During a recent visit with a microfinance partner in Senegal, a colleague and I encountered two of the most discussed issues related to the PPI: the kind of collection with associated advantages and disadvantages and the organization’s attitude toward cost. This blog is also available in French below the English copy, thanks to Absa Gueye, APSFD Senegal.

After a sleepless night plagued by jet lag, Babacar Sambe, our West African Regional Representative, and I set out early one morning for Thies, Senegal to visit the head office of Caurie Microfinance. Caurie is a partner of Catholic Relief Service (CRS) Mision II Africa, Oikocredit, Terrafina Microfinance, and a member of APSFD Senegal*. Through its connection to these networks, Caurie participates as one of the two flagship microfinance institution (MFI) members of the PPI Users Collaborative in Africa (PUCA) initiative.

Caurie completed its PPI pilot in the first half of 2010, and is ready to begin its implementation this year as its MIS, Perfect, supplied by a Togolese company, now has the module to store PPI data. Caurie has been assisted through its pilot process by Absa Gueye, APSFD’s SPM manager, with me and Babacar providing advice and support as needed. Our trip was an opportunity for Babacar and me to get a greater understanding of Caurie’s proposed implementation approach and to ensure that the project managers were considering the pros and cons of the sampling approach they planned to pursue. We understood that Caurie intended to use a sampling approach in its implementation and we wanted to raise some questions; sampling is generally more complicated than practitioners recognize, especially when there is a desire to track the sample over time to measure clients’ progress.

We met with Andre Youm, one of Caurie’s SPM managers (also head of the operations department). As we began our discussion around the sampling approach outlined in the written implementation plan, Andre leapt to the issues that would complicate the sample, such as: what happens to the representativeness of the sample over time in face of organizational change – perhaps the addition of new branches – drop-outs or exiting clients. I smiled and said “Precisely!” We were there to make sure Caurie understood from the planning stage of the implementation approach that changes to the organization or the sample itself could limit the way in which the data are used and what they represent.

As we discussed the operational implications of a sampling approach – having to organize the sample yearly and mobilize staff for its collection, Andre explained that because of this, Caurie was now considering a limited census application of the PPI. When I inquired if there was a budget to do a limited census as I imagined that it might be slightly more expensive as compared to the initial budget created for the sample approach, he stopped, looked at me, and said,

“We see this as an investment, not as a cost. We are investing in SPM (PPI included) because we believe we will see a return on our investment.”

Once again, I said, “Precisely!”

Andre had hit the nail on the head! When many practitioners think of SPM, they generally translate the associated or marginal expenses as sunk cost-- costs incurred that cannot be recovered and have a fixed benefit (rent for instance). But I would argue that expenses associated with SPM are an investment with potential for different types and amounts of return.

With respect to the PPI, the investment is arguably minimal and the return is potentially very high for organizations that visit clients’ home as a part of normal business procedures, have a good information management team (for data management and processing), and strong existing research capacity. Organizations lacking any of these will need to make a greater investment in their internal capacity to obtain the most from PPI use. Hence, such organizations may have a smaller return in the first few years, but will have the potential for larger returns in subsequent years.


*APSFD Senegal is the flagship partner of the CRS Mision II Africa.

-----------------------------------------------

Traduit en francais par Absa Gueye de APSFD Senegal:

Exactement! Clarté émergeant du terrain : Echantillonnage ou recensement ? Coût ou investissement ?

Lors d’une visite récente dans une institution de microfinance partenaire au Sénégal, un collègue et moi avons rencontré deux des sujets les plus discutées sur le PPI : La méthode de collecte avec des avantages et des inconvénients associés, et l'attitude de l'organisation vis-à-vis du coût. 

Après une nuit sans sommeil infestée par le décalage horaire, Babacar Sambe, notre représentant régional en Afrique de l’Ouest et moi avons pris très tôt le matin la route de Thiès - Sénégal pour visiter la Direction Générale de CAURIE Microfinance. CAURIE est un partenaire du Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Mision II Afrique, Oikocredit, Terrafina Microfinance, et membre de l'APSFD Sénégal. Par sa relation avec ces réseaux, CAURIE participe en tant que réseau phare des deux institutions membres de l’initiative du Réseau Collaboratif des Utilisateurs du PPI en Afrique (PUCA).

