14
Evaluation
report
The Spanish Microfinance
Programme for the Development
of Financial Services for
Micro-Enterprises in Colombia
2014
Synthesis report
Edition: July 2015
© Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
Secretary of State for International Cooperation and for Ibero-America
General Secretariat for International Development Cooperation
Report made by: Armando Muriel Rico, Raúl Muriel Carrasco, Elsa Martín Domínguez y Ximena Galvis Ortiz – Nodus Consultores
The opinions and views expressed in this evaluation report are not necessarily those of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Cooperation.
NIPO online: 502-15-056-0
NIPO on paper: 502-15-055-5
Legal deposit: M-24556-2015
It is authorized to reproduce total or partial portions of this document as long as the source and authors of the copyright are
adequately named.
If you have any questions about this document, please contact:
Evaluation and Knowledge Management Division
General Secretariat of International Cooperation for Development
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation
C/ Serrano Galvache, 26. Torres Ágora. Torre Norte
28071 Madrid
Ph:+34913948808
e-mail: [email protected]
Index
1.
ObJECTIvES OF ThE EvALuATION
1
2.
SubJECT MATTER OF ThE EvALuATION
2.1. Its strategic objectives
2.2. Its organisation
2.3. Its implementations
2.4. Its duration
2
2
2
2
2
3.
MAIN CONCLuSIONS OF ThE ANALySIS
3.1. Macro level
3.2. Meso level
3.3. Micro level
3
3
7
8
4.
MAIN RECOMENDATIONS
4.1. Spanish Cooperation
4.2. bANCÓLDEX
9
9
12
III
Synthesis report
Synthetic report
This document is the synthetic report of the evaluation carried out by NODUS Consultants of the
Spanish Microfinance Programme in Colombia
(hereinafter, the programme).
The report is structured into an initial presentation
of the objectives of the evaluation and its purpose
and then moves on to the main conclusions drawn
from the findings and the recommendations proposed by the evaluation team.
1. ObjectIveS Of the evaluatIOn
The terms of reference list the objectives as being
as follows:
a. To identify and assess the value of the contribution of the programme to the work of
BANCÓLDEX in promoting the development
of micro-enterprises in Colombia and access
to financial services for the population with the
lowest incomes.
b. To analyse the impact of the programme on its
microfinance institutions (MFIs), from the perspective of their efficiency, effectiveness and
strengthening to achieve their sustainability, as
well as in terms of the management of the social performance.
c. To identify the impact of the programme at the
micro-enterprise level and analyse its contribution to improving access to financial services
for micro-enterprises located in small towns or
those with an insufficient presence of MFIs,
and the effects on the beneficiary population
from the point of view of sustainability of the
micro-enterprise and the improvement in family
finances in the medium and long term.
d. To analyse the suitability of the programme,
with reference to the adaptation to the Country
Partnership Framework (in its spanish acronym,
MAP) to the context of Colombia and to the
principles of effectiveness and quality of the aid
to development.
The evaluation team would like to highlight with respect to the spirit of this evaluation that the agents
involved in the programme, Spanish Cooperation
and BANCÓLDEX wish this to be an important exercise that enables them to:
-
Have the necessary information and elements
of judgement to facilitate its realignment (if
necessary) and,
-
Take reasoned decisions on the design and
implementation of new initiatives from Spanish Cooperation in the inclusive finance sector
both in Colombia and in other countries.
These general objectives, as we can call them,
have been seriously taken into account by the evaluation team and have guided the entire process.
2. Subject Matter Of the
evaluatIOn
The subject matter of this evaluation process is the
Spanish Microfinance Programme for the development of financial services for micro-enterprises in
Colombia generated from the Microcredit Fund for
Basic Social Development Projects Abroad (in its
spanish acronym, FCM).
table 1. Microfinance Program Spanish
in colombia
Year loan agreement and
borrower
loan amount
(€)
2000
IFI
13,449,899.13
2001
IFI
12,020,240.00
2003
(new loan and assumption of
the above)
BANCÓLDEX
15,000,000.00
2008
BANCÓLDEX
20,000,.000.00
total:
60,470,139.13
Source: Compiled from data received from BANCOLDEX
1
The following can be used as defining elements:
2.1. Its strategic objectives
-
To encourage the provision of financial services
to micro-enterprises by supervised MFIs.
-
To support the incorporation of non-supervised
MFIs into the regulated system.
-
-
-
To finance technical assistance for the institutional adaptation and strengthening of the
financial intermediaries working with microenterprises.
