Evalyasyon Sektè Mikwofinans Ayisyen an 2014

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE HAITIAN MICROFINANCE SECTOR IN 2014 April 2015 i  Table of Contents List of Tables .....................................................................................................................................iv List of Graphs ....................................................................................................................................vi Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements......................................................................................................................... xvi 1. Background and rationale for the study ...................................................................................1 2. Methodology ..........................................................................................................................3 3. Haitian microfinance sector in 2014.........................................................................................5 3.1 Institutional characteristics .....................................................................................................7 3.1.1 The Staff .................................................................................................................................8 3.1.2 Network size and coverage....................................................................................................10 3.1.3 MFIs’ average number of years in operation ..........................................................................11 3.2 MFI Operations .....................................................................................................................12 3.3 Loan price and product-mix ...................................................................................................21 3.4 Financial performance...........................................................................................................22 3.5 Governance ..........................................................................................................................26 3.6 Validation, Inferences and analytical recap. ...........................................................................27 4. HIFIVE impact .......................................................................................................................29 4.1 Financial institutions .............................................................................................................29 4.2 Interviews ............................................................................................................................30 4.3 Agricultural associations .......................................................................................................30 4.4 Contextualization and additional considerations....................................................................31 4.4.1 Agricultural credit .................................................................................................................32 4.4.2 Support to exportable agricultural products ..........................................................................34 5. Conclusions and recommendations .......................................................................................35 ii  5.1 Opinions and recommendations expressed by respondents. ..................................................36 5.2 Recommendations derived from study analyses. ...................................................................37 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................................41 Appendix 1: Trend in the number of borrowers and total loan portfolio by type of institution between 2010 and 2014 .................................................................................................................................43 Appendix 2: Breakdown of additional funding by type of institution: 2010, 2014 ...............................44 Appendix 3: Weights of productive and non-revenue-generating assets in total assets ..................... 46 Appendix 4: Average size of total revenues and revenue breakdown.................................................47 Appendix 5: Average size of total expenditures and breakdown of expenditures ...............................50 Appendix 6: Reduction in risk by improvements in the quality of the loan portfolio- favorable trends in write offs, provisions for bad debts, and net portfolio.......................................................................53 Appendix 7: Average size of deposits by type of institution in nominal and real terms: 2010-2014 ..... 54 Appendix 8: Trends in ROE, ROA, write offs, and provisions bor bad debts: 2010-2014 ...................... 55 Appendix 9: MFI location - POS throughout the country ...................................................................56 Appendix 10: Trends in coffee and cocoa prices on the international market .....................................57 Appendix 11: Does there exist a long term relationship between real GDP and the value of cocoa exports? ..........................................................................................................................................58 Appendix 12: Terms of reference, main consultants’ profiles, list of persons met, survey instruments. ........................................................................................................................................................61 iii List of Tables Table 1 : Instruments used by category of respondents and institutions............................. 3 Table 2 : Trends in selected SCCs’ financial variables over the past six years (in Gourdes and )….. 6 Table 3 : Trend in selected SCC indicators expressed in real terms (2004 Gourdes & %)…………… 6 Table 4 : Selected indicators for all formal MFIs in 2014 (in Gourdes) and in relative importance (in %) to the SCCs supervised by BRH…………………………………………………………………………… 7 Table 5 : MFI by type of institution..