PPI Learning Forum

19 May 2010

An SPM Peer Learning Community activity organized by

Oikocredit.

Lisette Doming
[Pick the date]
1|PPI Learning Forum
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

PPI Learning Forum

The PPI Learning Forum was held last May 19, 2010 a Torre Venezia in Quezon City. The program
commenced at around 9:00 am and was facilitated by Ms. Meldy A. Pelejo, SPM Coordinator of the
Oikocredit Regional Development Center-Southeast Asia, and Mr. Christopher Tan of Grameen
Foundation.

Objectives and Flow of Meeting

Ms. Meldy Pelejo gave a background of what the learning forum wants to accomplish. The forum
was organized to know who are the PPI piloters/users. She explained that Grameen has their own
definition of who qualifies as a PPI user and the number of implementers are growing. Some of
the piloters are already in the advanced level while some are just beginning their implementation.
The forum is also a venue for discussing the main challenges and solutions for a successful
pilot/rollout/full implementation. Last, the forum will help in identifying how can PPI strengthen
SPM culture or the institutionalization of SPM within the organizations

Main Objective: Contribute to improving PPI's practices among the piloters and users and to
maximize the use of the PPI with the results to strengthen social performance.

Specific Objectives
 identify issues/concerns as well as solutions/responses taken in the management of the PPI
pilot and/or implementation (some of the implementers are advance, while some are just
starting out)
 to identify the requirements of rolling-out the tool
 draw insights, plans for data use in strengthening SPM

After going through the objectives, Ms. Pelejo discussed the format of the program. The
presentations/sharing is divided based on the PPI systems.

Overview of the PPI Systems

Mr. Christopher Tan
Grameen Foundation

Mr. Tan gave an overview of the different stages of PPI. The first phase is the Pre-analysis Stage
which includes institutional buy-in, PPI Training, data collection, data encoding, MIS, and quality
control. He emphasized that this phase is very important because if you don't get the data in
accurately, the analysis will be wrong and misleading.

The second phases is the Analysis Stage wherein we consolidate and analyze the data gathered
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

and determined what the data tell us about ourselves. After this phase is the Post-analysis Stage.
Given the data, what do we need to change?

He shared that many of the issues encountered last year is under the pre-analysis stage. He, then,
showed the PPI questionnaire and the conversion table. He emphasized that the individual
questions are not the important questions in the PPI. What is important is the cumulative score
and how that score translates into a particular poverty estimate.

Mr. Tan also gave an update of what GF is doing to make sure all the activities in Stage 1 was
properly done.

PPI Validation
 Need to monitor the PPI implementation to ensure data accuracy
 GF developing standards of PPI use
 GF developing validation process for PPI users
 Resources to begin validation in July
 Looking for interested MFIs

Specifically GF is interested in understanding

 the MFIs interest in being validated
 If the MFI sees value in being validated and recognized by GF
 How difficult it would be to furnish the information of the PPI collection, process, and
reporting
 The MFIs openness to having an individual come onsite to conduct the validation

Presentation 1: Institutional Buy-in

Presenter: Ms. Mary Jane Macapagal

Research and Development Head
Alalay sa Kauswagan, Inc (ASKI)

Ms. Mary Jane Macapagal shared their organization's experience in getting the support of the
organization in doing the PPI. When Oikocredit introduced PPI to ASKI, they realized that this tool
would allow the organization to know its poverty outreach and determine how quickly their clients
move out of poverty. They pilot tested the tool in 2008 in one branch. In 2009, ASKI rolled-out PPI
in all their branches and it became a part of their regular process.

Getting institutional buy-in from the board and top management was easy because the executive
director was an advocate of SPM. With regards to the field staff, they knew that they would have
a hard time convincing them and as such they were the first persons they oriented about PPI.
During the pilot, ASKI had a hard time getting the survey forms done because the total sample was
100% of the branch's clients and the programs officers have other tasks to do. ASKI also realized
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

that giving instructions are insufficient and that they had to have a policy and highlight the
sanction to emphasize that the organization is really serious in implementing the program. In
addition, results of the PPI are not just reported to the Board but also to the branches so that the
field staff can appreciate what information is derived from the tool.

Presenter: Ms. Cristina Bulaon

SPM Committee Chairperson
Friend Foundation

Ms. Bulaon was not able to attend the forum because of some transportation glitches. As such,
she sent a documentation relating the experience of Peoples Bank of CARAGA which was read by
Ms. Pelejo.