The deepening of the supply of financial services to micro-enterprise sectors located in places
with an insufficient presence of suitable credit
and/or financial institutions, especially in small
towns.
To fight poverty by facilitating access for microentrepreneurs to the formal financial system.
2.2. Its organisation
It was conceived through a strategic alliance with
a second-tier public entity to achieve the strategic
objectives of the Spanish Agency for International
Development Cooperation (in its spanish acronym, AECID) designed for the country and implemented through the agreements and contracts
signed with it.
This institution was the Institute of Industrial Development (in its spanish acronym, IFI) from 2000 to
2003. Later, between 2003 and 2004, the Colombian government closed the IFI and BANCÓLDEX
took on this role, and since then it has been the
partner institution in the programme.
2.3. Its implementation
It has two components: financial cooperation and
technical assistance.
-
Financial cooperation has been carried out in
four agreements, with over 60 million euros being loaned, and on the date of this report the
last loan is still to be repaid, with full repayment
scheduled for 2018.
-
Technical assistance
53,100.00 euros.
amounted
to
2.4. Its duration
The programme began in late 2000 and is scheduled for completion in 2018 with the complete
repayment of the last loan by BANCÓLDEX. It is
therefore due to last a total of 18 years, of which
this evaluation looks at the period between 2000
and 2013.
Given the complexity of the subject matter of the
evaluation and the desired level and breadth of the
analysis, the evaluation process has been carried
out following an approach that considered three
levels:
esquema de metodología empleada
2
has
Synthesis report
Macro level - The programme as a Spanish Cooperation instrument with BANCÓLDEX.
icantly to the development of the microfinance
industry in the country.
Meso level - Financial institutions that play an intermediary role for the resources of the programme.
• T
heimplementationoftheprogrammehaslater moved away from the priorities in this area,
to the extent that BANCÓLDEX has been focused on meeting its own institutional objectives, which the Government has entrusted to
it, as its business development agent. This has
further influenced the level of compliance with
the conditions of the agreements reached with
the AECID as mentioned below.
Micro level - Micro-enterprises / Target population.
3. MaIn cOncluSIOnS Of the
analYSIS
They are presented following the aforementioned
structure: Macro, Meso and Micro.
3.1. Macro Level
At this level, of a strategic nature, the programme in
Colombia has been analysed in its highest expression, that is:
-
-
Its synchrony and alignment with the nee ds
and priorities of the country and its interaction
with the reality and agents in Colombia, and the
result of that interaction for the achievementachievement of their mutual objectives.
The alignment and suitability of the approach
and objectives of the programme in the context
of Spanish Cooperation, that is, with reference
to the Master Plan and the Bilateral Cooperation Plans with Colombia in their various names
and versions.
The main conclusions are presented below.
3.1.1. Alignment with the priorities and
needs of the country
• Itisperceivedthattheprogramme’sdesign by
the AECID is with the needs of the country
established through the Government’s priorities, specifically from when it began to explicitly consider inclusive finances in its policies in
2006.
• In the early years of implementation, to the
extent that the programme has facilitated the
strengthening and performance of BANCÓLDEX as a second-tier bank for microfinance,
and that BANCÓLDEX has played that role
with professionalism, rigour and efficiency, it
can be concluded that it has contributed signif-
• T
he programme’s actions remain attached to
its initial and current implementation vehicle,
BANCÓLDEX, retaining the intervention model
established from the beginning, not opening up
to or incorporating the needs and priorities that
the Government is establishing in the evolution
of its policy on financial inclusion. In this regard,
although the Government and its priorities
evolve, the actions of the FCM remain rigidly
set in the initial model, without evolving as the
country does.
This finding can be seen as important, especially
when thinking about the future of the Programme
in Colombia and the general approach of the Spanish Cooperation on Microfinance, depending on the
desired direction.
• Inthecurrentsituationatthetimeofthisevaluation it is difficult to consider that the implementation of the programme is on the right
track and that it forms part of the development
of inclusive finance.
• T
heAECIDhasmaintainedthesamestructure
of action throughout the period, and has not
incorporated or opened up to the needs and
priorities that the Government has been establishing in the evolution of its policy of financial
inclusion.
Maintaining the initial partner, IFI/BANCÓLDEX,
as sole partner without questioning whether it
was the most suitable in new circumstances or
whether other institutions have emerged that
could also be considered partners, has influenced
the deviation in compliance with its strategic objectives by not acting, for example, outside the
area of responsibility assigned by the Government
to BANCÓLDEX.