…………………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Table 6 : MFI by geographical department..………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Table 7 : Business orientation of MFIs covered by the survey……………………………………………… 8 Table 8 : Number of employees by type of financial institution surveyed…………………….…………. 8 Table 9 : Average workforce size and distribution by sex according to the type of institution ……. 9 Table 10: Educational level of MFIs’ credit department personnel…..……………………………………….. 9 Table 11: Occupations of mid-level managers on MFIs’ staff……………………………………………………… 9 Table 12: Number of branches per type of institution and number of employees per branch…….. 10 Table 13: Distribution of branches by location……………………………………………………………………………..10 Table 14: Average age of MFIs (number of years)……………………………………………………………………….. 11 Table 15: Date of creation of Haitian banking institutions…………………………………………………………… 11 Table 16: Total assets (in Gourdes) and breakdown (%) by type of institution………………………... 11 Table 17: Trend in the number of borrowers by type of institutions: 2010-2014…………………… 12 Table 18: Trend in the credit portfolio in nominal an real terms by institutions: 2010-2014….. 13 Table 19: Number of borrowers and average size of loans by gender in all the MFIs of the Study: 2010-2014…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 Table 20: Number of borrowers and average size of loans by type of institutions and gender: 20010-2014…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 Table 21: Credit portfolio by loan type………..……………………………………………………………………………… 16 Table 22: Trend in the gross loan portfolio by beneficiaries’ place of residence……………………. 17 Table 23: Sectoral distribution of the loan portfolio……………………………………………………………………. 18 Table 24: Trend in the number of savers by type of savings account and institution: 2010-2014. 18 Table 25: Deposits trend (current gourdes) by type of account and institution: 2010-2014…..... 19 Table 26: Trend in deposits (2004 gourdes) by type of account and institution: 2010-2014…. 20 Table 27: Sources of additional funding for surveyed MFIs …………………………………………………. 20 Table 28: Range of services -aside from savings and credit services in gourdes- offered by the MFIs in the study…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21 Table 29: Trend in the share of the portfolio at risk (PAR30 provisions) in the total loan portfolio 22 Table 30: Share of productive and unproductive assets in total assets…………………………….. 22 Table 31: Trend in the average size of total revenues of the MFIs surveyed……………………………….. 23 Table 32: Trend the composition of revenues …………………………………………………………………………… 23 Table 33: Trend in average total expenditures of the MFIs surveyed……………………………………….. 24 Table 34: Trend in the composition of expenditures…………………………………………………………………… 24 Table 35: Average salary by type of institution in 2014………………………………………………………………. 24 Table 36: Number of loans and average size of loan portfolio per employee in 2014……………….. 25 Table 37: Trend in operating efficiency………………………………………………………………………………… 25 Table 38: Trend in net profit by type of institution…………………………………………..……………… 25 Table 39: Trend in selected financial performance indicators by type of institution……………………. 26 Table 40: Prevalence in the use of modern management tools among survey MFIs ………………….. 27 iv Table 41: Comparison of averages computed with BRH data and averages calculated using information on the MFIs surveyed………………………………………………………………………………………… 27 Table 42: HIFIVE disbursement by sector……………………………………………………………………………………. 32 Table 43: Number of MFI’s branches throughout the country…………………………………………………..... 32 Table 44: Number of customers reached and volume of credit allocated by the MFIs surveyed in 2014……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33 Table 45: Trend in agricultural credit among surveyed MFIs …….……………………………………… 34 v List of Graphs Figure 1: Coffee and cocoa production (tons: 1961-2013)……………………………….……………….. 34 Figure 2: Trend in the value of coffee and cocoa exports (in thousands of US dollars)…………. 35 vi Executive Summary In support of the socioeconomic objectives stated by Haitian authorities, in 2009 the US Agency for International Development (USAID) launched the “Haiti Integrated Financing for Value Chains and Enterprises (HIFIVE)” project. Using the microfinance network, HIFIVE aims to promote growth and employment, particularly in rural Haiti by improving access to credit and, more generally, by making financial services more readily available in those areas. More specifically, HIFIVE was designed to expand the availability of financial products and services better suited to the needs of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) operating in agricultural sub-sectors and other production sub-sectors on one hand, and to support the delivery of financial products and services to poorly serviced rural areas, on the other hand. Five years after the earthquake and above all, six years after the implementation of the HIFIVE program, an overview of the microfinance sector proves necessary. Since the last update that took place in 2011, recent data have not yet been produced for the sector. The current report pursues four main objectives: 1. Document the main developments in the microfinance sector over the past five years; 2. Update financial data available on the sector; 3. Assess specific contributions of the HIFIVE project to sector development; 4. Analyze the challenges the sector will have to face in the short and medium terms to improve access of SMEs to credit. To achieve the study’s objectives, several instruments were developed to collect information from three groups of respondents: 1) microfinance institutions; 2) heads of agricultural associations; 3) officials from federating and regulatory institutions. Appropriate questionnaires (one