Presentation on theme: "Presentation by Laura Foose, Alternative Credit Technologies, LLC November 9, 2005 Social Performance in Microfinance."— Presentation transcript:
Presentation by Laura Foose, Alternative Credit Technologies, LLC November 9, 2005 Social Performance in Microfinance
2 Social Performance Task Force lLaunched in March 2005 by CGAP, Argidius Foundation and the Ford Foundation lMembership: 52 organizations 20 NGOs 9 Donors 9 Networks/Associations 2 Social Investor networks 4 Microfinance Raters 7 Action Research Programs/Universities 3 Consulting groups lSubcommittee structure used to work on a common agenda developed by the task force
3 Objectives of Social Performance Task Force Strengthen understanding of social performance and learn about relevant initiatives and tools Promote social performance management at MFI level so as to improve operations Bring various stakeholders together to establish industry-wide standards for social performance reporting, auditing, and social rating Exchange on current and planned work in social performance
4 What is Social Performance? Social performance is the effective translation of an institutions social mission into practice (actions, corrective measures, outcomes). la actuación social de un instituto como la traducción efectiva de su misión social (acciones, medidas correctivas, resultados)
5 Social Performance Management Questions 1. What are your social performance goals? 2. How do you monitor who uses & who is excluded from using your services? 3. How do you monitor & assess the effects on current clients? 4. How do you monitor & assess the reasons why some clients leave? 5. How do you use information to improve your services & achieve social goals? 6. How do you review & improve the quality of your systems and processes?
6 Benefits of Social Performance Better management (balance financial/social objectives, base line info., performance tracking, early warning systems) More client-responsive (appropriate services, more product choices, better customer service) Improved outreach and services (portfolio segmentation, understand client use, innovations, verify impact of programmatic changes, track impacts on clients) Improved financial performance (better client retention, growth, lower operational costs)
7 Manifesto de Task Force Promover Resultados Sociales en Micro Finanzas Hacia una línea base doble Las Micro Finanzas funcionan mejor cuando se mide - y se revela- sus resultados. Información estandarizada y exacta sobre los resultados, tanto sobre los resultados financieros como los sociales, es indispensable. (De principios Claves del CGAP aprobado por Los G-8). Nosotros los subscritores, como líderes en el campo de micro finanzas: 1) Definimos la actuación social de un instituto como la traducción efectiva de su misión social (acciones, medidas correctivas, resultados) 2) Reconocemos que medir el resultado financiero no es suficiente para medir el impacto que tiene micro finanzas en la vida de la gente pobre. Una línea base doble define el éxito como buenos resultados financieros y sociales, y que a largo plazo estos se esfuerzan mutuamente. 3) Reconocemos además el creciente interés por donantes, redes, practicantes, fundadores y otros stakeholders en la evaluación, la aplicación y el mejoramiento de nuevas herramientas para fortalecer el desempeño social, monitoreo y informaciones.