One of the best things that happened to the Peoples Bank of Caraga (PBC) in connection with
its efforts to effectively deliver microfinance services to the rural communities, is MCPI’s invitation to
the SPM promotional workshop in December, 2005, where I chanced upon the Poverty Scorecard
from Ms. Annie Alip. I must emphasize that, because in early 2004, we tried to measure the impact of
our microfinance program using the means test before and after data, and you guessed it right, we
did not have a measure. They were just, “Yes, there was change because some of the clients’ sari-sari
stores have gone bigger. Well, their kids are still in school, some were able to send them to college.
Still some were able to redeem their mortgaged properties, others now own parcels of lands, etc.”
Most of the changes shared and observed were not in the means test form. Those who were assigned
to conduct the house to house survey felt that in general, there was no significant impact that can be
directly associated with our micro-lending program. It was not, therefore, an encouraging
experience.

We pilot-tested the 2002 APIS-based Poverty Scorecard in 2006, among 100 clients of the
Principal Office for easier calculations. Adopting the Client Recall approach I heard from Mrs. Alip for
the before data, we finally had a tool that measures impact. Results did not show tremendous
change in the respondents’ lives, but there was change alright and I was glad we can go somewhere
henceforth with the Poverty Scorecard. Together with the results of the client exit study we
undertook in 2005, we used the impact study in introducing SPM to all of PBC through the ten SPM
workshops we conducted in 2007, from the Board of Directors down to the last branch of operations.
These workshops were aimed at reviewing the bank’s mission which is our reason for being, and at
emphasizing to all that we need to translate our mission into practice – social performance
management.

With the Board’s blessing, we could just have imposed for the PPI to be used by the
Development Officers (DOs), our Account Officers for Microfinance. However, we believe that after
understanding SPM and PPI, there has to be considerable acceptance of SPM as an approach, for us to
be true to our mission. For that, we incorporated the PPI in the means test form, so that the DOs will
slowly get used to the instrument, hoping that somehow, they will by themselves, discover its
usefulness. This did not happen as hoped for. A few obviously appreciated the scorecard and used it
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

as their personal tracking tool for their respective clients’ progress. Others discovered their
prospective clients belong to the non-poor category and should have been excluded, and that would
not have been helpful in meeting their targets. So, why take the PPI seriously.

We did another survey towards the end of 2007, this time for over three hundred respondent-
clients from our six branches in Agusan del Sur. The respondents were randomly chosen from among
the clients who were with our MF program for at least five years. A significant improvement in the
status of the clients was observed in all branches, using the Poverty Scorecard. Results were
presented to the Annual General Assembly of Peoples Bank in 2008, and SPM with us is never the
same again. Only, I did not use all those questionnaires that the DOs accomplished since then. We
continued to participate in the SPM Working Group, enjoyed the generosity of MCPI and other MFIs on
their best practices, learned some more, and alas! a new PPI, the 2004 Version came about.

Last February, the Board passed a resolution approving the proposal to administer the 2004
version of the PPI among all MF clients, to generate a baseline data. All DOs will conduct the survey
among their respective members, to be randomly validated by their Supervisors and BMs, and finally
by the FRIEND Foundation staff. FRIEND is the training and research arm of PBC. By December of this
year, we hope to be able to come up with a report on the results of this study.

Our biggest challenge is integrating our SPM with our MIS. We were in the process of seriously
upgrading our IS when we were promoting SPM. As we did that, we realized we need to review and
revise our objective statements, because we found out that some were just actually strategies for the
others. That’s what SPM does to an institution. It bothers you to the bone. When you believe you’re
serving your clients well, it says not quite enough. And the PPI can attest to that. Our IS Team is
excited over the expected 50,000 or so PPI records, or I want to believe so.

The PPI is a blessing to us, as much as MCPI’s patience in promoting SPM among all MFIs is,
especially for a rural bank like us. Indeed, in all that we do towards financial self-sufficiency, we must
not forget that living our reason for being is as important.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. After Ms. Macapagal's presentation she was asked if they experienced any difficulty
convincing the board, the management, or the field staff?
 Ms. Macapagal shared that they didn't have any difficulty convincing the Board or the
management because their executive director is an SPM advocate. In fact, it was the
Board that requested them to give a report regarding ASKI's social performance. With
regards to the field staff, they knew that they would have a hard time convincing them
and as such they were the first persons they oriented about PPI. During the pilot test
stage, they experienced difficulty gathering the data because the program officers had
to juggle administering the PPI form and doing their usual workload. Because of this,
ASKI decided to look into their loan processes and see where the PPI data gathering can
fit in. At present, the data gathering is already included in the loan evaluation process.
 Ms. Pellazo of TSPI, shared that their Board has not yet totally accepted PPI and they
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