3
3.1.2. Coherence among Spanish
Cooperation and the cooperation for
Colombia
• Insufficienttrainingwasreceivedtounderstand, accept and apply the instrument as it is defined,
The most illustrative points of the conclusions are:
• H
avinglittleinvolvementinthedevelopment process of the programme, and
• A
lignmentof the programme with the Master Plan, from the existence of the latter, as the
FCM’s programme in Colombia began somewhat before the former.
• T
hat the monitoring mechanisms have
not worked as planned.
The Master Plan reflects an evolution in terms
of its understanding of cooperation in microfinance, in the line put forward by the FCM, and
the coherence maintained throughout the period as reflected in the strategic objectives set
out in the agreements.
This coherence, however, is not definitively
supported by the coordinated and participatory
performance of the different parties involved,
but rather seems to be the result of parallel advances.
• the alignment with the Master Plan is not always perceived between the bilateral programmes and the fcM programme, for two
reasons in particular:
-
-
The trend for bilateral programmes to pinpoint specific geographic areas where the
MFIs should place the resources from the
FCM that they receive from BANCÓLDEX,
without taking into account the situation of
the supply of financial products and services in them, so that they finance the target
population of another Spanish Cooperation
project in Colombia.
The consideration of cooperation in microfinance as lines of credit that should complement specific projects, and do so in a
subordinate way.
Both reasons influence the objective and effectiveness of inclusive finances as a tool in the
fight against poverty.
This situation is possibly a reflection of the limited resources and a weakness of coordination,
in this case between the Technical Cooperation
Office (Oficina Técnica de Cooperación, OTC),
the geographical area, and the area responsible for the financial instrument.
-
4
The OTC has not gained information,
knowledge and learning from its own experience. Among the reasons for this failure,
the following may be possible:
-
In conversations held at the headquarters,
especially with the areas of responsibility
of planning and effectiveness of the aid,
interesting and necessary possibilities for
improvement have also been perceived in
the coordination and participation of the
specialised department, FONPRODE, in
the general planning and monitoring processes.
3.1.3. The partner institution: BANCÓLDEX
• T
he relationship with BANCÓLDEX, which is
the strategic ally of Spanish Cooperation in microfinance in Colombia, can be seen as both
an element of support and at the same time a
distraction from the achievement of the strategic objectives of Spanish Cooperation in microfinance.
• W
ithregardtoitssupportiverolewehavethe
positive effects that its actions have had on the
microfinance entities that are and have been
under its scope of action.
• T
he aforementioned distraction element has
mostly been associated with the lack of proper
monitoring by Spanish Cooperation, in terms of
both resources and information.
• W
ith regard to BANCÓLDEX it should be
noted that, as the entity points out, the Programme has had a significant influence on
it, to the extent that it had to take it on at
an opportune moment, and that the team
responsible at BANCÓLDEX had the ability
and wisdom to push through their own objectives using the loans from Spanish Cooperation. BANCÓLDEX is a second-tier entity
recognised by the microfinance industry in
Colombia, particularly the one located in its
scope of action, which is urban, and also in
Latin America, and the results presented are
outstanding in accordance with its objectives.
Synthesis report
3.1.4. Achievement by the programme/
BANCÓLDEX of established
objectives and conditions
This point requires a sufficiently detailed explanation, although, as in the others, the detail included
in the Final Report logically provides an insight into
the situation.
4.1. The Objectives
4.2. The General conditions of the Agreements
The objectives
The analysis carried out reveals that in reality there
have been and there are two objectives/guidelines
for action:
-
Those of the AECID established in the agreements signed with BANCÓLDEX and which
are the objectives of the programme.
-
Those of BANCÓLDEX.
TheAECID’sobjectives can be summarised in the
following areas:
a) To increase the number of suppliers, avoiding the concentration of resources in a few
entities.
b) To encourage suppliers to become monitored and supervised entities.
c) To increase the presence of MFIs and their
supply in the country, especially in the areas where they are most lacking.
d) To expand and/or improve the range of financial products offered by the MFIs.
WithregardtothoseofBANCÓLDEX:
a) To institutionally assimilate the second-tier
activity in microfinance to fulfil the mandate
received as a result of the absorption of the
IFI’sactivitywhenitwasclosed.Toincorporate the activity in a differentiated way as
a micro-enterprise bank department which,
from 2011, has been broken up and its activities integrated in other departments of
the general structure of BANCÓLDEX.
b) To build a “BANCOLDEX network”, consisting of supervised and non-supervised
MFIs, likely to demand the financial resources that BANCÓLDEX could lend to
finance micro-enterprises.
c) Taking on the role of Business Development Bank, which as the Development
Agency implements the Government’s
policies, especially those of the Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry, and focused
on non-financial issues.
