The role of informal microfinance institutions in saving

2.2.10.3 THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN TANZANIA’S SACCOs AND
KENYA’S SACCOs
1. Sect oral and supervisory authority for both countries come under cooperative law
covered by banking law, although this does not clearly reflected in the attribution of a
specific function to the central Bank or the ministry of finance.
2. Both countries lack of interaction and exchange between the SACCOs and other
Microfinance institutions and the victual non-existence of methodological cross –
fertilization between the two types of institution i.e. they fail to receive instructions
from the central Bank regarding the preparations of financial statements and the
prudential norms to be observed.
3. Membership profile for the two countries have been standardized and has spread
almost all of the parts of their countries as they share many basic features in the way are
established, the profile of their membership the financial products offered their structure
and to a certain extent to a degree of social and financial viability id similar wherever
they are established.
4. Both countries, the SACCOs still enjoy a monopoly position in their market as they
have been established in rural areas while the Microfinance NGOs are more
concentrated in urban centers.
SACCOs serve cash crops formers in rural areas and salaried individuals in urban areas
(school teacher for instance), while microfinance NGOs serve micro-entrepreneur in
towns and the banks serve formal enterprises and wealthy individuals
SACCOs in both countries are not organized into networks as the structure is divided
into two levels the SACCOs at the base with huge membership potential (hundred of
thousands of members and an apex structure directly above them at the national level
with no intermediate body.
139