The Microcredit Summit Campaign has collected data for the State of the Microcredit Summit Campaign Report for 15 years and has verified that data beginning in 2000. The process consists of 1) the circulation of Institutional Action Plans (IAPs) to thousands of practitioners, requesting their most recent data; 2) a phone campaign to more than 500 of the largest MFIs in the world to encourage submission; 3) a verification process seeking third-party corroboration of the data submitted by the largest MFIs; 4) data compilation and analysis; and 5) the writing and publication of the report.Among the thousands of institutions and individual supporters in the Campaign’s 16 Councils, as of August 31, 2012, a total of 3,703 MFIs from 149 countries were members of the Council of Practitioners and have submitted an Institutional Action Plan (IAP) at least once since 1998. To view a complete list of the institutions and individuals that submitted an IAP in 2011, go to Appendix IV.
Practitioners were asked to furnish data that is critical in measuring progress toward fulfilling the Campaign’s two goals. The IAP outlines a common set of strategic objectives and creates an easy way for institutions to share their plans and accomplishments. The IAP is the basic building block of the Campaign. In this year’s IAPs, the data provided comes from questions, such as 1) what is the total number of active clients (clients with a current loan) and 2) what is the total number of active clients who were among the poorest when they received their first loan. We requested answers to these and other questions for data as of December 31, 2011.
In most cases, the data presented in this report is submitted by individual institutions. Some data, however, comes from network or umbrella institutions. To prevent double counting, the Campaign analyzes the data from these institutions to identify any potential duplication from their partners.
Whether data from network or umbrella institutions is counted or not, they continue to play a critical role in facilitating data collection from their affiliates, and the Campaign is extremely grateful for this support. For a complete list of the networks and other institutions that provided crucial assistance in the collection of data this year, go to Appendix V.
When collecting regional data from the Middle East and North Africa, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and North America, the Campaign uses the figures provided by three large institutions. Beginning in 2006, the report included the total number of clients from the Middle East and North Africa, provided by the Sanabel Network; from Eastern Europe and Central Asia, provided by the Microfinance Center (MFC); and from North America, provided by the Aspen Institute. The data from these institutions does not include information on poorest clients reached.
Some of the networks’ partner MFIs are also members of the Campaign and submit Institutional Action Plans. In order to avoid double counting, we deduct the total number of clients reported by those MFIs from the total numbers received from Sanabel, MFC, and the Aspen Institute. The data reported by Sanabel represents 68 members of which 31 have reported to the Campaign. The data reported by MFC represents more than 80 members, of which 17 have reported to the Campaign. The Aspen Institute represents 42 organizations, none of which has reported to the Campaign since 2005 (therefore, we have not deducted any numbers from their data).
The National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD) is the apex development bank in India promoting Self-Help Groups (SHGs), many of which are linked to formal banking institutions. SHGs enable the poor and poorest to save and lend among themselves. These NABARD-promoted SHGs have reached 57 million clients, accounting for 29% of all clients reported to the Microcredit Summit Campaign last year (data as of December 31, 2011).
NABARD has played a central role for more than a decade in pioneering the self-help group movement in India, through which poor and poorest women organize themselves into savings groups. SHG members save and lend among themselves and also manage the affairs of their groups. Mature SHGs are linked to the formal banking system, which has an extensive branch network throughout the country to bolster their resources.
Table 7: NABARD Client Growth
(1997 to 2012)
Some of NABARD’s partners (banks and NGOs) are also members of the Microcredit Summit Campaign and submit institutional action plans. In order to avoid double counting, a portion of the figures reported by these agencies has been subtracted from NABARD’s figures. After these calculations, NABARD accounted for 53,777,359 total clients, 43,021,887 of whom were among the poorest when they started with the program.
These updated calculations—first performed in 2002, updated in 2006, and again in 2011—are based on data collected from institutions in India that overlap with NABARD. These institutions were asked what percentage of their SHGs were bank-linked (i.e., included in NABARD’s figures). On the basis of this research, a 5% reduction of NABARD’s figures was taken into account when calculating total clients, total women, total poorest clients, and total poorest women.
|← Previous: Regional Data (2013 Report)||Next: Poverty Measurement Tools →|