In a first period, this difference between the objectives of BANCÓLDEX and those of AECID did
not significantly affect the achievement of those of
the Programme with regard to increasing the number of suppliers, since there was an increase in
the number of receiving entities. Later this process
came to a standstill, coinciding with the changes
in the organisation of BANCÓLDEX, most notably
the loss of internal importance of second-tier activity for microfinance with the disappearance of the
Micro-enterprise bank se bank department (Departamento de Banca Microempresarial).
a) W
ith regard to concentration, the outcomes
in terms of MFIs until 2008 show a logical increase in entities, and some of them, the strongest, took greater advantage of the availability
of resources.
There was a drastic change from the last loan
of 2008, showing an increase in the concentration of the resources in the largest MFIs, basically the foundations related to the network
of Women’s World Banking and, in the final
period,Santander’sCreditUnion.
This latter course of action is consistent with
the objectives of BANCÓLDEX but not with
those of the programme, and illustrates the
consequences of the differences identified between the objectives, as well as the degree of
compliance with the terms of the agreements.
b) Regarding encouraging microfinance institutions to become supervised institutions,
in the period under review four foundations
have come under the supervision of the Central Bank and they are the ones that have received the most resources. This is undoubtedly
a positive effect derived from the programme
with respect to financial cooperation, although
it cannot be said that there has been a process
of deliberate encouragement.
However, it must be pointed out that a fifth foundation exists with characteristics similar to those
mentioned and this has decided not to be subject to supervision. Very possibly its access to
the resources of BANCÓLDEX is discouraging
a supervision process, which is important for the
5
target low-income population to the extent that
if supervised the entity would be able to offer
the full range of financial products and services,
especially savings products trying to get funding,
savings products that are necessary to be able
to escape poverty and empower this population.
c) Regarding the increase in the presence of
MFIs and their supply in the country, especially in the areas where they are most lacking.
Proactive measures carried out by the programme/BANCÓLDEX aimed specifically at
developing the supply in under-served areas
have not been identified.
The population receiving BANCÓLDEX/AECID line of credit is finally selected by the MFI
which has a quota with BANCÓLDEX, and the
conditions that BANCÓLDEX establishes to
grant that quota do not include any criteria in
this regard.
It can therefore be considered that it is the sublender MFIs themselves that specify where the
Programme’sfundsareapplied.
d) Expand and/or improve the range of financial
products offered by the microfinance entities.
Specific targeted actions carried out by the
Programme/BANCÓLDEX to encourage an
improvement in the offer aimed at the target
population have not been identified.
General conditions
The agreements signed contain some general conditions which, both for their importance for the Programme in Colombia and for future actions by the
Spanish Cooperation make it worthwhile devoting
a specific section to their achievement. These are
the points relating to:
a) The placement of the financial resources
provided by AECID/Official Credit Institute
(Instituto de Crédito Oficial, ICO) to the
Programme in Colombia.
b) The limiting of the concentration of the
placement of financial resources in individual microfinance institutions.
c) New clients.
a) Placement of financial resources
The condition is that the balance of the financial resources received by BANCÓLDEX must be totally
6
and permanently placed in the MFIs and, therefore,
in the target population, which are the micro-enterprises.
Although there is disagreement about the way of
calculating the use of the Spanish resources, using
the data received it can be clearly seen that, over
various periods, the Programme’s resources have
not been placed in the MFIs and therefore not in
the target population either. Some major differences
have occurred since 2010, which have led to an
amount of more than 50% of the available funds not
being placed in loans to the target population.
The situation observed would have required actions
to be taken in BANCÓLDEX and the Spanish Cooperation in Microfinance, and to have been taken in
2009 at the latest. An example of these measures
would be a formal warning of the alleged breach.
In any case, it is also a signal that should be taken
into account for the remaining time of the FCM
Programme, until 2018
b) the limiting of the concentration of the
placement of financial resources in individual microfinance institutions.
In accordance with the data provided by BANCÓLDEX, the percentage limits of resources placed in
an MFI have been exceeded on numerous occasions. The situation is observed in five entities and
at different points in time, especially since 2009,
even until 2014.
Again in this case there is no sight of the corrective actions that would have been required. This is
another signal to consider in relation to the future
of the Spanish Cooperation in Microfinance in Colombia.
c) new clients. This condition has been passed
on by BANCÓLDEX to the microfinance institutions receiving the funds, and has been a
clause about which the AECID has been vigilant and that, with exceptions that have been
corrected, has been fulfilled.