are still in the process on buying-in the support of the organization. The Board
questions why there is a need to know if they are targeting the poor.
◦ Ms. Macapagal said that in ASKI they are using the PPI to know their poverty
outreach and not yet as a targeting. They are still studying about using it as a
targeting tool because it will affect their operations.
◦ Mr. Tan explained that one of the values of PPI is that it allows for segmentation of
clients and by segmenting we are to able to know the kinds of products that we can
offer so that the clients can move out of poverty. Also, through PPI, you can see the
movement of clients in terms of their poverty level and then you can do cluster
analysis.
◦ Ms. Pellazo affirmed that maybe PPI is a good profiling tool. However, how can one
know that the clients have moved out of poverty when there are other factors that
can affect which is not captured by the questionnaire. Mr. Tan explained that PPI is
a probability model. It has to be looked at like the credit scoring which means that
you would have to look at is the final score.
 In the case of KMFI, there was an assumption that if the directive comes from the top
management, it assures you of a buy-in. But in terms of the quality of data and
implementation, you wouldn't get quality if you do not consult your operations.
 (dan) of HSPI shared that there was no problem with the Board, but there was
resistance from the field staff because the POs have targets. Also, PPI is seen as an
additional task and we are a very lean organization. As of now, our PPI point person is
also our internal auditor.
 Ms. Flores of Gata Daku MPC said that there was no problem because the SPM
implementation was already included in the planning. The problem was how the AOs
will manage their time because they will be the one administering the survey.

2. Ms. Pellazo asked if it is helpful to have 3 different people handle each PPI stage.
 Ms. Macapagal mentioned that they initially thought of having the training officer as
the point person for PPI. But later on they realized that the workload of that person
will be affected because PPI is not a one-time activity. At present, they have divided
the tasks for the PPI i.e. the training component is handled by the training specialist,
the data gathering is done by the credit operations group.
 Mr. Tan reminded the group that there is a need to find a balance with having
different people handle each stage of the PPI. Because if you divide one work to
different people, it ends up that nobody is responsible for it.

To summarize the session, Mr. Tan pointed out that the resistance in implementing PPI comes
from the different levels of the organization and each has a different reason. For the Loan
Officers, it is an additional work. The solution is to find a way to integrate it to the things that they
are already doing so they wouldn't feel that its additional work. For the Management, there is a
tension between the goals of the organization (which is increasing outreach) and setting a
particular score. But when a score is set, there is a possibility that you have to say no to a group
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

of people/ possible clients because they are above the PPI score that you set. For the Board, it is
an issue of self-image. MFIs' mission is to serve the poor, but when we use the PPI, we might find
out that we're serving people who are not poor.

Presentation 2: PPI Training

Presenter: Ms. Mary Jane Macapagal
Research and Development Head
Alalay sa Kauswagan, Inc (ASKI)

Ms. Macapagal was again asked to share ASKI's experience, this time regarding providing training.
Prior to the pilot testing the tool, staff from the pilot branch were trained on PPI. ASKI asked for
the support of Oiko in the conduct of the training knowing that they are more knowledgeable
about the tool. When ASKI started using the PPI form, the research team went with the pilot test
branch to ensure that the form was administered properly.

As with the pilot branch, a training for all branches was conducted prior to the roll-out of PPI. A
concern that was raised the was who will train the newly hired program officers. Will it be the
responsibility of the supervisor, BM? As such, ASKI reviewed its current training curriculum for new
staff and developed a module for SPM which includes topics on definition of SPM, why ASKI is
very particular about social performance, PPI, and how to deal with the different questions.
Likewise, a training for the managerial staff was designed which included an SPM session, but
focused more on what are their responsibilities as managers in implementing PPI and monitoring
social performance. An actual demonstration in the field (conduct of survey) was done wherein
the program unit supervisor assisted the new staff in conducting the survey and gave inputs on
how to administer the survey.

Presenter: Mr. Edgardo Tubongbanua, Jr.

Pag-inupdanay Inc

Mr, Tubongbanua was also requested to share PI's experience in training their staff on PPI. He
shared that PPI has already been conducting social performance appraisal through focus group
discussion, consultation, and means testing, among others. When PI decided to implement PPI,
they pilot tested it in one branch – Hinigaran Branch. Aside from the PPI indicators, they
incorporated community participation, mainstreaming of women issues, and child labor reduction
in the from. In 2009, they rolled out PPI to all the branches.