8 Manifesto cont 4) Apoyamos el desarrollo actual en el campo de monitoreo de resultados sociales, para organizaciones que tienen el mismo objetivo de promoción de la actuación social, pero cada uno con enfoques y perspectivas diferentes. 5) Nos comprometemos a lconvertirnos en pioneros para poner en práctica el monitoreo periódico, reportando y liderando los aspectos sociales de nuestras organizaciones y las organizaciones que apoyamos lFormular objetivos sociales claramente especificados por nuestro organización; lDiseñar, introducir y usar sistemas para manejar, examinar, monitorear y reportar sobre los resultados sociales dentro y fuera de nuestra organización; lUsar la información sobre los resultados sociales para mejorar el efectos social de nuestras operaciones lEstar abiertos a auditorias externas sobre los resultados sociales lPromover y intercambiar ideas e información sobre los resultados sociales
9 Work Plan of Task Force 2006 l Promote the spread and practice of Social Performance Management through training of practitioners lEstablish industry social performance standards and a common reporting framework lDevelop a common reporting site at the MIX to support reporting on social indicators and make double bottom line reporting a regular practice in the MF industry
10 Social performance pathway Design and inputs Mission Objectives Goals Reaching Target Clients Change Service Design & Delivery Systems Meeting Client Needs OutputsOutcomes ImpactIntent Effective translation of mission into practice Governance/ policies management/strategyOutreach/Changes services
11 Current Initiatives and Existing Tools Existing ToolsNew Initiatives Intention and design CGAP Poverty Audit CERISE Social Rating (M-CRIL Planet Rating Microfinanza etc) Outputs CGAP Poverty Assessment MicroSave USAID/IRISAMAP Accion Council of MF Equity Funds CGAP/ Ford FINCA Imp-Act SPM MFC OutcomesAIMS Imp-Act Grameen FND
12 At the level of MFIs l Reporting system for stakeholders (MFI Board, management, external financiers, member- clients) l Information for MFI strategic decision making and improved SP management At industry level lGreater transparency on social development achievements At national and international level l To provide a base for comparison with other MFIs on the basis of widely accepted SP standards CERISE-Argidius SP Initiative: Objectives
13 Intention Design Principles Process Action Output Outcome Impact Economic & Social Performance Conceptual Framework The SPI approach: a self- assessment of principles, actions and corrective measures for internal use and external reporting.
14 lOutreach to the poor and excluded lAdaptation of services and products to needs of target clients lImprovement of social and political capital of clients lSocial responsibility of the institution Score of 25 points each 4 Dimensions of Social Performance
15 lmission of the MFI lgeographic and socio-economic focus ltools for targeting lsize of transaction lcollateral Dimension 1: Outreach to Poor and Excluded
16 Dimension 2: Adaptation of Services lrange of services lquality of services lnon-financial services accessible to the clients lparticipation of the clients in the design
17 Dimension 3: Social and Political Capital ltransparency of the financial transactions lclients representatives for consultation, decision- making or control of the MFI lempowerment : social cohesion, voice of the clients with the national or local government
18 Dimension 4: Social responsibility of institution lhuman resource policy lsocial responsibility towards the clients lsocial responsibility towards the local community
19 Social Performance Management (SPM) the systematic assessment of performance relative to social objectives and the use of information to improve practice 1)demonstrate program impact 2)improve program services Assessment with Action
20 Social Performance: Six Key Questions what are your social performance objectives and how do you plan to achieve them? Who uses your programmes products and services? Who is excluded? Why and when do clients leave or fail to fully utilise the available services? What is the effect/impact on current clients? How will you use information to improve your services? How do you maintain and improve the quality of the systems you use to answer these questions?
21 Main components of Social Performance Management Developing a social performance strategy Monitoring and assessing social performance Institutionalizing and using social performance information
22 Component 1: Developing SP Strategy Clarify mission and social goals Define clear and realistic performance objectives Set measurable performance targets Design program (operational plan)
23 Component 2: Monitoring and Assessing SP l SP systems – two approaches routine monitoring follow-on research l SP systems – design (key questions) What information is needed? Who needs it? How will information be collected? From whom will data be collected? How frequently will the information be collected? Who will collect, collate, analyze and report information?
