Social Impact Assessment of Microfinance Programmes - weman

More documents

Recommendations

Info

We first discuss results based on tables presented in the Appendix to this Chapter. Since Kashf is one of the oldest MFIs in Pakistan, it is one of those which has clients in its third cycle and beyond. In fact, as Table A.8.2.2 shows, about a third of Kashf’s sample is in its fourth (or longer) loan cycle, which makes Kashf one of the best MFIs to undertake an impact assessment analysis. As in the case of some other MFIs which work with women, we see that in the case of Kashf as well, most women are in the Business of operating shops – Table A.8.2.4; also, unlike Active or Pipeline Borrowers, most women in the Non-Borrowers category are involved in Cottage Industries. The Housing Characteristics of Active Borrowers, on average, seem to be slightly better than those of the other categories – Tables A.8.2.6 and A.8.2.7. The average Income Per Capita and the Expenditure Per Capita for Active Borrowers is much higher for Active Borrowers than for all other borrowers. The value of Household Assets of Active Borrowers are also much higher than all others. However, as in the case of the targeting of the ‘Official Poor’, i.e., those below the Official Poverty Line, very few of Kashf’s clients fall below that Line – Table A.8.2.8. The difference in the Household Assets Ownership position – Table A.8.2.14 – does not seem to be large amongst the three groups. Table A.8.2.26 which shows the perceptions of Borrowers on the impact the programme is having on them, reveals, as it does in most other MFI cases, that as the number of loan cycles increase, in general, so does the positive perception about impact. This is not a surprising result, as one would expect that someone will stay on with a programme only if their real or perceived quality of life has improved. If they felt that their lives were not improving, they should have left the programme. Also, as in the cases of most other MFIs, new (Pipeline) Borrowers have a far better perception about the change in the quality of life, than do Non-Borrowers – Table A.8.2.29. Unlike most of our other partner MFIs, data from Kashf allows us to see whether there was much impact on account of the microfinance intervention, mainly because Kashf has been in the sector for more than a decade and there are numerous clients who are in their fourth and beyond loan cycle. Table 8.3 shows, for example, that the differences that relate to better living Housing conditions for Kashf’s Active Borrowers are significantly better than the other three categories. Most important, however, is the hugely significant improvement in Per Capita Income, Per Capita Expenditure, Value of Household Assets, etc, which accrues to Kashf clients compared to those who are new to the programme or do not belong to it – Table 8.4 brings out this difference very sharply. In the case of Children’s Education – Table 8.5 – not surprisingly, we do not find much significant difference between those who are Active Borrowers and the other categories. This is probably because, as we speculate and as our tables in the Appendix show, most women send their children to school anyway and one does not necessarily expect much difference on account of the microfinance intervention. A curious result from Table 8.5, which is also found in other MFIs, is the statistically significant difference between children who attend private schools of Active 19
Borrowers and the others. It is surprising that fewer children of Active Borrowers attend private schools than do those of Non-Borrowers and Pipeline Borrowers. Table – 8.3 KASHF – Housing Variables Category Mean Standard Deviation t-value Significance Level House owners Active Borrowers 93.7238 24.30425 2.992 .003 New and Non- Borrowers 85.6089 35.16493 Person per room Active Borrowers 3.0621 1.26558 -1.645 .100 New and Non- Borrowers 3.2895 1.77538 Houses with baked bricks Active Borrowers 99.5816 6.46846 5.352 .000 New and Non- Borrowers 88.1919 32.33013 Houses with RCC Roof Active Borrowers 32.6360 46.98647 .486 .627 New and Non- Borrowers 30.6273 46.17974 Houses with Cemented Floor Active Borrowers 48.9540 50.09397 2.675 .008 New and Non- Borrowers 37.2694 48.44162 Note: There are 239 and 271 respondents in each category respectively. t-value greater than 1.6 indicates the mean difference between two categories is statistically significant. The negative t indicates that average value of category 2 is greater than the average value of category 1. Table – 8.4 KASHF – Economic Status Variables Category Mean Standard Deviation t-value Significance Level Expenditure Per Capita Active Borrowers 1719.1644 731.22097 5.762 .000 New and Non- Borrowers 1382.1862 588.18874 Per Capita Food Active Borrowers Expenditure 858.0294 322.48533 .970 .333 New and Non- Borrowers 830.9796 306.96651 Income Per Capita Active Borrowers 1843.7834 825.03292 4.213 .000 New and Non- Borrowers 1550.0408 749.29919 Household Asset Score Active Borrowers 7.04 1.729 4.248 .000 New and Non- Borrowers 6.31 2.094 Value of household assets Active Borrowers 408644.0380 323086.48155 3.212 .001 New and Non- Borrowers 299592.0976 318946.72808 20