Oiko and Grameen Foundation conducted the PPI training for some of the MFI's staff. PI's
research arm, the MPK, conducted the training for the other staff. Cliniquing and follow-up was
also done in the pilot branches during the first quarter of implementation.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. Ms. Apoderado of OCCCI said that it took a while for them to pilot the PPI. When they
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

started pilot testing, they saw that there were many bad data so she visited the office and
asked what was the problem. They found out that some of the people trained were no
longer in the organization. They weren't able to anticipate that there will be new staff
coming in due to opening of new branches and sanctions. So, they coordinated closely
with the HR and re-conducted the training.
 Ms. Pelejo explained that field practice (actual data gathering) should be done
immediately after the training so that the inputs during the training is still fresh. She
reminded the group that tt takes a while before one gets used to doing new things. It is
also important to involve the staff even those that are non-frontliners because when
you involve them and there is staff turnover, the problem can be addressed.

2. Mr. Domingo of CDO Coop shared that they have already finished pilot testing PPI among
their regular clients. He recognizes that there really should be someone to handle staff the
turnover. What happened with them is that it was Chairman of the Board who administered
the form. However, he was not a regular staff and his position has terms (i.e. after 3 years,
a new chairman will be elected).

3. Ms. Patindol of PI said that their staff training was handy because they have a unit -
Mausisaon sa Pangkalibutan (MPK), who specialize in research and training. What they did
was to ensure all the PI staff have undergone the training. They also had coaching wherein
the development officers observe how to administer tha questionnaires.. There was also
cliniquing and action planning as to how to handle the obstacles in the conduct of the PPI.
 Ms. Pelejo reminded the participants that it is important to reflect on their organization
– what are your capacities, resources available. We use the things that we learn from
what the others are doing, but it has to be customized to fit the context of your
organization.

4. Ms. Pellazo shared that when they conducted the training, they had a role playing on how
to gather data from the clients. She thinks that it was good because it generated a lot of
questions, questions that even they didn't know how to answer during the training. They
encourage questions even those that seem stupid during the training because it means that
they are interested. Later on, we process those questions.
 Ms. Macapagal shared that they allow those kinds of questions because there are valid
questions like “Paano kung 2 un tv pero un 1 hindi umaandar?”, but they set limitations.
 Ms. Pelejo added that during the training, it is important that the trainees knows what
answer they are trying to elicit from the interviewee.

To end the session, Mr. Tan emphasized four points:

1. There is a need to expand the definition of training to include actual implementation
because a lot of training actually happens on the job.
2. The frequency of training has to be looked into because the turn-over is very fluid.
3. Training actually happens across the organization. Even management and board have to be
trained on the PPI but there are certain parts that have to be emphasized more depending
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

on your audience.
4. Oikocredit, Grameen Foundation, and the learning community are here if you organization
needs to ask questions.

Presentation 3: Data Collection

Presenter: Ms. Sintilla
Pag-inupdanay Inc

Ms. Sintialla of Pag-inupdanay Inc (PI) described their experience in gathering the PPI data. PPI
was implemented in PI in 2009 as a tool in the loan evaluation. The tool is being used by PI for
documentation, monitoring, and evaluation of members/partner-clients. The data generated
enabled PI to monitor the poverty profile of its partners, verify whether the organization is really
reaching the group that it wants to serve, guide the management in improving programs and
services i.e. manual development, training modules, and capability-building to complement the
credit assistance program of PI

All PI partners, both new recruits and renewal, had to answer the PPI survey. Since the partners
are located in far flung and sparsely populated areas, it was difficult to gather the needed
information. Further, clearing up of incomplete data, which is done in the head office, was hard
because they had to coordinate with the branches and the branches are far from the HO.

In order to overcome these obstacles, PPI is administered house-to-house by the DO during the
conduct of the inventory and evaluation. Since clients are located in far flung areas, motorcycles
were provided to the branches so they can go to areas where public transportation is unavailable.
Branch managers checks and validates the accuracy of the PPI forms for all the newly recruit
partners and loan renewals. When incomplete forms/inaccurate data are submitted, sanctions are
given to the DO or the BM in order for them to know that PPI is a priority. A point person has also
been assigned to check on the PPI forms and encode it in the head office MIS.

Presenter: Jeanette Moling

Research and Development Manager
Rangtay sa Pagrang-ay, Inc (RSPI)

Ms. Jeanette Moling shared what they have gone through while collecting PPI data. RSPI pilot
tested PPI in 2007 with 350 clients located in Baguio and Benguet. The roll-out to other branches
began in 2008, and in 2009, PPI was integrated into their general MIS. Data gathering is done by
the operations people of the organization. Data encoding is being done by the bookkeepers,
while data processing and analysis is being done by the research and development unit.