3.1.5. Monitoring
This has probably been the most fragile area of the
Cooperation in microfinance in general and of the
Spanish Programme in Colombia in particular.
Synthesis report
This weakness can be identified both in its design,
orientation and implementation, and in the lack of
human and technical resources that have traditionally been assigned to fulfil this responsibility.
The one in Colombia was among the first experiences of the FCM programme that aimed to promote the development of the microfinance industry,
with priority over placing microloans themselves.
During the first 11 years there was no monitoring of the strategic objectives established in the
agreements, limiting the work to data verification
and checking the details of the placement. At the
start, and until 2003, meetings of the Joint Committee for Monitoring the Agreement took place,
but then they became more infrequent, with the
next and last one being held in 2008 and involving
staff from the current FONPRODE.
From 2000 to 2013 the aim was to learn by doing,
and from 2012 a more appropriate approach was
takeninordertofulfilitsraisond’être.
The consequences can largely be seen in the
achievementachievement of the objectives and
conditions of the Programme in Colombia discussed in this document.
3.1.6. Influence of the programme on the
development of the microfinance
industry
On this aspect, it can be concluded that the Programme has clearly influenced the development of
the microfinance industry.
This influence has occurred, on the one hand,
through the provision of financial resources to finance micro-enterprises at a time, at the start especially, when this supply did not exist on a national
or international level.
It has also occurred, on the other hand, due to the
very positive actions of the IFI in the first instance
and, from 2004, of BANCÓLDEX.
Although this entity was not really dedicated to
meeting the strategic objectives agreed with Spanish Cooperation, it was dedicated to meeting its
own, and it did this well, and that is what ultimately
influenced the development of the industry, or at
least a substantial part of it, and allowed for the
almost exclusive action with financial resources.
However, with regard to the technical assistance
which most clearly influences institutional development and strengthening and the transformation into supervised entities, the impact has been
zero. There were no non-repayable grants available for this purpose, or at least not for a significant amount, and alliances were not sought for
it either.
3.1.7. Influence of the microfinance
industry on the Programme
There is no evidence that the development of
the industry has generated reactions in the Programme, in terms of either BANCÓLDEX or Spanish Cooperation in Microfinance.
The reasons are possibly as follows:
-
In the case of BANCÓLDEX, its own transformation into a business development bank,
where the development of the microfinance
sector lost priority.
-
In the case of Spanish Cooperation in Microfinance (headquarters and OTC), because the
monitoring system as a whole does not facilitate the perception of these changes.
That is, both agents may be “blind” to possible
changes in their operations.
3.2. Meso level
At this level we have the MFIs which are the providers of financial services to the population.
3.2.1. Influence of the Programme on
participating MFIs
These findings relate to the financial cooperation
element, which is the only one they have been able
to perceive.
• T
he overall view of the MFIs about the
BANCÓLDEX/AECID credit line is positive
or very positive, and it is considered important or very important for them regardless
of the type of entity (NGO, cooperative, etc.)
and its size measured in the volume of the
credit portfolio.
• T
he main influence has logically arisen from
the possibility of access to financial re7
sources when there was not so much international supply and when they could not capture
savings from the public since they were unsupervised.
• T
his reason for the influence and importance
has diminished to the extent that MFIs have
grown, there are more suppliers and the entities supervised by a suitable monetary authority can capture savings from the public. Today
the MFIs that have a quota with BANCÓLDEX
now have funding alternatives and therefore
only demand resources as a result of the price,
with some exceptions.
• T
helastparagraphiscertainlyawake-upcall
for both Spanish Cooperation and BANCÓLDEX, since the objective is not to compete with
attracting public savings, or with other formal
suppliers, but to offer the possibility of funding for the MFIs, and therefore for the population who do not have that facility. That was its
success from the start, and it seems that both
players have remained in that scenario. One example is provided by the volume of resources
available from the ICO loan which has not been
placed in the MFIs, and the minimal increase
in recent years in the number of MFIs in the
“BANCÓLDEX network”, which brings together
the entities that have received BANCÓLDEX
funding.
• A
nother important item of information is the
points that the MFIs highlight about the use of
the credit line resources:
-
To serve more customers.
-
To improve the ability to compete where
they have a presence.
-
To increase their presence in new geographical areas, when the MFI had already
taken the decision to do so.
The third of these points is one of those that the
Cooperation sought, as long as in these new areas the supply of financial products and services
was insufficient for the population, a circumstance
which could not be verified as there is no information on this aspect.