CAURIE a accompli sa phase pilote du PPI dans la première moitié de 2010, et est prêt à commencer sa mise en œuvre cette année puisque son SIG, acquis auprès d’une entreprise togolaise PERFECT, a développé un module pour stocker les données du PPI. CAURIE a été assistée dans sa phase pilote par Absa Gueye, la coordonnatrice du Projet de Gestion des Performances Sociales à l’APSFD, Babacar et moi-même fournissant le conseil et l'appui nécessaire. Notre voyage était une occasion pour Babacar et moi d’avoir une large compréhension de l’approche de mise en œuvre proposée par CAURIE et de s’assurer que les responsables du projet en interne considéraient les avantages et inconvénients de la méthode d’échantillonnage qui était envisagé de suivre. Nous avions compris que CAURIE avait l’intention d’utiliser une approche par échantillonnage dans la mise en œuvre et nous avons voulu soulever quelques questions ;   l’échantillonnage est généralement plus compliqué comme le  reconnaissent les praticiens, particulièrement s’il y a un désir de suivre l'échantillon dans le temps pour mesurer le progrès des clients.

Nous avons rencontré André Youm, un des responsables de la Gestion des Performances Sociales de  CAURIE (aussi Directeur des Opérations). Comme nous commencions notre discussion autour de l'approche par échantillonnage décrite dans le plan d'action élaboré, André a sauté sur deux questions qui compliqueraient l'échantillonnage, tel que : ce qui va arriver dans le temps par rapport à la représentativité de l'échantillon si des changements surviennent dans l'institution ? – exemple l'ouverture de nouvelles agences - des abandons ou sorties des clients ? J'ai souri et j’ai dit « exactement ! » Nous étions là pour nous assurer que CAURIE avait compris à partir de l'étape de planification de l’approche de mise en œuvre qui change selon l’institution ou l'échantillon lui-même pourrait limiter la manière dont les données sont utilisées et ce qu’elles représentent.

Pendant que l’on discutait les implications opérationnelles d'une approche par échantillonnage, - devant organiser l'échantillon annuellement et mobiliser le personnel pour la collecte, André a expliqué cela pour cette raison, CAURIE prenait en compte un recensement limité dans l’application du PPI. Quand je me demandais s'il y avait un budget pour faire un recensement comme j'ai imaginé qu'il pourrait être légèrement plus couteux par rapport au budget initial créé pour l'approche par échantillonnage, il s'est arrêté, m’a regardé et me dit :

« nous voyons ceci comme un investissement, pas un coût. Nous investissons dans la Gestion des Performances Sociales (le PPI inclus) parce que nous croyons que nous verrons un retour sur notre investissement. »

encore une fois, j'ai dit : « exactement ! »

André se gratta la tète! Quand beaucoup de praticiens pensent à la Gestion de Performances Sociales, ils traduisent généralement les dépenses associées ou marginales en coûts perdus – les coûts engagés qui ne peuvent pas être récupérés et ayant un avantage fixe (le loyer par exemple). Mais je soutiendrai que les dépenses associées à la Gestion de Performances Sociales sont un investissement avec un potentiel de retour sous diverses formes.
En ce qui concerne le PPI, l'investissement est vraiment minime et le retour est potentiellement très élevé pour les institutions qui font la visite aux clients à domicile comme partie intégrante des procédures normales de travail, ont une bonne équipe de gestion de l'information (pour la gestion des données et le traitement), et la forte capacité existante de recherches. Les institutions qui manquent un peu de tout cela, auront besoin de réaliser un plus grand investissement dans leur capacité interne pour obtenir le plus de l’utilisation du PPI. Par conséquent, de telles institutions peuvent avoir un plus petit retour dans les premières années, mais auront le potentiel pour de plus grands retours dans les années suivantes. 

*L’APSFD Sénégal est l'association phare, partenaire de CRS / Mision II Afrique.

Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

Last August, my colleague Babacar Sambe and I set out in earnest to plan Grameen Foundation’s first deployments of the Progress out of Poverty Index (PPI) in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). After analyzing the landscape, considering budget constraints and the location of local GF staff, we decided to begin our first efforts in Mali and Senegal. Rather than go it alone, we reached out to other international NGOs that support poverty-focused microfinance institutions (MFIs). And to round out our collaborative group, we invited other important locally based constituents-- namely a microfinance rating agency and the national associations of both countries. Our group of PPI supporters was formally branded the PPI Users Collaborative in Africa, otherwise known as PUCA (pronounced PUCK –a). PUCA includes Catholic Relief Services, Grameen Foundation, Oikocredit, Terrafina Microfinance, Planet Rating, and the national associations – APSFD Senegal and APSFD Mali.

Our intent was to go slow and steady – selecting the right MFI partners, training local staff and consultants, and engaging the national associations strategically as we moved along. We formally began our journey together in February of this year with three MFI partners of the international NGOs – two from Senegal and one from Mali – that are committed to managing their social as well as financial performance. Of the three, two have their completed pilots and one is very well-positioned to start its implementation.

Beyond working with these three partners, PUCA has expanded the number of local staff and consultants trained in both countries. At the beginning of 2010, there were five local PPI trainers across the two countries, and now there are 11. We pushed beyond the early boundaries we’d set for ourselves – hosting trainings in Mali and Senegal – by supporting APSFD Senegal’s trainer, Absa Gueye, in her first PPI training in English outside of her homeland. This event made APSFD Senegal the very first national association in the world to offer a retail-priced PPI training outside of its borders.

At the start of the year, Senegal was the only country in SSA to have had a GF-led PPI training. Six months later, a total of four trainings have been held in both countries – two in Senegal and two in Mali. Each collaborative member of PUCA now has staff with good knowledge of the PPI and their training capacities are still being strengthened. The PPI has been introduced to a total of 7 MFIs. Of the four that are not currently a part of PUCA, three have expressed interest in piloting the tool and preparations are being made to work with these institutions in the coming months.

It feels like PUCA has been around for a long time, but as I sit here and count I realize it’s only been 11 months since our formal launch and a year since all members committed to its creation. Are we moving too slowly or is 11 months a long period of time? We had expected that our three original MFI collaborators would be in the process of completing their implementation strategies by now, but things have moved more slowly than anticipated, largely due to unforeseen personal tragedies and a few life-changing blessings affecting SPM project leads. As life events arise, we’re reminded that there is only so much planning that can be done. So, in those moments, we’ve taken deep breaths and provided emotional support to our colleagues.

As I think about the ecosystem we’re trying to build, I ask myself, “Have we gained enough traction and interest this year? Have we built out a sufficient support network for both MFI users and trainers?” I think the jury is still out. Using the PPI is a process and it is as much about managing change as it is about assessing poverty outreach and measuring improvement in clients’ lives. So perhaps the next year will be more telling for PUCA as we wrap up our initial implementations and begin work with a new batch of MFIs. We’ll see if the slow-and-steady approach does in fact win the race.

Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

At the close of our four-day training in Nairobi, Kenya, Stephen Makanga of KADET stands up and requests that the participants acknowledge in a Kenyan way the excellent job done by the facilitators. He instructs the group of Kenyans and Ugandans to rub their hands together (creating heat), and then to open them up a bit when he calls half-kilo, then wider at one kilo, even wider at kilo-and-a-half, and wider at two kilos, followed by the rotating of the wrist as though working flour and when he called “Pasha Moto,” they clapped in unison to acknowledge a job well-done. Absa, Donald, I wore huge smiles at this gesture of appreciation and to acknowledge the liveliness and engagement of the participants during the training, we too participated in demonstrating pasha moto!