When RSPI implemented PPI, they were faced with different challenges. There were
inconsistencies in data gathering and as such data quality suffered specially during the first year of
the roll-out. When the AOs were newly trained, the output was good. Later on, the quality
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

suffered. The AOs assumed that they already know their clients since they've been with the
organization for some time and as such the AOs tend to just answer the questionnaire even
without interviewing the client. Also, there were different interpretation of the questions
particularly in the definition of terms. In addition, there were concerns on how to ask some of the
questions without offending clients.

To address these problems, all field staff were trained on the use and conduct of PPI survey and
experiences are shared during the middle management training. Also, the survey was integrated
as part of the client profile instead of including it in the LUC. Random audits for data validation
were being conducted by the BM, AM, and internal audit.

Presenter: Ms. Vivien Martin

Executive Director
Kamayo Mindanao Foundation, Inc. (KMFI)

The last presenter for the session, Ms. Martin narrated KMFI's experience in data collection. KMFI
is the CSR arm of Enterprise Bank. They got into PPI in 2009 because it serves as the social
compass of the MFI and their Board was interested to know how the MF program affected their
lives of the clients.

In 2009, the President of EBI told Ms. Martin to go to NWTF to learn the tool. When she went back
to Davao, KMFI collaborated with a university and used their research experience in using PPI. In
May 2009, they already have a sample size and research design. On June of the same year, KMFI
started gathering data. However, when they began using the tool, the selected respondents were
no longer in the KMTK program. Further, they were forced to make their own operational
definition of terms like if a larger part of the house is made of cement, it is considered strong.

The same with the other institutions, institutional buy-in was a challenge KMFI had to address.
KMFI needed to coordinate with Enterprise Bank regarding the implementation of PPI. Also, there
was no buy-in at the level of the AOs because for them it was additional work. It was important
that the relevance of PPI to the banking group was explained in order to get institutional buy-in.

Ensuring data quality was another challenge for the MFI. It was observed that the form was
administered to the clients at the same time (during center meeting) at the last minute. If not for
the Board asking for the results of the PPI, the form would not be used.

The problem with regards to bad data was solved by segregating the data into three levels. Level
A data are those that are complete and the time of completion was about 5 minutes. B data are
those that needed to be validated by the research team like whether the area is rural or urban. C
data are the questionnaires that were discarded i.e those that were completed at the same time.
Random visits and client calls were also done to ensure accuracy of data. Last, the margin of error
was changed because it was too ambitious. What happened then is that the sample size
decreased from 8000 to 1000.
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

Implementing PPI taught KMFI valuable lessons. The approval and support of the board to
implement a project doesn't equate to institutional buy-in. Consultation with the people who will
be involved in the project is very important for a successful implementation and getting
institutional buy-in. Likewise, the significance of planning, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting
(PMER) cannot be underestimated. It is also important to have coordinating structure sine KMFI is
an independent institution from EBI. At the same time, collaboration between KMFI and
Enterprise, as well as with the personnel is essential.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. Ms. Pellazo asked what are the sanctions for submitting incomplete forms?
 For 1st offense, if it is the DO, he is called upon by the BM and is reprimanded. For
succeeding offense, there is a monetary sanction of P5, 10.
 Mr. Tan pointed out that it is important to integrate the SPM strategy with the HR
policies because it is were you have the incentives and sanctions. He inquired about the
reaction of the HR or the operations regarding the sanction.
◦ There was no resistance on the part of the field staff since we patterned the MF
program to CARD which employs monetary sanctions.

2. Ms. Pellazo asked Ms. Moling what was the problem they encountered with integrating PPI
with LUC because they were thinking of doing just that.
 Ms. Moling replied that the strategy did not work for them because they only used a
sample of clients for the LUC as opposed to the PPI which was administered to all
clients.
 Mr. Tan clarified that it is not the LUC per se but the sampling. That if the LUC is done
for all the clients, then there's no problem.

3. Ms. Pelejo asked Ms. Moling how often do they meet with the middle management for the
sharing of experiences.
 RSPI conducts quarterly meetings and part of the agenda is the sharing of experiences
regarding the processes.

4. Dr. Tiongson of AIM asked what they do when there are questions that are offending? For
example, about the bathroom, do they just refrain from asking it or do you use the
bathroom?
 Ms. Moling said that they do sometimes ask the clients if they could use the bathroom.
They also give suggestions to the AO how to ask those questions.