Page 1 and 2:
Social Impact Assessment of Microfi
Page 3 and 4:
indicators which are more difficult
Page 5 and 6:
• Since Asasah has been in operat
Page 7 and 8:
Akhuwat • Akhuwat was established
Page 9 and 10:
and economic change in their surrou
Page 11 and 12:
development. NRSP's mandate is to h
Page 13 and 14:
Kashf Urban Poverty Alleviation Pro
Page 15 and 16:
clients’ amounts to Rs.5.6 millio
Page 17 and 18:
Pakistan, Official Poverty Line - R
Page 19 and 20:
Contents Executive Summary Acknowle
Page 21 and 22:
7.5 UPAP Survey Results 7.6 UPAP Re
Page 23 and 24:
microfinance operations. This ordin
Page 25 and 26:
and not other services such as savi
Page 27 and 28:
elow. While we examined the traditi
Page 29 and 30:
Ideally, baseline studies and panel
Page 31 and 32:
members of these organizations are
Page 33 and 34:
Microfinance Branch District/City I
Page 35 and 36:
factor. For this survey, the sample
Page 37 and 38:
loans and might have increased cons
Page 39 and 40:
Chapter Three: Asasah 3.1 Instituti
Page 41 and 42:
insufficient resources. Furthermore
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 3.1: Asasah’s Target Marke
Page 45 and 46:
for SBF, two in Lahore and one in K
Page 47 and 48:
to Regional Managers as the organiz
Page 49 and 50:
undertake thorough research which e
Page 51 and 52:
According to Asasah the only time a
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 3.3 Funding Sources NGO 5% D
Page 55 and 56:
Borrower’, is that client who has
Page 57 and 58:
Note: There are 237 and 273 respond
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
orrowers spend less on education by
Page 63 and 64:
Jewellery and livestock were genera
Page 65 and 66:
Appendix Chapter 3 A 3.1.1 Institut
Page 67 and 68:
A3.1.4 Organizational Structure Boa
Page 69 and 70:
Table - A.3.2.4 Respondent Characte
Page 71 and 72:
Table - A.3.2.9 Child Education [AS
Page 73 and 74:
Table - A.3.2.14 Household Assets O
Page 75 and 76:
Table - A.3.2.17 Women’s Empowerm
Page 77 and 78:
Table - A.3.2.20 Women’s Empowerm
Page 79 and 80:
Table - A.3.2.22 Borrowers - Loan A
Page 81 and 82:
Table - A.3.2.27 Non-Borrowers’ P
Page 83 and 84:
Chapter Four: Orangi Charitable Tru
Page 85 and 86:
these, as many as 7,301 units are c
Page 87 and 88:
• Loan for Livestock: OCT also su
Page 89 and 90:
guarantees of two local entrepreneu
Page 91 and 92:
CEBEMO, a Dutch funding agency, has
Page 93 and 94:
MFIs claim. Hence, its criteria and
Page 95 and 96:
Table - 4.4 OCT - Household Assets
Page 97 and 98:
difference, we found that active bo
Page 99 and 100:
mainly because they don’t have to
Page 101 and 102:
Term/D uration Loan size improveme
Page 103 and 104:
Table - A. 4.2.4 Respondent Charact
Page 105 and 106:
Average Indebtedness 19300 6375 340
Page 107 and 108:
Table - A. 4.2.14 Household Assets
Page 109 and 110:
Table - A. 4.2.19 Borrowers’ Perc
Page 111 and 112:
Table - A. 4.2.23 Non-Borrowers’
Page 113 and 114:
which also became the head office.
Page 115 and 116:
problem of group lending is that me
Page 117 and 118:
uy insurance, which covers the risk
Page 119 and 120:
activities with other NGOs and Soci
Page 121 and 122:
5.1.5.3 Policy Environment As Akhuw
Page 123 and 124:
are also working on a marketing pla
Page 125 and 126:
We first discuss results based on t
Page 127 and 128:
New and Non- Borrowers 506072.7273
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
From these results we can judge tha
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix Chapter 5 A 5..11 Institut
Page 135 and 136:
Table - 5.4.2.1 Sample Information
Page 137 and 138:
Table - A. 5.2.6 Housing Characteri
Page 139 and 140:
Table - A. 5.2.12 Sources of Househ
Page 141 and 142:
Table - A. 5.2.16 Women’s Empower
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Table - A. 5.2.29 Non-Borrower’s
Page 151 and 152:
in the contextual needs of the comm
Page 153 and 154:
6.1.4.1 Products and Services Offer
Page 155 and 156:
Other filters related to the specif
Page 157 and 158:
management reveal the significance
Page 159 and 160:
have been chosen from ‘old/establ
Page 161 and 162:
School Going Children - Boys % Acti
Page 163 and 164:
The Difference in Differences (DID)
Page 165 and 166:
Table 1: Regression results Young B
Page 167 and 168:
• Participants were also not very
Page 169 and 170:
