Social Performance Indicators Blog

Experienced PPI™ User Discusses Challenges

Posted by: Mike Krell

Muhammed Awais, the Regional Microfinance Programme Specialist for Plan International in Asia and a source for one of my past entries, has recently written a blog post for Grameen Foundation in which he describes the “Top Ten PPI Challenges.” Based in Bangkok, Awais has experience implementing the PPI at both the practitioner and network levels, and his list focuses mainly on MFI resistance to adopting the PPI. He addresses various criticisms leveled at the tool, such as that its basis is older socio-economic surveys or that it is too simple to be effective, while also highlighting a problem with the way the tool has been marketed (i.e. from a purely social performance perspective). It provides invaluable advice for individuals and institutions contemplating PPI implementation.

Grameen Foundation Unveils Its New PPI™ Certification Program

 

Posted by: Mike Krell

A perennial problem here at MIX is that of self-reported data. While it’s true that the financials we display come by and large from independent auditors, social performance data—as well as institutional, outreach, and product information—is all self-reported and, for the most part, not externally audited. This fact brings with it an assortment of headaches, the majority of which stem from a simple question: how do we know whether such data is reliable?

Announcement: MIX Provides New Resources for Social Performance Management and Reporting

Posted by: Cara Forster, Program Manager, Network Development Services, SEEP, and Mike Krell

The SPTF and MIX sent out a social performance communication today. This email includes a modified Social Performance Standards (SPS) Report with an expanded Reporting Framework section containing helpful links directly related to each social indicator. It also includes a document describing each of the Companion Resources referenced in the new Reporting Framework section. The Companion Resources aim both to make the reporting process easier and to give MFIs quick access to references that will (1) allow them to learn more about each of the topics covered in the Reporting Framework, (2) help them find tools that can assist them answer the indicator questions and (3) connect them to articles that describe how other institutions have addressed similar challenges. It is the hope of the SPTF and MIX that these new Companion Resources will stimulate even more MFIs to report on social performance and, in doing so, to reflect on their mission and current progress, to the benefit of both the MFIs themselves and the industry as a whole.

Announcement: Fill MIX’s Social Performance Standards Report through CERISE’s Social Audit Tool

 

 

 

Translated and posted by: Mike Krell

MFIs using CERISE's SPI social audit tool can now provide their core social performance data to MIX without any additional effort. In fact, the SPI questionnaire contains all of MIX’s core indicators. By using the CERISE/SPI method of evaluation—a method recognized and valued by numerous investors, funders, and regulators—MFIs can not only conduct an internal diagnostic and commit themselves to improving social performance, but can also export all of their social data to the MIX format in a single click with the electronic SPI. This new functionality allows microfinance service providers to improve their transparency as well as their visibility at the international level (MIX/SPS).

Advocating for Financial Performance Indicators: What Can We Learn from Efforts in Social Performance?

Guest Post by:
Drew Tulchin, Managing Partner, Social Enterprise Associates
Leah Nedderman, Consultant

Most advocates of social performance acknowledge that financial performance indicators are more widely recognized than social measurement indicators.  Financial value is considered less subjective and financial metrics are more widely utilized. For example, the CEO of a microfinance institution (MFI) is more likely to track and report return on equity (ROE) than clients’ progress out of poverty. A country’s central bank is more likely to have portfolio at risk (PAR) requirements than client protection requirements in evaluating the success of an institution being regulated.

However, those of us promoting financial performance standards still find considerable challenges when encouraging the revision and adoption of new financial standards, particularly since there is a revision and update to current standards underway.

What can be learned from the work of social performance advocates, particularly in terms of reaching out to stakeholders with targeted and consistent messages?

First, the challenge: The SEEP Network, an international membership association based in Washington, DC, has launched a revision of the SEEP Framework for Reporting, Analysis, and Monitoring—a tool for MFIs and stakeholders to generate comparable and internationally accepted financial information. The Microfinance Industry Reporting Standards Initiative is a formal mechanism to maintain and update the standards.  This is the first time in 6 years an update has taken place.