5. Mr. Baldove of HPFI asked what RSPI does when they discover discrepancies in the forms?
 Ms. Moling said that the forms are returned to the AO. Also, since they already have
validation levels, it is now included in their performance evaluation.
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

6. Ms. Apoderado wanted to know how KMFI classify towns as being rural or urban.
 What KMFI did was if it is in the town proper, then it is considered urban, if its 25kms
away from the town proper then it is classified as rural
 Ms. Pellazo shared that the categorization of baranggay as whether it is rural or urban
can be found in the NSB website.

At the end of the session, Mr. Tan reiterated the important points that came out from the
discussion.
1. The key players in data collection are field staff/operations people. So, when talk about
buy-in, there are different levels that we need to talk to.
2. Two key questions in implementation – 1) Are they actually doing it?, and 2) Are they
actually doing it well? It has to be ensured that the interpretations to the questions are
accurate and the responses are accurately recorded.
3. The organization has to build in all sorts of audit and monitoring function. Even a simple
analysis should be done because it is only when we analyze data that we are able to know
that there is something missing.
4. It is important to integrate SPM with the work of the operations and HR because once
incentives and sanctions are considered, we are getting into HR policies.

Presentation 4: Data Encoding

Presenter: Jeanette Moling

Research and Development Manager
Rangtay sa Pagrang-ay, Inc (RSPI)

Ms. Moling was called again to share RSPI's experience in data encoding. She related that during
the pilot test the research assistant encodes the PPI scores at the head office. RSPI decided to
automate their system and so they outsourced an MIS provider which they had to orient about
PPI. When, the scorecard was integrated into the MIS, the encoding was delegated to the
bookkeepers. There was apprehension, then, about data quality because the scores encoded in
the system might be different from the scores in the form. Once the scorecard was integrated
into the system, the total score is now automatically generated. In order to ensure data quality,
manual validation was done. The scores in the system was compared to the scores in the form.

Presenter: John Neri

ICT Manager
Paglaum Multi-Purpose Cooperative (PMPC)

Mr. John Neri was also asked to share their experience in data encoding. At the start of his
presentation, he gave a brief background about the cooperative. PMPC pilot tested PPI in 2009 in
Plaridel branch with their microfinance clients. They use PPI as a tool to track poverty levels and in
evaluating products.
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

During the PPI implementation PMPC was confronted with various challenges. Data gathering was
a problem because of the schedule of the AOs. There was also the problem of improper data
encoding and in data consolidation and analysis. Asking questions in a way that it would not
offend the clients was also a concern. Last, how to properly implement PPI for individual/regular
members not only in the MF clients because they not yet tried it with the individual clients.

The PPI has allowed us to know the income status of their members. Also, they were able to
determine the difference in every category of the consolidated data like loan product, age
category. It has also compelled them to create a software program for easy and faster data
encoding and consolidation. This program is developed internally.

In order to eliminate bad data, PMPC designed a structure. The AOs administers the survey while
the area manager and branch managers validates the completed questionnaire. Data gathered is
consolidated at the head office and encoded by the tellers.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. Mr. Tan wanted to know what were the findings in RSPI's validation.
 Ms. Moling explained that in the data input, there are about 10% errors, while in the data
gathering, it was about 5%. The errors are small because it was part of loan process.
The moment that the questionnaire is returned, the loan evaluation will not proceed.

2. Ms. Pellazo clarified if the income status can really be reflected because what she
understood about PPI is that it does not reflect the income status.
 Mr. Neri cleared it up and said that it was just a wrong use of term.

3. Several participants were curious about the MIS – cost, staff hours in developing the
program, reports it generates.
 Ms. Moling replied that their MIS' modifications was funded by Oiko.
 Mr. Neri shared that they plan to incorporate the report in PMPC's current program.
The target to finish the program is August because PPI will already be rolled-out in all
the branches. In the past, it took a month to develop the program because there was
only 1 person working on it. But since PMPC has hired additional programmers, the
development would only take weeks.

At the end of the presentations, Mr. Tan pointed out that based from the experiences of the MFIs,
it can be observed that as the number of errors increase, the more manual manipulation of data
there will be. He reminded the participants to try to remove as much manual handling of data as
possible. Further, since it is the IT personnel who codes the formulas in the system, it is important
that the PPI team/champion coordinate with the IT team when they are defining the variables.

