Interview: Sarah Essam Al Muhaidib, Executive Director, Al Muhaidib Foundation, on scaling investment for early-childhood change
What are the most persistent gaps in early-childhood development programmes?
SARAH ESSAM AL MUHAIDIB: One of the clearest gaps is the limited number of philanthropic actors operating in this space. While broader foundation landscape in the Kingdom is substantial, very few organisations focus on early childhood. The hesitation is often due to limited access to research and sector intelligence. Strategic philanthropic investment can be catalytic in closing these gaps. Coordinated research efforts identify the most pressing system needs, whether in early development, detection or parental engagement. When philanthropies coordinate and share evidence with government entities, they are better able to align priorities and shape long-term policy direction.
How should philanthropic investment respond to low enrolment rates in early-childhood education?
AL MUHAIDIB: Low enrolment stems from several factors, but limited parental awareness remains central. Some parents underestimate the value of early years education or question the quality of available nurseries. Meanwhile, as enrolment grows – now significantly higher than earlier single-digit rates – the system faces pressure to expand without compromising quality, especially where standards are unclear. Cost is another barrier. Government programmes that subsidise childcare for working mothers have encouraged workforce participation and expanded access to safe early-learning environments. Establishing nurseries in workplaces is one way to support parents and increase enrolment. In addition, some initiatives train underprivileged women as caregivers, providing them with income and expanding the pool of qualified staff.
Which philanthropic approaches are effective in scaling pilot programmes into national systems?
AL MUHAIDIB: Scalable models typically rest on strong evidence, standards and partnerships. When a pilot demonstrates clear improvement – whether in education, rehabilitation or enrolment – government partners are more willing to adopt and embed it within national systems. One example is specialised schooling for children with Down syndrome: the model combined individualised development plans, systematic teacher training and structured assessment. Results included a 70% increase in educational and rehabilitation development and a 40% reduction in absenteeism. Based on this evidence, the Ministry of Education adopted the approach and began developing national standards for disability-inclusive schools. This progression shows how philanthropy can influence system-level change.
In what ways can philanthropic organisations balance investment in research with service delivery?
AL MUHAIDIB: The strongest approach is to operate along a full impact chain: research to understand the problem, direct service to address immediate needs, and standard-setting to ensure solutions become scalable and sustainable. Metrics should reflect this chain. In early detection, relevant indicators include numbers screened, diagnostic accuracy and timely access to intervention. In schools or rehabilitation centres, development and growth percentages, attendance and family engagement offer strong insights into effectiveness. At the system level, reach is key – how many children benefit when standards are adopted nationally. When a single programme shapes policies serving hundreds of thousands of children, it shows philanthropic investment has moved beyond service delivery to true system transformation. Environmental factors also play a role. Inclusive public parks provide children with and without disabilities opportunities to play together, building empathy and normalising inclusion from an early age. As more cities adopt these spaces, they reinforce the social attitudes that accompany in-school interventions. Across these areas, collaboration is essential. No single organisation can meet these needs effectively alone.
Read More from OBG