• T
o conclude with this aspect, it only remains
to mention the little importance that the MFIs
place on the influence in generating new products, in general, and internally strengthening
those that are smaller.
8
3.2.2. Selection criteria for the MFIs
• A
t the beginning of the Programme, with the
IFI as the partner entity and its FINURBANO
Programme recognised for its success, Spanish Cooperation, with no prior experience in
Programmes like the one planned, decided it
would maintain the criteria used by the IFI to
select the MFIs to lend resources to, knowing that it worked well, but without questioning
whether these criteria were the most suitable
given the strategic objectives.
• In the review carried out on the occasion of
this evaluation it has been seen that among the
criteria that BANCÓLDEX uses for selecting
MFIs there is none that allows for priority to be
given to the MFIs that best meet the strategic
objectives of Spanish Cooperation. An example
here would be the analysis of the Strategic
Plan of the MFIs to identify aspects such as:
- Plans to extend their supply of financial
products and services to under-served areas, or
- Plans to become a supervised entity capable
of offering savings products, among others.
• A
lthough the money is not identifiable and,
therefore, in reality it is an “accounting game”,
saying that Spanish resources are financing
certain clients, knowledge of the expected
growth with certain characteristics of the portfolio of the MFIs, allows support to be prioritised to those whose growth strategy is consistent with the objectives of Spanish Cooperation
in Microfinance in Colombia.
3.3. Micro level
This includes the target population, considering as
such those people at which the actions of Spanish
Cooperation in Microfinance are aimed. The term
beneficiary population has been used to indicate
the population that has actually received the Spanish resources.
3.3.1. Selection criteria for clients used by
the MFIs: the beneficiary population
vs the target population
• T
heprocessofplacingthefinancialresources
that BANCÓLDEX follows, of the discounting
micro-loans granted, gives the MFIs the power
Synthesis report
to select the clients assigned to the BANCÓLDEX/AECID Programme.
4.1. Spanish Cooperation
• T
hepercentageoftheresourcesfornewcustomers, which is one of the conditions of the
last agreement signed with the AECID, has
been introduced as a differentiating element
with other BANCÓLDEX lines.
The points considered most important are grouped
into the following:
• Inthecontextdescribed,andthroughtheinformation extracted from the survey of the MFIs
and particularly from the focus groups, doubts
arise about the proximity of the beneficiary
population to the target population, which
supposedly should not have access to financial
services, or in other words, is very unlikely to
have previous experience of the level found in
the focus groups.
2. Strengthen the technical capacity.
• T
heusebytheselectedMFIsofcriteriaonfairness, sustainability, and other behavioural characteristics of the micro-enterprises, depends
only on them having these included in their process since it is not part of the BANCÓLDEX
selection criteria.
3.3.2. Influence of the Programme on the
beneficiary population
• It is impossible to differentiate the effect that
the credit is assumed to have on micro-enterprises in cross-cutting areas of gender and
ethnic and/or language diversity, as this is not
among the parameters demanded by the AECID or BANCÓLDEX.
• C
onsideringthestatementsmadebythepeople running the micro-enterprises, access to
credit would have forced them to become more
organised, gain greater financial education and
develop their business.
On a more personal level, they indicated that it had
provided them with economic security, family wellbeing, individual independence, confidence about
the future, access to basic services such as education and health, and social integration.
4. MaIn recOMMendatIOnS
Finally, this chapter we set out the main recommendations, proposals and suggestions which the
evaluation team offers for consideration by the parties involved in the Programme, presenting them on
the basis of their recipient.
1. conduct a review of the implementation
strategy of the Programme.
3. Increase the coordination in Spanish cooperation in terms of planning and monitoring.
Each of these points is explained below.
4.1.1. Conduct a thorough review in depth
of the implementation strategy for
the FCM Programme
This is the first recommendation, and it is suggested that it include:
a.
Programme design
b.
Partner entities
c.
Monitoring
These suggestions and recommendations are expanded on below.
a. Programme design
• C
arry out a deep reflection on updating the
design of the intervention. This update is initially performed in Spanish Cooperation to be subsequently shared with the Colombian government at the corresponding levels. This process
is particularly appropriate in the circumstances
in which the country finds itself in terms of the
expectation of a new post-conflict stage.
• C
onsiderthedecision on whether or not to
continue cooperation with colombia in this
area and, if so, reflect on the desirability of expanding the number of partner institutions
for the Programme, both in the current context
and especially if the country enters the postconflict stage, in which the rural sector would
be a priority focus of action.