Presentation 5: Quality Control

 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

Presenter: Ms. Mary Jane Macapagal

Research and Development Head
Alalay sa Kauswagan, Inc (ASKI)

Ms. Macapagal was asked to speak about quality control. She focused 4 main points – 1) getting
institutional buy-in, 2) clarifying plans for training and data collection, 3) ensuring clarity of
management plans, and 4) clarifying accountability and ensuring quality control mechanisms. She
mentioned that in getting the buy-in of the board and staff, it is important that they are oriented
on what PPI is and why the organization is implementing it. Further, they should be given an idea
of the possible direction of the PPI implementation including the costs and resources that are
needed. Once the organization has started its implementation, it is important that the results are
conveyed to both the board and the staff so that they would be able to appreciate the tool.

The staff that would be involved in the implementation would need to be trained about the PPI
process. If they are unable to understand the process, there would be poor implementation. So,
the training should be able to provide them with background information about PPI, how was the
10 indicators derived, and what are the basis for these indicators.

It is also important to assign a PPI point person at the start of the implementation so that there
will be continuity in the inputs provided by GF and Oiko. Also, the PPI process should be
integrated to the regular work of the field staff. If PPI is carefully integrated into the usual flow of
activities, the BMs would not be worried that their work will be interrupted.

Lastly, accountabilities should be clarified in the policy. In the case of ASKI, the branch supervisors
are responsible for validation of the PPI survey. The internal auditors also validates the form when
they conduct their audit session since the loan application process is part of their comprehensive
audit.

Ms. Macapagal summarized the challenges they encountered and how they were able to
overcome it. Prior to implementing PPI, an orientation workshop was conducted for the credit
operations people. ASKI invited Oikocredit to conduct the orientation for the field staff. They
were asked to compare means test and PPI and decide which one gives information to the
organization. When they agreed to apply PPI, they started to use the tool.

ASKI recognized that there will be new staff coming in to the organization, thus, sessions on PPI
was included in the training curriculum for new staff. A process map was also created which
depicts the step-by-step process of the PPI implementation.

To address the issue on collection, a full-time support staff was hired to process the data. The PPI
results are communicated to the branch level and at the Board and management level.

Presentation 6: PPI Data Analysis, Data Use and Product Development

 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

Mr. Gilbert Maramba

Research and development manager
Negros Women for Tomorrow Foundation (NWTF)

Mr. Gilbert Maramba presented how their MFI analyzes PPI data and how they use it. At the
beginning of the discussion, Mr. Maramba shared their SPM strategy – find the target client,
address their needs, and change their lives. This strategy allows them to ensure that the clients
are able to gain from the loan that they are paying.

In 2008, NWTF discovered that 40% of their clients are above the poverty line. A new policy is put
into place regarding client recruitment - 90% of the new clients should have the score of below 34
which means the clients are below poverty level. With the change in the recruitment system, a
new policy in loan application was created.

Potential income is now considered in the loan application and cash flow analysis is only done for
individual loans or those above P30,000. In the new policy, we look at the skills of the household
and what kind of business can be derived from each skill. The potential income for each type of
business is computed and then the clients choose which business they would go into or it can be
an expansion of the existing business. After choosing a business, the income is projected.

PPI reports generated is on a per loan officer basis. Each LO is able to know the upward and
downward movement of their clients over 3 years and below 3 years. Thus, they themselves can
access what they have done in the field and with their clients.

The reports also allow NWTF to see the trends per branch and per area. In addition, the MFI is able
to segregate each type of business and see the repayment rate for each type. By segmentation
the MFI can see which business clusters are very safe and really risky, then a new program can be
developed for them.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. Mr. Tan asked what was the reaction of the loan officers when they introduced PPI?
 The loan officers are excited that we will be reporting to them because they have more
data.

2. Ms. Pellazo requested Mr. Maramba to expound more on segmentation.

 Mr. Maramba related their experience in agri-microfinance and said that if they had PPI
when they started the program, they would have been able to predict the performance
of the clients. Segmentation can be based on the type of business and under each type
of business what are the poverty level or start-up vs existing, what is the repayment
rate. By doing this, the performance of certain types of clients can be seen.
Segmenting allows you to see which types of business are risky but the PPI is not used
as a basis for expanding in other areas.
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

3. Ms. Macapagal was curious as to how the new policy had affected the capacity of the
branch to implement PPI.
 The staff became more confident that they'll be able to reach the target. If there would
be an increase in the number of clients that have upward movement, then the “tapal”
system or client dropout can be minimized.

4. Ms. Moling of KMFI wanted to know what were the implications of population poverty
likelihoods being too far?
 As been observed, the poverty likelihoods are the same. If it's too far, there's
something wrong with the training program or downloading of policies.

