format (“Key Takeaways,” FAQs inside posts). Partner-respecting (language credits local leaders and partner clinics, avoids “we saved them” in many sections, though this should be checked across older content).

Likely tone range

Warm and invitational for donors and churches. More authoritative and evidence-adjacent on disease and research pages.

Common openings or messaging patterns

Start with the human problem (suffering + isolation), then name the disease and the “curable/ treatable” truth, then explain the partner model and invite giving.

Repeated phrases to note

“Hope starts with healing.” “Christ-centered partners,” “local pastors,” “faith leaders,” “through the Church.” “Restore dignity,” “end stigma,” “no one remains invisible.”

Likely banned or tired phrases

Explicit: “leper.” Likely “fatigue” phrases to assess: “make the world a better place” style generic CTAs that appear in some blog templates.

Apparent reading level

Generally accessible, aimed at a broad donor audience (roughly middle-to-high school readability), with occasional program terms explained via context. Likely CTA style Direct, imperative, often time-sensitive: “Give Now,” “Act Now,” “Join us.”

Questions to validate or correct assumptions

Do they want a single consistent brand voice across donors, churches, and technical audiences, or segmented voices by content category? What words should be “protected” (used carefully) vs “promoted” (used often) after the rebrand? How explicitly should the gospel be integrated in SEO articles that target broader, non-faith searches?

10. Top Interview Priorities

Clarify the sharp positioning statement in one sentence that differentiates Hope Rises from other leprosy/NTD nonprofits. Confirm the primary audience for the next 12 months (donors vs churches vs funders) and what “conversion” means for each segment. Map the actual program portfolio and prioritize what is “core” versus “supporting” (training, WASH, footwear, shipments, research). Validate the post-rebrand partnership boundary: what “Christian partnership” means operationally, and the rules for exceptions. Define the top 3 measurable outcomes the org wants to be known for (not just activities). Confirm how they want to describe research and innovation (LepVax, diagnostics, resistance tools) without overclaiming. Resolve the medical shipments story: procurement model, “33x” math, and how they communicate “we can’t accept donated items” alongside shipment CTAs. Establish voice guardrails: how faith-forward should SEO articles be when targeting broad, general searches. Identify language do’s and don’ts, especially around stigma, person-first terminology, and sensitive imagery. Choose the 20–25 beliefs-library topics they most want to own and rank for, and confirm which are “must-win” versus “nice-to-have.” Determine their stance and messaging on overhead, effectiveness, and trust signals (ratings, audits, allocation policies). Clarify how they define and talk about stigma reduction outcomes (reintegration, belonging, employment, school) in a measurable way. Confirm whether they want to compete for head-term leprosy basics or intentionally focus on mid-tail practical care terms (footwear, wound care kits, church referral model). Decide the organization’s public posture on government partnerships post-rebrand (present, past, future boundaries). Validate which content should be written for donors, which for church leaders, and which for global health technical audiences, including how to segment site categories accordingly. Confirm the brand narrative arc: what changed with the rebrand besides the name, and what must stay consistent.

11. Source Register

URLs are provided as inline code to keep the register clean and auditable.

Client Overview sources

Hope Rises International (Home): https://www.hoperises.org/ Why Hope Rises (New Name, Same Mission): https://www.hoperises.org/why-hope-rises Our Approach: https://www.hoperises.org/our-approach Connect / offices and addresses: https://www.hoperises.org/connect ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer (American Leprosy Missions Inc): https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/135562163 Charity Navigator rating page: https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/135562163

Service / Product-Line Map sources

Our Work: https://www.hoperises.org/our-work Research & Vaccines: https://www.hoperises.org/research-and-vaccines Publications list: https://www.hoperises.org/publications Gift catalog: https://give.hoperises.org/ Support Our Work: https://www.hoperises.org/support-our-work Churches: https://www.hoperises.org/churches World Leprosy Day page: https://www.hoperises.org/world-leprosy-day

Positioning and voice sources

Spring 2025 Newsletter (rebrand + partnership stance): https://www.hoperises.org/newsletters/spring25 Blog & Press index: https://www.hoperises.org/blog-press Sample blog post (stigma): https://www.hoperises.org/post/end-stigma-leprosy-through-gods-provision-local-partners Sample blog post (MDT treatment): https://www.hoperises.org/post/treatment-leprosy-free-mdt-wound-care-footwear Sample blog post (protective footwear): https://www.hoperises.org/post/protective-footwear-leprosy-restoring-safe-mobility Sample blog post (home health kits): https://www.hoperises.org/post/home-health-kits-ntds-connect-homes-clinics Sample blog post (shipping supplies guide): https://www.hoperises.org/post/ship-medical-supplies-africa-through-church-partnerships Leprosy & Related Diseases page (terminology + FAQs): https://www.hoperises.org/leprosy-related-diseases

Competitor Landscape sources

The Leprosy Mission International (donate/resources navigation): https://www.leprosymission.org/get-involved/donate/ Lepra (What We Do): https://www.lepra.org.uk/what-we-do/ NLR International (donate page with allocation claim): https://nlrinternational.org/donate/ Effect Hope (Impact page): https://effecthope.org/our-impact/ Rising Star Outreach (home/program model): https://risingstaroutreach.org/ FAIRMED (Leprosy, yaws, elephantiasis overview): https://www.fairmed.ch/en/our-approach/leprosy-yaws-elephantiasis