per type of respondents) were administered to the first two groups, while interview guides were used to collect opinions, comments, and recommendations from other institutions. Study findings The study focused on the formal microfinance institutions. There were about 194 such institutions in 2014 according to the National Association of Haitian Microfinance Institutions (ANIMH). Therefore, the current investigation does not concern other informal community-based financial structures (community banks, mutuelles de solidarité) estimated at 3,500 in 2014 according to the same source. The Haitian microfinance sector has been undergoing a major transformation for some time now. In fact, according to several directors of MFIs and heads of other institutions involved with it: it is becoming more professional in the sense that it is increasingly adopting a commercial business model based on criteria of efficiency and profitability. This phenomenon is partly explained by the sharp decline in financial resources channeled through associations and NGOs. Given scarcer funds, institutions have to strive for greater efficiency in their operations. However, this development can also be explained by the arrival of bank subsidiaries in the microfinance market segment. Because these subsidiaries are business-oriented, they heighten competition in the sector, thus causing other institutions to keep pace with them. Case in point, there are today 4 bank subsidiaries or departments vii of banking institutions involved in microfinance, while two foundations or NGOs have stopped their direct involvement in the sector, delegating all their operations exclusively to their financial arms. The MFIs surveyed have been in operation for about 17 years on average. 1. Developments in MFIs’ financial status of and operations 1.1 Assets. Significant increase in assets compared to 2010. Expressed in real terms, average total assets grew by 5% between 2010 and 2014 for MFIs as a whole. Savings and credit cooperatives (SCC) and bank subsidiaries experienced the highest growth rates: 38% and 40%, respectively. The credit portfolio (net) represented an average of 63% of total assets. Overall, the share of provisions for bad loans (PAR30) expressed as a percentage of the total credit portfolio, dropped from 16% in 2010 to 10% in 2014. The bank subsidiaries hold a healthier portfolio than the other types of institution. 1.2 Revenues. Average total revenue for the MFIs as a whole grew by 7% in real terms between 2010 and 2014. Revenues from interests on loans showed a more robust growth rate than that of total revenue with a rate of 25%, while a 13% increase was recorded for administrative fees for the same time period. Revenues from credit operations make up 91% of total revenues. 1.3 Expenditures. Operating expenses increased at a higher rate (9%) than that of revenues. More than 70% of total expenditures are accounted for by two items: i) personnel; ii) other operational expenditures. A significant drop (-41%) is observed on the line “Expenditures due to bad loans" between 2010 and 2014. This is indicative of an improvement in portfolio quality between those years. 1.4 Profits. Overall, the MFIs suffered losses in 2014. This is due exclusively to the performance of the "Others" category that includes corporations (Société Anonyme, S.A.) and NGOs. Financial performance for bank subsidiaries and SCCs has improved between 2010 and 2014 as evidenced by increases in the real growth rates of their profit levels: 277% and 79%, respectively. 1.5 Selected financial performance indicators. Generally speaking, an improvement in the main financial indicators has been observed in 2010 compared to 2014. The ROE increased from 0.05 to 0.08. The ROA increased from -0.03 in 2010 to 0.03 in 2014. Because of losses, the "Others" group has negative ROAs. 1.6 Personnel. Bank subsidiaries followed by other institutions (NGOs and S.As) have, on average, many more employees than SCCs. The SCCs in the survey have an average workforce of less than twenty people, while other MFIs (non-cooperative) generally have nearly one hundred employees. Women are under represented among the staff. They make up 33% of MFI staff, while they compose 52% of the working-age population (15 years and over) of Haiti and their attendance rates in the country’s higher education institutions reaches 47%, as opposed to 53% for men. viii Surveyed SCCs report that up to 77% of their credit department staff hold a university degree (or have attended university). The percentage is higher for bank subsidiaries and the "Others" group: 96% and 88.5%, respectively. 1.7 Governance. The budget of almost all the MFIs of the study was authorized by a Board of Directors (BD) composed of 7 members on average. In addition, nearly 90% of MFIs also have of a credit committee that meets on a regular basis: 71 times a year, on average. Generally, the credit committee is made up of three members. Some MFIs (14%) claim they do not have an internal audit section, but the most recent external audit has been performed as recently as 2014 or early 2015 in the majority of cases. Many MFIs (32% -79%) use modern administrative and financial management tools: strategic plans, business plans, computerized accounting and credit systems, etc. 1.8 Credit portfolio. While, on average, the size of the portfolio grew by 51% in real terms between 2010 and 2014, the average loan size decreased by 18% during that same period. Interest rates. Interest rates on loans can reach 4% per month. These nominal rates reflect the high level of risk associated with the sector, but effective rates are even higher since borrowers are charged administrative fees in the form of commissions (1.5% -3.7% of the loan amount) and must also open adeposit account (up to 33% of the loan amount) before they can receive a loan. Sectoral distribution of loans. The trade industry continues to account for a large proportion (66%) of