Presentation 7: Using PPI Information

Dr. Erwin Tiongson

Core faculty and associate professor
Asian Institute of Management

Dr. Tiongson discussed analyzing public sector efficiency and how these tools can be used to PPI
data. During the discussion, Dr. Tiongson mentioned that bad data should not be thrown away
because by then you can ask who produced the bad data and when was it produced. For example,
if the bad data was produced at Christmas time, maybe it is not a good time to gather data.

Dr. Tiongson showed relationships between inputs and outputs, and measuring efficiency. In the
case of the MFIs, the input can be the spending and the output can be clients served. By creating
a scatter diagram, the differences in outputs of the different branches can be compared and from
then identify best practice branches. Using the scatter diagram, he explained that the distance
between two of the points is the efficiency score. The efficiency scores can be correlated with
other things for example, general characteristics of the branches or the location of the branches.

As a summary, Dr. Tiongson pointed out that efficiency analysis can be used for PPI data.
Branches can be compared according to the average PPI scores which is converted to a poverty
likelihood. The PPI scores can be correlated to certain characteristics of the branches or the
community where the branches operate. However, efficiency analysis is a preliminary tool and
there are limits as to what can be done.

Questions / Comments / Points Raised:

1. Mr. Tan asked if there is any secondary analysis that needed to be made, assuming you can
measure quality and how can the framework be made simpler?
 Assuming that the quality can be measured, it should be included in the first-stage
analysis. Another way of adjusting for quality, maybe it has nothing to do with the input
per se, maybe it could be things like organizational attitude, the notion of having shared
values, experience of loan officers. In terms of making the framework simpler, Excel
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

can be used but the inputs and outputs have to be defined.

2. Ms. Pellazo clarified how can it be said that the score (output) is from the MFI?
 Dr. Tiongson again reiterated that what was shown is a diagnostic tool and there are
some research tools that can be used like randomized evaluation.

3. Mr. Maramba commented that microfinance inputs are hard to quantity, how can the
analysis be done?
 The two branches can be compared maybe based on years of experience, branch
manager experience, skill level, gender (# of males and females).

Forum Learning: Group Workshop

Guide Questions
1. What were the main barriers or major impediments/challenges to PPI pilot/roll-out/full
implementation?
2. What are the good practices that could facilitate a successful PPI pilot/roll-out/full
implementation?
3. How can the PPI be part of your organization's strategy to reach your desired social
outcomes and results?

Output

Group 1
Main barriers or major  Institutional buy-in
impediments/challenges  Data quality
to PPI pilot/roll-out/full  Time management
implementation  Communicating of
results
 Transfer of information
– there was a need for
improvement of training
Group 2
 MIS ad trained IT staff
to consolidate and
process PPI results
 Institutional buy-in –
lack of cooperation and
commitment among
AOs who does the data
gathering

Good practices that could
facilitate a successful PPI
pilot/roll-out/full
implementation
 Integrating of PPI with
the loan processes
 Set-up PMER
 Data
gathering/encoding
 MIS
 Support of the top
management
 Integrate data gathering
on regular loan
processes
 Integrate use of PPI as
part of new staff
training
 Communicate PPI
results to the lower
 Proceedings of the PPI Learning Forum
May 19, 2010

How can the PPI be part
of your organization's
strategy to reach your
desired social outcomes
and results?
 Review of social goals
and objectives
 SMART goals and
objectives based on PPI
level staff
 Establish levels of
validation to ensure
data quality
 Integrate PPI as part of
KRA of all employees
 Use of PPI results to
segment markets for
future product
development projects
 Integrate PPI in
measuring an
organization's goal

After the presentation of the group outputs, Mr. Tan wrapped up the activity by emphasizing on
key points discussion during the day.

1. The reports change so it's important to put our attention to the reports being generated. It
is important to experiment and make mistakes but when you make 1 great insight from
your mistakes that is such an important contribution. How you use the information will
drive how PPI will look in the next 2 years. Also, look at all sorts of potential SPM-type of
information.
2. It is very important to communicate PPI to the different levels of the organization, even to
the clients. In order to get buy-in, it is important for people to see where you want to take
them.
3. Integrate everybody – Board, IT, HR, finance. Make sure everyone understands what the
organization are doing. Delegate some parts of the work to the other units because a way
to get buy-in is if they feel that they are responsible for something in the project.
4. Monitor in order to know the job is being done and it is done well.
5. It is important to have feedback loops on different levels of the organization.
6. There is a need to have clear policies.