SEO context and market facts sources

WHO NTD topic page (1B+ affected; 1.495B needing interventions): https://www.who.int/health-topics/neglected-tropical-diseases WHO Leprosy fact sheet: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/leprosy WHO leprosy data summary (2024 cases): https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/topics/topic-details/GHO/leprosy WHO news ahead of World Leprosy Day 2026 (2024 case count): https://www.who.int/news/item/21-01-2026-who-renews-commitment-to-a-leprosy-free-world--spotlighting-partnership-and-progress-ahead-of-world-leprosy-day CDC About Leprosy: https://www.cdc.gov/leprosy/about/index.html CDC Clinical Overview: https://www.cdc.gov/leprosy/hcp/clinical-overview/index.html HRSA recommended treatment (NHDP guidance): https://www.hrsa.gov/hansens-disease/diagnosis/recommended-treatment Fiocruz news about LepVax trial: https://fiocruz.br/en/noticia/2024/10/fiocruz-will-lead-first-clinical-trial-leprosy-vaccine-brazil Leprosy Research Initiative LepVax project page: https://leprosyresearch.org/projects/transmission/lepvax Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/ Why Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/why-hope-rises?utm_source=chatgpt.com Our Work https://www.hoperises.org/our-work Leprosy & Related Diseases https://www.hoperises.org/leprosy-related-diseases Give Hope and Healing https://www.hoperises.org/support-our-work?utm_source=chatgpt.com Churches https://www.hoperises.org/churches Publications https://www.hoperises.org/publications Fiocruz will lead the first clinical trial of a leprosy vaccine in... https://fiocruz.br/en/noticia/2024/10/fiocruz-will-lead-first-clinical-trial-leprosy-vaccine-brazil?utm_source=chatgpt.com WHO renews commitment to a leprosy-free world... https://www.who.int/news/item/21-01-2026-who-renews-commitment-to-a-leprosy-free-world--spotlighting-partnership-and-progress-ahead-of-world-leprosy-day?utm_source=chatgpt.com Connect https://www.hoperises.org/connecthttps://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/135562163https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/135562163 Neglected tropical diseases -- GLOBAL https://www.who.int/health-topics/neglected-tropical-diseases?utm_source=chatgpt.com Gift Catalog | Hope Rises International https://give.hoperises.org/ Spring 2025 Newsletter https://www.hoperises.org/newsletters/spring25https://www.hoperises.org/partnershttps://www.hoperises.org/partners Our Impact https://www.hoperises.org/impact Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/post/end-stigma-leprosy-through-gods-provision-local-partners Research & Vaccines https://www.hoperises.org/research-and-vaccines Our Approach: Holistic Healing & Gospel for NTDs https://www.hoperises.org/our-approach?utm_source=chatgpt.com Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/post/treatment-leprosy-free-mdt-wound-care-footwear Lepra, Frambösie, Elephantiasis... · FAIRMED https://www.fairmed.ch/en/our-approach/leprosy-yaws-elephantiasis Donate Today - The Leprosy Mission International https://www.leprosymission.org/get-involved/donate/ How Lepra helps people affected by leprosy https://www.lepra.org.uk/what-we-do/ Donate - NLR - until No Leprosy Remains https://nlrinternational.org/donate/ Our Impact - Effect Hope https://effecthope.org/our-impact/?srsltid=AfmBOoqGrW23pR10owmTrqhd-OoeZPwanxPaIem-__H-kxelQFT0Fqx-Leprosy (Hansen disease) https://www.who.int/data/gho/data/themes/topics/topic-details/GHO/leprosy?utm_source=chatgpt.com RISING STAR OUTREACH | LIFTING THOSE WITH LEPROSY https://risingstaroutreach.org/ Leprosy https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/leprosy?utm_source=chatgpt.com Financials https://www.hoperises.org/financials About Leprosy (Hansen's Disease) https://www.cdc.gov/leprosy/about/index.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com Clinical Overview of Leprosy https://www.cdc.gov/leprosy/hcp/clinical-overview/index.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com Treatment of Hansen's Disease https://www.hrsa.gov/hansens-disease/diagnosis/recommended-treatment?utm_source=chatgpt.com Our Work Fighting Neglected Tropical Diseases https://www.gatesfoundation.org/our-work/programs/global-health/neglected-tropical-diseases?utm_source=chatgpt.com Blog & Press https://www.hoperises.org/blog-press Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/press/worlds-first-leprosy-specific-vaccine-progresses-to-human-trials-in-brazil Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/post/ship-medical-supplies-africa-through-church-partnerships Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/post/protective-footwear-leprosy-restoring-safe-mobility World Leprosy Day https://www.hoperises.org/world-leprosy-day Frequently Asked Questions https://www.hoperises.org/faqs Charity Navigator - Rating for Hope Rises International https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/135562163 Hope Rises International https://www.hoperises.org/post/home-health-kits-ntds-connect-homes-clinics LepVax: Leprosy Vaccine Trial, Phase 1b https://leprosyresearch.org/projects/transmission/lepvax?utm_source=chatgpt.com