It was just four day earlier that we started the training and several of the participants, staff of AMFI Kenya (Association of Microfinance Institutions in Kenya) or MFI members of the association that also served on the board or the committee evaluating AMFI’s strategic direction on social performance, wore their reservation regarding the PPI on their faces and in the skeptical glances I received. Certainly, I could not feel the warmth on this day. By the end of the first day, after we, the training team, had thoroughly covered the intent and construction of the PPI, the mood in the room had shifted. We asked participants to share thoughts they had as we wrapped up the first day together and several comments surfaced:

“This was eye-opening!”
“Thank you for demystifying the PPI!”
“We had it in our heads that Grameen Foundation came to Kenya,
conducted a mini-survey, and then created the PPI.”
“I came prepared for battle [on the indicators]!”

I smile thinking of where we began just a few days ago. The concerns regarding indicators and misinformation about the creation process are not unique to this training or participants; these are challenges or concerns I deal with in almost every place I train. But, it is nice knowing that we’ve moved from cool to lukewarm to pasha moto! By all accounts, the friendships made and the exchange of knowledge, this training has been hugely successful!

Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

In June, three PUCA (PPI Users Collaborative in Africa) members– national association APSFD Senegal, along with Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and Grameen Foundation – excited about the success of the dual country training events in Mali and Senegal, began to discuss the possibility of a unique opportunity for APSFD Senegal. The association is the flagship partner of CRS’ Mision II Afrique social performance management initiative and has primarily focused its attention on educating and supporting its in-country members interested in better understanding and managing their social performance. We jointly explored the feasibility of APSFD Senegal offering a PPI training of trainers outside of its borders using a retail pricing model where each participant paid a registration fee. This would be the first time that such an offering would be made in Africa, and we’ve learned that it is the first time in the world that a national association has hosted a training on the PPI using this retail pricing approach outside of its borders. Elsewhere in the world, national associations have sometimes been asked to consult for specific organizations and train on the PPI, but the initiative and pricing approach taken by APSFD Senegal in this case is unique.

In its inaugural PPI training outside of Senegal that began today, APSFD Senegal will train 9 institutions and 16 participants from Uganda and Kenya. Absa Gueye, APSFD’s social performance manager and the lead trainer for this Training of Trainers (ToT) is joined by me and GF Fellow Donald Bodzo to observe and support this first-of-its-kind event. Attendees include staff members of AMFI Kenya, a national SPM association, several Kenyan MFIs, Microfinanza, international NGOs Catholic Relief Services, Stromme Foundation and Oikocredit, and staff from a software company and microfinance consulting firm. This retail pricing approach has brought together an interesting mix of individuals seeking to learn more about the PPI for different purposes and should lead to an engaging learning exchange.

I am personally excited about this event and the foundation we are laying for other national associations that are interested in including social performance trainings into their business models as a source of revenue generation. After the training, our hope is to document the learnings from our journey in making this experience a reality.

More to come on our experience over the next few days! Karibu Kenya!

***

The CRS Mision Africa is an initiative that provides intensive support for training, technical assistance and mentoring for a three-year period to build the capacity of national associations and AFMIN (African Microfinance Network), an association of microfinance networks in Africa.

PUCA is an innovative, two-year initiative designed to help African microfinance institutions effectively use the PPI. The initiative, the first of its kind in Africa, unites five charter partners—Oikocredit, Catholic Relief Services, Terrafina Microfinance, Planet Rating and Grameen Foundation—with the national microfinance networks APIM/Mali and APSFD Senegal.

Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

As the program officer responsible for PPI deployment in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle East North Africa, I have the opportunity to meet people from many countries and help them to understand social performance management better. I also have the opportunity to help reshape their perceptions of an American. When I first began working with our West African representative based in Senegal, we had many phone calls, but he never realized that I am a woman of Caribbean descent since I have no accent. The Internet connection was rarely strong enough for video chat so he didn’t realize I have skin the hue of many people in Senegal. In fact, he came to the airport looking for a white American woman – a fact he later shared with me and we had a good laugh about. I sound American but to many Africans I could be one of them…until I open my mouth. I am perhaps a paradox – a self-identified Caribbean-American woman with no Caribbean accent working in development; I suspect there are few who could fit this description. 

 
Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

“Pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat” - the sound of heavy rain on a zinc rooftop. “Image is important,” I hear Alou Sidibe’s* words in my head.

“Pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat,” the rain continues. “Kafo is serious,” says Bourama, the first client interviewed with the PPI in the field test**, as we converse in his sitting room and he sweeps away the water that seeps in from the heavy rain outside.

“Pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat,” continues the rain. “Kafo is safe,” say Mamadou, the second client interviewed in the field test, as he explains that his family was robbed of all their savings which they kept in their home, and he had a good experience with Kafo a very long time ago when he lived in the village.

“Pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat, pit-a-pat,” the rain beats down on the truck window as we journey on rough pathways that are supposed to be roads to our last interview. During our trip, I reflect on the comments of the client which whom we’ve spoken and realize that Mr. Sidibe’s comment, “Image is important,” is so simple, but encapsulates so much of what social performance is about.

Social performance is about image – that of the microfinance sector, the MFI players, and the clients of those institutions. In essence, it is about how the sector and its actors, microfinance institutions, are perceived by a variety of stakeholders. Perhaps most importantly it is about how clients perceive these institutions and the potential value MFIs bring into their lives.

Ultimately, as participants in and observers of the microfinance sector, reaching the poor and unserved and improving their lives is the image of microfinance that we equate with success. To solidify this image, the sector and its actors must have strong data…and PPI data can get us there.

*Alou Sidibe is director general of Kafo Jiginew based in Bamako, Mali. Kafo Jiginew is a partner of Oikocredit, a member of the PPI Users Collaborative in Africa (PUCA).

**A field test is the application of the PPI questionnaire (scorecard) to a handful of clients by loan officers. It provides loan officers with the opportunity to conduct a few interviews, raise questions or issues they have around any of the indicators, and assess clients’ reactions to the questions.

 
Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

In almost every PPI training, you’ll find at least one person who really understands the statistical foundation of the PPI and becomes your advocate and then almost by force of nature, there’s the other… the one that gets it but challenges you to explain some concepts in a more nuanced manner or with a more detailed example. Both types of participants are quite helpful – the former helps to get others to buy into the tool and the latter helps to strengthen the training module.

In a training in Senegal in December, I was challenged to explain how we get from the likelihood of being below the poverty line at the individual level (say the client has a 60% likelihood of being below the poverty line) to percentage of clients below the poverty line at the group level (50% of the clients in the organization are below the poverty line). As a result, I no longer assume that people get this basic probability concept and have now incorporated it into my trainings.

Yesterday in Cairo, I was once again challenged. The participant from Dakahlya Businessmen's Association for Community Development (DBACD), one of three microfinance institutions among the first to receive PPI training, asked, ”How do you calculate change in the number of clients above the poverty line if there are drop-outs.” He noted that the example given the previous day had assumed no drop-outs, making the analysis straightforward but, as he pointed out, in reality there would be drop-outs. I attempted to verbally describe the process and modify the example using the flipchart but he shook his head in the negative (implying he didn’t get it) and the others followed. Last night, I re-worked the example with drop-outs and presented the following color-coded analysis this morning:

After walking through this analysis, there were smiles, and when asked if everyone now understood how we calculated the number of clients that had moved above the poverty line, they nodded in affirmation. Now, we’re back on track!

 
Sharlene Brown is a Program Officer with the Grameen Foundation Social Performance Management Center, handling trainings for MFIs in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle-East/North Africa. Sharlene is based out of Washington, DC.

Sharlene Brown and Jeff Toohig from the Social Performance Management Center at Grameen Foundation are currently in Senegal for a PPI training with Catholic Relief Services partners.

With the temperature in the high 80s, we trek to the homes of clients to apply the PPI in Thies, Senegal with loan officers from Caurie, a local MFI.  This is the third day of our training which has twelve participants including members of four MFIs, two independent consultants, and staff members of CRS and APSFD Senegal – the national network - who have taken the lead in organizing this training of trainers and are providing assistance with translation.

So far, all is going well and as Boubacar, our friend from CRS likes to say, “We’re on the same page in the same book.” We all understand the importance of knowing the percentage of clients being served that are below the poverty line and recognize that it is key to be able to track clients’ progress over time. The PPI is recognized as an objective poverty assessment tool that empowers poverty-focused institutions to make such evaluations.