• F
orthesamepurpose,itisproposedtoundertake technical Support, this is to say, the provision of non-repayable funds that contribute
to the achievement of the strategic objectives,
and to do this in coordination with the Bank of
9
Opportunities Programme (Programa Banca
de las Oportunidades) which is the instrument
of the Colombian government to implement its
policy of financial inclusion.
• O
n a more operational level, it is suggested
to define and implement a new model of
agreement which covers both the philosophy
of the strategic objectives to achieve as well as
the indicators necessary to facilitate the necessary monitoring. This is independent of the
future decisions affecting the Programme as
mentioned below.
b. Partner entities
WithregardtotherelationshipwithBANCÓLDEX
·• review the appropriateness and expediency of continuing the relationship, taking
into account its institutional change and the
mandate from the Government as an agent for
business development.
• If it is decided to continue, then the suggestion is to agree on a new operating scheme
aimed at fulfilling the objectives and conditions
of Spanish Cooperation on the points:
-
Selection criteria of the MFIs receiving the
FCM’sresources.
-
Requirements: As a minimum, incorporate
the application and analysis of its strategic planning and assess the consistency of
this planning with the strategic objectives
redefined for the Programme.
-
Do not compete, in principle, with internal
savings. This means that if the MFI is already authorised to take deposits from the
public such as, for example, the banks that
act as intermediaries in microfinance that
have emerged in recent years, the idea
would be not to provide them with additional resources, as Spanish Cooperation
would be offering them an alternative to
the entities offering savings products and
services to the population. This leads on
the one hand to not encouraging financial
inclusion and, on the other hand, to dependence on funds from foreign institutions.
-
10
The exception that could be considered
would be if any of these entities aims to
expand their activities to little or completely
unserved areas, including the rural sector,
as a way to support the achievement of
that goal.
-
Call upon BANCÓLDEX, as a prerequisite,
to provide projections of placement of the
resources pending repayment to the ICO,
until 2018, the year in which they must pay
the last capital repayment, following the
criteria leading to achievement of the strategic objectives of Spanish Cooperation
resulting from the aforementioned review
oftheProgramme’sdesign.
• If this continuation is not of interest to both
parties then BANCÓLDEX should immediately return the outstanding balance of the last
loan payable to the ICO to Spanish Cooperation so that the Cooperation can make use of
it and apply it to meet its objectives through
other partner organisations, in agreement with
the Colombian Government, whose long-term
strategy matches that of Spanish Cooperation.
In general
• R
egardless of the option with BANCÓLDEX,
they should consider other partner entities
capable of reaching where BANCÓLDEX cannot or does not want to reach under conditions
that are determined as a result of the aforementioned reflection.
-
The clearest option would seem to be FINAGRO which has a mandate from the
government to act as a second-tier entity
in the farming and rural sectors. This option would require a thorough analysis of
the institution, in all aspects, especially its
strategic plan.
-
They could also consider first-tier entities
that intermediate directly with the population.
• T
hefinancial resources could be obtained either from those BANCÓLDEX cannot use or
from new resources that Spanish Cooperation
decides to contribute to support the Government in the new financial inclusion strategy, especially if the country enters the “post-conflict”
period.
c. Monitoring
The proposal is to review the whole monitoring
scheme in depth, its model as well as its content
and resources.
Synthesis report
The recommendations are aimed at its optimisation
to fulfil its raison d’être: enable compliance with
the strategic objectives in the context of the updated needs and priorities of the country, in the field
of the fight against poverty in which the cooperation in microfinance acts.
The elements that are suggested for review are as
follows:
• Onthedesign:
- Elements/variables/indicators to be monitored.
These elements must be clearly defined in
the Programme design, and explicit in the
agreements to be signed.
• O
nthebasicinformation:
- Definition of the information to be received
in the area responsible for monitoring: Design, format, medium and frequency.
- This definition should be maintained in the
partner entity and available to Spanish Cooperation and with the legally enforceable
requirement to provide it on request.
• O
nthemediumandprocessing:
- Computer storage, search and publishing
tool.
• Ontheanalysisandgenerationofproposals:
- Provide sufficient professional capacity,
considering all of the FCM operations still
in force, so that it can be carried out as often as necessary to ensure timely decisionmaking.
• O
nthetransmissionofpositionandproposals.
- Selection of recipients.
- Design of the communication in format and
frequency.
• A
dvantage of holding meetings between the
parties, such as working committees or agreement monitoring committees:
- Of a working and proactive nature, not decision-making.
- On at least an annual basis.
- Withtheparticipationofthepartnerentity,
the OTC and the headquarters, possibly remotely.