the loans in 2014. However, this percentage share is on a decline. In fact, in 2010, it had reached 72%. During the same period, the share of the credit portfolio granted by the MFIs production activities increased from 2% to 11%. The gender issue. Women outnumber men among borrowers for all MFIs. However, on average, women are granted smaller loan sizes than men. The issue of the beneficiaries’ place of residence. There has been a considerable increase in loan volume in provincial towns and rural areas between 2010 and 2014. The percentage of loans disbursed in Port-au-Prince was 41% in 2014 compared with 51% in 2015. Agricultural credit. The HIFIVE project disbursed significant financial resources for agricultural credit. The study has made it possible to assess the impact of this initiative by analyzing the trend in two variables: a) the number of borrowers; b) the volume of loans. In 2014, nearly 50,000 farmers were granted loans from the MFIs surveyed and received 666.4 MG. This amount represents 110% of the financial package disbursed by HIFIVE within this category, a result that serves to illustrate the incentive side of the program. Support to exportable agricultural products. Agricultural activities supported by HIFIVE include two export crops: coffee and cocoa. Given the growing importance of cocoa exports over coffee in recent ix years, an econometric model, the VECM 1 was developed to assess the potential impact of an increase in the value of cocoa exports on Haitian GDP 2. The model indicates that a 1% increase in the value of cocoa exports produces a 0,278% increase in GDP. In reference to the 2014 real GDP, and assuming that a 1% increase in the value of cocoa exports occurs through appropriate policies, ceteris paribus, GDP would have increased from 15.02 MG to 15.06 MG, an impact of approximately 41.7 MG in real terms. When additionally, one considers the fact that real per capita GDP stands at about 1,400 gourdes, one understands that this result translates to a significant effect on the income level of several thousands of Haitian households. Indeed, it corresponds to the per capita income of more than 29,000 people. 1.9 The number of borrowers. The number of borrowers more than doubled between 2010 and 2014, from 87,448 to 199,668, an overall increase of 128%. The highest growth rate of 198% was recorded for bank subsidiaries. 1.10 Savings. Between 2010 and 2014 voluntary savings grew by 26% in real terms. This growth rate is higher than the growth rate of the gross domestic product (GDP) during the same period: 16%. The growth experienced by SCCs reached 37%, while the other MFIs’ amounted to 20%. 1.11 The number of depositors. The number of depositors has more than doubled between 2010 and 2014. 1.12 Product mix. MFIs (cooperative and non-cooperative) offer a diverse range of products and services and use Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). Services include transfer of money both inside and outside the country as well as foreign exchange services. 2. Analytical assessment. Analytical observations derived from study findings cover five broad areas: 1) risk management; 2) credit portfolio allocation; 3) confidence in the sector; 4) Product-mix; 5) governance and institutional capacity. A) Risk Management The improvement of the credit portfolio and the corresponding decrease in intermediation risk despite a significant increase in borrowers constitute a major development that marked the evolution of the microfinance sector in 2014 as compared to 2010. Specifically, the fact that the sector's financial performance 3 measured through the ROE and the ROA has improved deserves to be highlighted. 1 Vector Error Correction Model. 2 In the absence of an input and output matrix. 3 Notwithstanding the bad financial performance of some of some major financial operators within the “Others” group and the increase in loan write-offs and provisions for nonperforming loans made by certain institutions between 2012 et 2014, as well as an observed decline in ROE and ROA for some institutions within the same time period. x  B) Portfolio allocation Due to insufficient financial resources, the average size of loans shows a downward trend, a state of affairs that seems to particularly affect rural areas. In this context, Port-au-Prince’s dominance appears to have declined in favor of cities and urban areas of the provinces to the extent that they have benefited from a much larger increase (2014 vs. 2010) of the volume of loans granted them, than rural areas. Still on the topic of misalignment between population distribution and allocation of resources, it would seem that less credit is made available to women than men, and women are underrepresented among the staff of the MFIs. Indeed, statistics available from the Survey of Households Living Condition, Post Earthquake (ECVMAS) conducted by IHSI in 2012 show a 47% rate of participation for women in the country’s higher education institutions, against 53% for men. Women make up 33% of MFI staff. Preference afforded the trade sector in lending has decreased, particularly with regards to bank subsidiaries. Their share of total loans to that sector evolved from 85% in 2010 to 74% in 2014, while 11% of their portfolio was dedicated to the production sector in 2014 as opposed to 1% in 2010. Thanks to newly developed technical data sheets for several sub-sectors, previously unavailable resources reached the agricultural sector. However, while it is true that better-suited products have come on line (i.e. repayment time in line with the agricultural calendar), high interest rates remain a concern for beneficiaries. C) Confidence in the system It can be argued that the significant increases in the number of depositors and total deposit amounts would not have been possible without renewed confidence in the financial cooperatives. The number of voluntary depositors has increased by 163% in 2014 compared to 2010 at the SCC