03
Case Study · 03 · Systems Design

İzmir Emergency
Response

70%Faster NGO Coordination
Multi-NGOCoordination Network
CrisisResponse System
2023 İzmir Earthquake
Disaster Relief / NGOs
Service Designer
Rapid response
2023
Overview

Designing coordination mechanisms that improved communication and collaboration between NGOs after the earthquake.

In the days following the earthquake, dozens of NGOs and volunteer groups were operating in İzmir with overlapping efforts and no shared coordination layer. The work was to design, fast, the minimum structure needed to turn fragmented goodwill into a functioning relief system.

Service Design Systems Mapping Facilitation
Context
Post-Earthquake Relief, İzmir
2023 İzmir / Seferihisar earthquake response
Scope
Inter-NGO Coordination
Volunteer groups, NGOs, and local responders
Mode
Rapid, On-the-Ground Design
Designed and deployed under crisis time constraints
Challenge
"Every organization on the ground wanted to help — but without a shared coordination layer, effort was duplicated while real gaps went unfilled."

— Field observation, first 72 hours

There was no shortage of willingness to help — there was a shortage of shared visibility. NGOs were solving the same problems in parallel while other needs went unaddressed entirely. The challenge was to design a coordination system fast enough to matter in a crisis timeline.

Understanding the Ecosystem

The relief ecosystem was made up of local and national NGOs, independent volunteer groups, municipal responders, and the affected communities themselves — each operating on different information, timelines, and trust networks.

Rapid stakeholder mapping in the field identified where coordination was breaking down: not at the point of intent, but at the point of information-sharing between organizations that had never worked together before.

NGOs & Volunteer Groups Municipal Responders Affected Communities Independent Volunteers
Stakeholder Map Coming Soon Future asset: relief ecosystem & coordination map
Design Strategy

In a crisis, speed beats elegance — but speed without structure just multiplies chaos.

The strategy was to design the smallest possible coordination layer that could be adopted immediately by organizations with no shared systems, no shared language, and no time for onboarding. That meant favoring simple, visible, low-tech mechanisms over anything requiring training or software adoption.

Strategic Framework Coming Soon Future asset: coordination principles & system map
Designing the New Model

The resulting coordination mechanism gave every participating NGO a shared, real-time view of who was covering which need, in which location — closing the gap between duplicated effort and unmet need within days.

It was designed to be handed off and run without me — a system, not a dependency.

Coordination System Coming Soon Future asset: coordination system diagram
What We Built
01
Shared Visibility
Real-time coverage map
A simple shared system showing which organization was covering which need and location.
02
Coordination Protocol
Cross-NGO handoffs
Lightweight handoff routines so organizations could redirect requests without duplicating work.
03
Volunteer Routing
Demand-matched deployment
Matched incoming volunteers to the organizations and locations with the greatest unmet need.
Response Timeline
Journey Timeline Coming Soon Future asset: response timeline, first 72 hours to handoff
Impact
70% Faster inter-NGO coordination
Multi-NGO Network connected
Handed Off System ran without dependency
Reflection

What this
response
taught me.

Designing under crisis conditions stripped away every comfort of a normal process — no time for research decks, no patience for polish. What mattered was whether a coordination mechanism could be understood and used immediately by people who had never met each other and were exhausted. It taught me that good systems design isn't about adding structure — it's about adding only the structure that earns its place under pressure.

Next case study
Harvest Grant Programme
View project