The number one thing you need to do is logging. Without measurements it very hard to know what's going on. You might very well go to the doctor and check blood levels, intolerance and the like. But that is mostly a one time thing. You need to be constantly logging all your workouts and diet and then test yourself every 1-6 months (different for different tests). You'll at least want body measurements, bmi (be accurate, but not to often), aerobic performance, strength performance.
Get some screening, then go to someone who knows their thing, get homework, do homework for a couple of months, come back and you'll be in a very good position for improvement or at least arguing your case.
I think the number one thing is you have to give people a reason to pay. Being useful is of course the first step, but people also want to feel they're getting something "extra", they want to feel like it's a transaction, however bad.
One of those things can be to provide a very clear road-map tied to donations and then follow up on it. That's what so powerful with these crowd funding campaigns. People feel like they are making a difference though at times they are essentially buying something.
I don't think you necessarily have to "compromise your values" either. You're probably already limited by money, so add some planning and just be honest about it. "With this amount, this will happen" etc. As always of course "under-promise and over-deliver".
That's mainly for individuals though. Companies are somewhat the same, but they want things that fit into their budget.
Has someone told the FBI about Berlin? They might want to put the whole city on the list just to be sure considering possible co-conspirators. Probably add Hamburg too.
That doesn't really explain the working conditions so much as justify them. What strikes you when working in emerging markets is just how, well, emerging they are. A lot of things are just inefficient. There needs to be more pressure to live up to universal human rights. Not only because it's the right thing to do, but because it puts pressure on these markets to get more sophisticated.
People tend to say it's about control, but companies give up control all the time. I think it's mostly because they don't have to. I'm not sure how good a plan it is, but I do think it was visionary. I think the Nordic countries a losing much of their raison d'être by not taking care of their middle/working class.
There actually was this kind of system in Sweden in the 80s. Of course it was very unpopular with the right and was abolished as soon as they got into power. Since then, like in most of the western world, the productivity gains has to a large extent favored owners rather than employees.
Get some screening, then go to someone who knows their thing, get homework, do homework for a couple of months, come back and you'll be in a very good position for improvement or at least arguing your case.