level, while deposit amounts s increased by 38% in real terms. D) Product Mix The MFI sector now offers a much more diverse range of financial services and is no longer solely confined to the capture of financial resources required for granting loans. However, revenues from interests on loans still remain predominant in their income structure. The more diversified menu of services is used to attract and secure customer fidelity. E) Governance and institutional capacity The increased use of modern computerized management systems in many credit cooperatives points to significant progress in the area of institutional capacity. The vast majority of MFIs are steered by a board of directors, but the internal control function still needs to be improved in more than a few cases. As for external audit, facilitation and financing could be sought from federating and regulatory institutions to address resource constraints. xi Efficiency gains must be achieved particularly by the SCCs. They have high operating costs and a large number of employees, compared to the size of their loan portfolio. This situation can also be the result of limited resources to extend credit. 3. HIFIVE impact In the course of the study, opinions and views of various respondents were collected on the degree of achievement of HIFIVE’s three main objectives and the project’s impact. a) Improved access to credit for agricultural sub-sectors b) Improved access to credit in rural areas; c) Adoption of ICTs. Financial institutions. Ten MFIs provided an assessment of the impact of HIFIVE by answering the following question: How much credit do you give the HIFIVE Project with regards to the performance of your institution in the following areas? The HIFIVE Project received a score of 3.2 out of 5 in each of the three objectives. Therefore, the respondents grant a significant credit to HIFIVE for the results obtained by their respective institutions in the three targeted areas. Agricultural associations. Heads of agricultural associations claim that they had good knowledge of the operations of their members and point to limited financial resources as the single most important constraint they face. Other important constraints include: a) difficult access to the market; b) lack of inputs; c) lack of water resources and d) bad weather. With regards to the most successes their members experienced in their agricultural activities over the last five years, by order of importance, the respondents identified: a) increased production; b) greater access to credit, and c) higher farmer income. Taking into account both the reported successes and the identified constraints, and using a scoring method similar to the one used for the MFIs, the respondents had to assess the contribution of HIFIVE in the alleviation of the constraints and the realization of the successes. As far as successes are concerned, HIFIVE obtained a score of 2.5 while on the topic of constraints a score of 2.9 was calculated. In summary, respondents somewhat associate HIIFIVE with their successful outcomes, but agree on the fact that it has contributed more significantly to the alleviation of financial constraints. However, challenges remain, and respondents complain particularly of high interest rates. Interviews. In the opinion of most persons in charge interviewed, the HIFIVE project has made a positive contribution to the microfinance sector by enabling the development of suitable products and allowing financial education to take place on behalf of both clients and staff. Although financial inclusion remains a huge challenge, some believe that inclusion was improved by HIFIVE through the implementation of new technologies (interconnection of banks, management information systems, use of tablets in agriculture) and sector capacit6y building through training. xii Limited financial resources remain a major concern and financial assistance was appreciated. However, some have suggested that the program should include more organizations or partners among its beneficiaries. The financial support provided by HI FIVE produced a double effect. On one hand, it made it possible for beneficiaries among the MFIs to extend credit to borrowers who otherwise would not have received any. On the other hand, the very capacity of granting credit helped strengthen the credibility of the lending entity, usually a credit union, with its members. Financial resources are lacking, especially given the fact that ongoing initiatives have stimulated demand. Some interviewees believe that the mechanism used to intervene in the agricultural sector (procedures, technological means, and targeted financial support) can be used as reference for other sectors. Strengthening the capacity to implement diagnostics of additional sectors is, according to them, fundamental. Recommendations Recommendations are derived from various analyses carried out using study findings, but they also stem from comments and opinions expressed by respondents: 1) heads of regulatory and federating agencies; 2) MFI managers; 3) heads of agricultural organizations. Opinions and recommendations expressed by respondents The respondents’ comments and recommendations were grouped under three main themes. A) Absence of State and needed support. Several operators bemoan the fact that a public policy for microfinance has yet to be formulated. On the same score, public financial resources are not available for the sector, and the legal framework is deficient. In addition, the proposed establishment of a credit bureau is slow to materialize. Government support is needed to alleviate the constraints involving poor communication and energy infrastructure as a means of reducing the MFIs’ high operating costs. B) Additional need for capacity building. Overall, credit cooperatives have improved their operations. However, there are still many discrepancies in the sector, a situation which causes some cooperatives to malfunction, a situation