Never mind the incorrect term in the second sentence (I'm relatively sure it's language-immersion...I mean, I guess a language emersion course could be described as one that takes you out of your native language, but I've never seen it described that way).
Ultimately, the article just misses the forest for the trees with statements like "While the foreign volunteers were well-intentioned, they misplaced their focus; it was necessary to build stable homes, but the real problem was crippling, multigenerational poverty. Lacking skills and employment to improve their condition, Haitian families continued to beg in the streets in the absence of tourists. The volunteers came and left but nothing had really changed."
The author is so unaware that they don't seem to realize what they even wrote. The people needed houses and were poor. Are we really supposed to believe that because building houses did not fix both issues that it should not have been done at all?
Ultimately, the article just misses the forest for the trees with statements like "While the foreign volunteers were well-intentioned, they misplaced their focus; it was necessary to build stable homes, but the real problem was crippling, multigenerational poverty. Lacking skills and employment to improve their condition, Haitian families continued to beg in the streets in the absence of tourists. The volunteers came and left but nothing had really changed."
The author is so unaware that they don't seem to realize what they even wrote. The people needed houses and were poor. Are we really supposed to believe that because building houses did not fix both issues that it should not have been done at all?