- Withtheguidelinesandpreparationagreed
with FONPRODE.
- Preparation of reports aimed at the area of
monitoring.
• Decisionmaking
-
-
Use the formal procedures established in
the agreements when rectifiable deviations
or breaches occur.
Propose and implement fundamental
changes in the execution when events or
changes are identified that predict a failure
to achieve the strategic objectives of Spanish Cooperation.
• P
erforming an interim evaluation if the Programme is extended beyond 2018 and the
suggested changes to the design and form of
intervention take place.
4.1.2. Strengthen the technical capacity
Cooperation in Microfinance requires some technical knowledge in the same way as any other specialised instrument.
It is about obtaining this capability at a sufficient
level so that these interventions by Spanish Cooperation work effectively and efficiently.
The recommendations are set out in the following
lines:
a. Provide in the headquarters of the specialised capacity, depending on the volume of
transactions and the diversity of instruments if
the FCM is extended.
b. training in the Otc. In particular it is recommended that training be strengthened in the
OTC of Colombia, since the expert incorporated
says they do not have enough a sufficient level
of training. This training should include the following aspects:
• Inclusivefinanceingeneral.
• TheinstrumentofSpanishCooperation.
• GuidelinesoftheMasterPlan.
• TheColombiaprogramme.
c. coordinate the availability of a strong technical capacity at the headquarters, whether
it be FONPRODE and/or the body in which
this capability is outsourced, or any part of
it, with the actions necessary to carry out in
Colombia. The Monitoring Committees and
their preparation are a good opportunity but
not necessarily the only one to carry out this
coordination and optimisation of the available
technical capacity.
11
4.1.3. Increase the coordination in Spanish Cooperation in terms of planning
and monitoring
a. In the process taking place in Spanish Cooperation in general, in relation to planning and
monitoring, take into account the presence and
participation of the area responsible for cooperation in microfinance, FONPRODE. This is
undoubtedly already established in this way,
however from the perspective of the evaluation team and the information it has obtained,
this involvement might not have been sufficient.
The analysis carried out in Colombia suggests
the desirability of greater involvement in the
design of the MAP.
b. It seems that this face-to-face involvement must
be accompanied by the greater understanding
and appropriation of the instrument suggested
to be produced in the OTC. This means training
on the one hand and appropriation on the other.
c. OTC involvement in the monitoring is recommended, with the will and coordination indicated in paragraphs and points in the report.
4.2. BANCÓLDEX
WhenlookingatthesuggestionsforSpanishCooperation it was said that there should be a reflection on the desirability of BANCÓLDEX continuing
to be the partner in the programme, considering
the premises and priorities established.
In this scenario, the suggestion proposed to
BANCÓLDEX would be the following:
review the appropriateness and opportuneness to continue the relationship with Spanish cooperation in Microfinance, taking into
account its institutional change and mandate
from the Government as an agent of business
development.
The evaluation team proposes that, if the decision is made to continue, a number of changes
should be made to the operation of the Bank in
this area aimed at meeting the defined strategic
12
objectives of the programme, which include the
following.
a. Adjust the criteria that MFIs should meet to
receive resources from the Line, especially in
relation to their strategic plan and non-competition with internal savings, among others.
These criteria would be additional to those that
BANCÓLDEX already uses in general.
b. Make an estimate of the MFIs eligible to receive the resources of the current BANCÓLDEX/AECID Line, and compare it with the AECID.
c. Define an action plan for the incorporation of
these MFIs into the “BANCÓLDEX network” or
simply into the relationship of entities supported with resources from Spanish Cooperation in
Microfinance.
d. Make a forecast of the possibilities for the placement of the financial resources. On the basis of
these forecasts we should see the appropriateness of considering the adjustment of the existing loan if a surplus is identified that prevents
compliance with the condition that 100% of the
resources must be placed permanently.
e. Study the possible modification of the Line,
meaning, for example, leaving permanently
open the receipt of applications, defining the
minimum loan amount for each MFI of those
qualified to receive a loan under the Programme, changing the system of granting
funding to the MFIs beyond the rediscount of
microloans, among other possibilities.
f.
Actively seek new MFIs with opportunities to
receive financing from the Spanish Cooperation loan.
g. Adapt the availability of information to the monitoring scheme which Spanish Cooperation is
advised to review, and provide the information
required.
h. Adjust the current position on the placement
of the financial resources, eliminating the malfunctions and failures identified.
i.
Sign a new agreement.
Informe completo y otros
documentos relacionados
se pueden encontrar en:
http://www.cooperacionespañola.es/es/publicaciones