How to write a human-interest story for donors and the public

A human-interest story explains a programme through the experience of one person, family or community. UN-Habitat describes these as dynamic personal stories, with quotes from the people a project serves, about how an intervention has improved their lives, written to be compelling and understandable to the general public.¹

NGOs and donors use several names for the same format: success story, case study, impact story or field story. A guide from Catholic Relief Services and the American Red Cross makes a useful distinction. A success story shows a project's impact through one person's positive experience in their own words. A learning story looks at what worked and what did not, including how people dealt with problems.²

The same guide advises choosing the type of story according to its main audience and purpose: success stories suit marketing and funding proposals, while learning stories belong in monitoring and reporting.² Mixing the two produces a story that is too polished for programme staff and too hedged for the public.

Before anyone travels, write down in one sentence who the story is for and what you want them to understand. A donor report needs a clear link between the activity funded and the change seen. A public audience needs a person they can picture and a reason to care. In our own practice, we agree this sentence with the client before planning the field visit.

The best stories come from people who have experienced real change, not from whoever is easiest to reach. The Most Significant Change technique, set out by Rick Davies and Jess Dart, offers a disciplined way to find them. Instead of counting against pre-set indicators, it asks participants an open question about the most significant change they have seen over a period, within broad areas called domains of change.³

Groups at each level of the organisation then read the stories, choose the most significant one in each domain, record why they chose it and share that reasoning back with the people who told the stories.³ Even if you never run the full process, borrowing the open question and the written reasons for selection makes your choice of story more honest and easier to defend to a donor. The guide also notes that a story is more valid if it is recorded in the storyteller's own words.³

Get consent before you interview, observe or photograph anyone.² Bond's guidelines are blunt: if it isn't informed, it isn't consent. People should understand why you want to interview or photograph them, how long their content will be kept and how they can withdraw.⁴

Ask whether the person wants to be named. The Most Significant Change guide suggests tracking consent from the very start, removing names when people prefer not to be identified, and checking that anyone else named in a story agrees to it.³ Use open, semi-structured questions, let the person talk, and record their exact words so that quotes are accurate.²

• Who are you, and what was life like before?
• What changed, and when did you first notice it?
• What part did the programme play, and what else helped?
• What is still difficult?
• What would you want people to know?

USAID's guidance for partners sets out a simple shape: a short, jargon-free headline with an action verb, then a human-interest lead describing the challenge, the actions taken and the results, with quotes from the people who benefited and a link to the wider community or national picture.⁵

The opening paragraph should answer who, what, where, when, why and how, ideally starting with an anecdote, and the body should keep the person's own account at the centre with enough background to place it in context.² Keep it short. The CRS guide suggests 500 to 750 words, and UN-Habitat asks for stories under 700 words.¹²

Quotes carry the story. Spell names and places correctly, and ask family members, neighbours or community leaders for a wider view.¹ An official quote can add context, but it should never replace the person's voice. Bond asks organisations to treat contributors as experts by experience and to use their own voice in preference to the organisation's.⁴

Numbers should show scale, not decorate. USAID advises using statistics that show a clearly defined change over a set period, avoiding percentages or figures without context, and not leading with dollar amounts.⁵ Write in plain language: replace jargon such as "capacity building" with "training" and spell out acronyms.⁵ Avoid overdramatising, which reduces credibility, and avoid judging people's appearance or character.²

Before publishing, check every name, figure, date and caption against your notes and programme data. The Most Significant Change guide recommends verifying selected stories by visiting the places where events happened, prioritising those chosen at the highest levels.³ A story that turns out to be inaccurate does more damage than no story at all.

Do not crop or edit images in ways that change their context or meaning, and where possible return copies of the finished story and photographs to the people in them.⁴ Photographs should show people in action with clear captions giving names, place and date.¹ One well-made story can then be reused across a donor report, a web feature, social media and a short film.

• One-sentence purpose and audience agreed
• Success story or learning story chosen
• Person selected for real change, with reasons recorded
• Informed consent recorded, including whether to use names
• Exact quotes in the person's own words
• Clear headline and a lead that answers who, what, where, when, why and how
• Numbers with context, no jargon or unexplained acronyms
• Facts and captions checked and story shared back