Idepro Case Study Executive Summary
ABOUT GLOBAL PARTNERSHIPS
GP is dedicated to understanding the outcomes achieved through its investments. GP employs an iterative impact management practice that draws on qualitative and quantitative data from various domains to gain deeper insight into what works, why, for whom, and under what circumstances. As part of its on-going learning program, GP launched a case study initiative with a select set of partners across several of its investment initiatives. This report describes the results from the case study, conducted by Microfinance Opportunities (MFO) in partnership with GP-investee, Idepro.
Idepro believes that providing working capital loans to small-scale producers will enable them to invest in their businesses. This will result in enterprise growth while TA can help producers eliminate other obstacles to success, such as a lack of business training.
In the grape value chain, the focus of this case study, Idepro manages two programs offering different levels of assistance. In the Financia program, farmers receive loans and a tailored farm improvement plan, a basic TA offering. In the Impacta program, clients receive loans and tailored improvement plans. They also receive on-going, in-depth TA from Idepro.
Idepro is highly committed to the measurement of results, performing internal evaluations of their work in various value chains. Idepro participated in this case study to deepen their understanding of results and inform their analysis.
Research Objectives and Design
GP and Idepro sought to answer four core research questions to gain deeper insight into the clients served and outcomes achieved through Idepro’s grape value chain:
For each question, GP and Idepro also sought to understand whether there were differences between the Financia and the Impacta programs.
To answer these questions, MFO surveyed 299 grape value chain clients, including 249 of 493 Financia clients and 50 of 51 Impacta clients. MFO designed the survey, in consultation with GP and Idepro, to focus on important indicators to answer these research questions—it was not an exhaustive survey of farmers’ knowledge, behavior, or economic well-being. This study provides descriptive data on all surveyed clients and allows for some comparisons between the Financia and Impacta programs. MFO also included questions to examine how knowledge, behavior, and well-being have changed over time.
The results of this case study, which focused on the grape value chain, suggest that:
- Clients are likely to be living in moderate poverty, with no significant difference in poverty levels between Financia and Impacta clients.
- Idepro’s TA programs are effective in improving knowledge and changing farmer behavior, and the Impacta program is more effective than the Financia program at eliciting these changes.
- Clients are likely improving their economic well-being but there is weak evidence at this point that one program is yielding better outcomes than the other.
- Clients in both the Financia and Impacta programs still struggle to be resilient to economic shocks. This suggests that while economic well-being may be improving, it has not yet translated to long-term improvements in economic well-being.
- While monetary poverty lines serve as a guide, aspects of non-monetary poverty, such as food insecurity, remain important considerations as practitioners and investors think about the poverty profile of their target market.
- This study demonstrates that technical assistance programs, such as Idepro’s Impacta program, can increase knowledge and change behavior. However additional research is needed to better understand which aspects of the program—including content, design, and delivery—are key to delivering these desired outcomes.
- Practitioners and investors often focus on long term outcomes such as improved economic position and resiliency. While it is important to set these objectives, we must also develop informed and practical expectations regarding the time needed to deliver such results.
- Furthermore, this study reminds us of the importance of identifying shorter term outcomes (such as knowledge and behavior change) and then develop cost effective ways to track progress toward and correlation with longer term outcomes (such as improved economic position and resilience).
This study was made possible in part through generous support from the Swiss Confederation and JPMorgan Chase:
The Economic Cooperation and Development division is part of SECO’s economic competence. In advanced developing countries, it supports socially, environmentally and climate-friendly economic growth with more and better jobs for all levels of the population. This opens up prospects, reduces poverty and removes inequalities. Switzerland benefits from development of this type through new trading partners, increased security and reduced migration pressure.
JPMorgan Chase believes more people should have access to opportunity and the chance to move up the economic ladder, particularly in the world’s cities, where the benefits of revitalization are not reaching everyone. Their global initiatives are focused on key drivers of inclusive growth to address social and economic challenges and leverage the firm’s worldwide presence, talent and resources.