24 Component 3: Institutionalizing and Using SP Information Ensure effective use of information feedback loop Institutionalize SPM through management/board commitment and staff buy-in Improve SPM system through periodic reviews
25 CGAP-Ford Social Indicators Project Develop indicators to track MFI social performance through monitoring outreach to the very poor and changes in client well-being Create common reporting format for MFIs across countries standardization Report on social performance of MFIs on MIX Market 35 participating MFIs l16 Asia l6 Sub-Saharan Africa l1 Northern Africa l9 Latin America l3 Eastern Europe
26 Methodology Develop 2 sets of indicators industry indicators: 5 to 6 globally applicable indicators on different dimensions that can provide cross-country comparisons proxy indicators: simple context-specific indicators developed by each MFI Proxy indicators will be benchmarked to industry indicators so that MFI context-specific reports can be compared globally
27 Methodology (contd) Criteria for selecting the indicators Have reasonable reliability/validity Relevance across a variety of national contexts Cost-effective data collection How is the information collected? Existing client information from application form Simple low-cost small sample surveys
28 Initiatives in Social Rating Sub-committee: M-CRIL, Planet Rating, Microfinanza, Accion With contribution from: Imp-Act Overview Frameworks Issues Indicators and methods Cost
29 Rating and social performance Social Rating must reflect and make explicit the: social goals and objectives in microfinance systems within an MFI which are relevant to achieving those objectives environmental factors which affect MFI activity, and indicators of whether those objectives are [on the way to] being achieved. SP definition: effective translation of social goals into practice
30 Social Ratings so far: pilots Excludes questionnaire tests which did not result in reports Stand-alone reports: - complement to the financial assessment of credit rating - a direct comparison of the double bottom line - still some experimentation
31 Objectives To contribute to: I nvestment decisions T ransparency on social performance Benchmarking social performance across MFIs, and to Encourage MFIs to improve their social performance (specific recommendations possible) Task: To simplify and measure quite complex ideas Adapt to different contexts and organisational models Provide validity – reasonable levels of rigour/precision Do so practically – at reasonable levels of time and cost
32 Different frameworks Cerise: social indicators project - dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR - clients, employees, community) + mF specific dimensions (depth of outreach and adaptation of services) [starting point for some rating agencies] Rating agencies/M-CRIL: the Imp-Act pathway and credit rating approach (focus on MFI and clients)
33 Working hypotheses in rating the risk profile and creditworthiness of an MFI depends critically on its financial performance, the social profile of an MFI depends critically on its outputs (depth of outreach and appropriate products), but both are also affected by its managerial capabilities and governance
34 Social performance pathway Design and inputs Mission Objectives Goals Reaching Target Clients Change Service Design & Delivery Systems Meeting Client Needs OutputsImpact Intent Effective translation of mission into practice Governance/policies management/strategy Outreach/services SOCIAL RATING
35 Social benchmarking? Generic social values (clear and agreed) – or specific to each MFIs situation, model and stated objectives? E.g. not all MFIs target women, target the poor, apply group based model (social collateral), can legally offer savings products Considerable debate: try to balance both Generic is important to compare across the industry (countries, models); and has to make sense for specific MFI Reflected in selected dimensions and what is scored
36 The dimensions of a social rating 1Social mission, systems, strategy 2Outreach – depth and breadth 3Appropriateness of financial services 4Social responsibility to clients 5 to staff 6 to community Similarity in scope and content: Differences in grouping, and in scoring 1-3 are fundamental, can be scored (equal weights) 4 may be scored as part of 1 and 3 5-6 difficult to score; can be described
37 Parameters: social mission & systems Mission: clarity, communication, commitment (board/mangt) Systems aligned with stated mission: approach to targeting; staff incentives; reporting/monitoring and use of information/findings ( e.g. market segmentation, client data/feedback, dropout data/feedback) Relationship with clients: transparency, ensuring awareness Provision of or linkage with non-financial services – described Main
38 Indicators: Outreach Operations in poorer areas (more remote, poorer within more developed areas, e.g. urban slums) Clients who are poor - % and number Hired employment in micro-credit supported enterprises % clients not served by formal financial services % clients not served by other MFIs % clients from marginal groups/communities
39 Indicators: Financial services Range of financial services (within regulatory guidelines) Process of product development Client awareness/understanding Client satisfaction: products, EIR, timeliness, comparison with alternative sources ( if applicable) Effective group systems (regular attendance, updated passbooks, transparency of transactions) Client exit – dropout rate Poverty assessment of dropouts, reasons for exit