Impact on Quality of Life & Social
Page 171 and 172:
Appendix Chapter 6 A.6.1.1 Institut
Page 173 and 174:
Sample Information [SAFWCO] Table -
Page 175 and 176:
Table - A. 6.2.7 Housing Characteri
Page 177 and 178:
Table - A. 6.2.12 Sources of Househ
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Table - A. 6.2.29 Non-Borrowers’
Page 189 and 190:
incremental growth, it is emerging
Page 191 and 192:
the purpose of the organization and
Page 193 and 194:
Group loans are meant specifically
Page 195 and 196:
Officer. If the Field Worker and Cr
Page 197 and 198:
The worker’s degree of mobility d
Page 199 and 200:
credit is disbursed to another woma
Page 201 and 202:
Borrowers Houses with RCC Roof Acti
Page 203 and 204:
Own House Active Borrowers 98.4568
Page 205 and 206:
A Single Difference equation is als
Page 208 and 209:
Table 7.6: Regression results Young
Page 210 and 211:
Table - 7.8 UPAP - Economic Status
Page 212 and 213:
Table - 7.10 UPAP - Household Asset
Page 214 and 215:
Y ij = X ij α + C ij β + M ij γ
Page 216 and 217:
Table 1: Regression results Young B
Page 218 and 219:
to consider young unmarried clients
Page 220 and 221:
influentials and people understand
Page 222 and 223:
Client Profile Most of the women in
Page 224 and 225: Appendix Chapter 7 Appendix A.7.1 N
Page 226 and 227: Appendix A.7.2 Results from NRSP Su
Page 228 and 229: Table - A. 7.2.6 Housing Characteri
Page 230 and 231: Monthly Expenditure on Health 1526
Page 232 and 233: Table - A. 7.2.16 Women’s Empower
Page 234 and 235: Do you operate Bank account in your
Page 236 and 237: Spouse without your suggestion .6 3
Page 238 and 239: No 17.6 14.1 20.3 9.6 16.7 100.0 15
Page 240 and 241: Appendix A.7.3 UPAP Institutional B
Page 242 and 243: Table - A.7. 4.4 Respondent Charact
Page 244 and 245: Table - A.7. 4.9 Child Education [U
Page 246 and 247: Table - A.7. 4.14 Household Assets
Page 248 and 249: Table - A.7. 4.17 Women’s Empower
Page 250 and 251: Table - A.7. 4.20 Women’s Empower
Page 252 and 253: Table - A.7. 4.23 Borrowers - Loan
Page 254 and 255: Table - A.7. 4.27 Non-Borrower’s
Page 256 and 257: Chapter Eight: Kashf 8.1 Institutio
Page 258 and 259: were introduced at several levels a
Page 260 and 261: Box 8.1 Kashf’s Core Values Servi
Page 262 and 263: issues are in the social theme book
Page 264 and 265: usiness address, attest to experien
Page 266 and 267: the learning centre has been set up
Page 268 and 269: development and undertaken market s
Page 270 and 271: information has not been integrated
Page 272 and 273: Table 8. 2 Financing Sources: Septe
Page 276 and 277: Note: There are 239 and 271 respond
Page 278 and 279: Table - 8.7 KASHF - Business Charac
Page 280 and 281: The results from the estimation of
Page 282 and 283: A total of three focus group discus
Page 284 and 285: The positive impact of the credit w
Page 286 and 287: Appendix Chapter 8 A.8.1.1 Institut
Page 288 and 289: 54 Jawarian R 55 Behra R 56 Sahiwal
Page 290 and 291: A.8.1.5: GESA Activities Initiative
Page 292 and 293: Table - A.8.2.1 Sample Information
Page 294 and 295: Table - A. 8.2.6 Housing Characteri
Page 296 and 297: Table - A. 8.2.12 Sources of Househ
Page 304 and 305: Table - A. 8.2.22 Borrowers - Loan
Page 306 and 307: Table - A. 8.2.27 Non-Borrowers’
Page 308 and 309: Chapter Nine: Conclusions For anyon
Page 310 and 311: are necessary for impact to take pl
Page 312 and 313: Another finding from the survey sug
Page 314 and 315: of the microfinance sector in Pakis
Page 316 and 317: Section 1 - IDENTIFICATION File:
Page 318 and 319: 1.9 Occupation - Primary __________
Page 320 and 321: Section 4a - All Respondents File:
Page 322 and 323: Section 4b - All Respondents File:
Page 324 and 325:
Section 5b - All Respondents File:
Page 326 and 327:
Section 7 - Only for Non-Agricultur
Page 328 and 329:
8) Do you regularly pay the loan in
Page 330 and 331:
Section 9 - All Respondents File:
Page 332 and 333:
10.2 Had you wanted to join a progr
Page 334 and 335:
11.7 Business Assets Business Asset
Page 336 and 337:
Section 14 - All Respondents File:
Page 338 and 339:
Section 16,17,18 - All Respondents
Page 340 and 341:
17.2 [If Yes in 17.1], Why you did
Page 342 and 343:
Section 19 - Only for Female Respon
Page 344 and 345:
19.8 Who in your household decides
Page 346 and 347:
Section 20a - Only for Agricultural
Page 348 and 349:
Section 20b - Only for Agricultural
Page 350 and 351:
Page is left intentionally blank Qu
Page 352 and 353:
Appendix: Additional Codes ________
Page 354 and 355:
___________________________________
Page 356 and 357:
___________________________________
Page 358 and 359:
Bibliography Carolyn Barnes and Jen
show all

Social Impact Assessment of Microfinance Programmes - weman

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?