that results in a lack of appropriate services to certain segments of the population, especially the poor. Two categories of credit unions and customers are said to emerge: "the well served" and "the poorly served." In that respect, training programs and technical support should be strengthened and expanded. In addition, efforts must be made towards the delivery of material and equipment needed to enable more MFIs to modernize their operations. C) Additional resources required for lending. Together with the better reputation enjoyed today by MFIs, an increase in the number of people with access to the financial system is among the great successes observed over the past five years. However, resources available for loans are limited, and new partnerships should be identified and established, especially if services to the poor are to continue. Recommendations from analysis of the study xiii A) Support and strengthen the MFI sector professionalization process. Four courses of actions need to be considered: 1. Financing the implementation of accounting and management information systems in institutions or branches where they have not yet been put in place. To the extent that there are lessons to be learned from the use of already installed systems, assessments should be undertaken and necessary improvements made where necessary. 2. Continue to ensure management training for professional staff in order to familiarize them with any new products or procedures, but also to ensure the availability of human resources in the event of attrition. 3. Accelerate the use of ICTs to increase staff productivity. The experience has been made: ICTs help reach more clients especially in remote areas, and increase the capacity to manage the loan portfolio more efficiently. 4. Strengthen governance by establishing greater internal control capacity. The study found weaknesses in that area. B) Encourage the production credit. Four types of actions are proposed. 1. Identify promising production sub-sectors, particularly but not exclusively in agriculture, by performing diagnostics for these sectors and preparing related technical fact sheets. 2. Ensure training for staff destined to manage new products. In the case of agriculture, agronomists, agricultural technicians and agro economists have to be recruited. 3. Finance the acquisition of technology tools and equipment adapted to new sectors and products. Find the resources necessary for granting loans. 4. Seek needed resources for lending purposes. As was the case for agricultural credit, a donor needs to lead the way. C) Ensuring greater gender equity in the microfinance sector. Three types of actions are proposed: 1. Deploy recruitment efforts towards women to encourage them to join the ranks of MFIs staff. 2. Offer training programs to afford women greater access to higher level positions in the MFIs. 3. Investigate the reasons why average loan sizes are generally smaller for women than men. D) Strengthen technical and financial support for the SCCs and network of community banks (BC) and Mutelles de Solidarité (MUSO) in the area of agriculture Four types of actions should be considered in order to implement this recommendation. 1. Extending the network of partner associations and institutions; 2. Extending the insurance program and financial support throughout the country; 3. Finding new financial partners; xiv  4. Consider prolonging HIFIVE’s mandate. SCCs lack financial resources. E) Provide financial support to economically active but poor people. Channel social protection resources to support programs for the poor through the MFIs. F) Strengthen technical and financial support to producers of exportable commodities through MFIs. Four types of actions are proposed. 1. Locate all centers of production of exportable agricultural products and identify their technical and financial needs; 2. Design and implement technical support programs; 3. Identify MFIs that are capable of carrying out agricultural credit programs very fast; 4. Use umbrella organizations or associations to build capacity of MFIs that are not yet ready but show potential. The recommendations are designed to enable the State, the donor community, and the MFIs themselves to seize opportunities and address challenges that hinder the growth of the MFI sector. Opportunities include the potential of impacting more than a million individuals involved in the MFI sector. In this respect, it is appropriate to emphasize the positive outcomes for: i) economic growth through the development of production sub-sectors and the implication for income and employment; ii) poverty reduction via greater access to credit. Lack of financial resources emerges as the most important constraint against the growth of the microfinance sector. Some MFIs have to face heavy financial charges when they attempt to secure more resources. Unstable political and macroeconomic frameworks exacerbate market conditions, making this situation even worse. In that regard, the State should demonstrate a stronger presence in the sector by channeling financial resources to it. However, more importantly, public policy in the field of microfinance needs to be formulated. Finally, the study has revealed some needs, which, if they are met, will help enhance the vitality of the MFIs: 1) Strengthening of the legal and regulatory frameworks; 2) Strengthening of MFI governance; 3) Capacity building and supply of equipment; 4) Additional technical assistance for agricultural credit. xv Acknowledgements PHAREVIEW S.A. wishes to thank the heads of the microfinance institutions that participated in the survey as well as the associations of the sector that have contributed to the finalization of the study, either by providing data or by sharing insight and voicing critical comments. PHARVIEW wishes to acknowledge in a special way the Secretary of State for Agriculture Michel Chancy, the Director of the DIGCP Marie Laurence Boyer, Conseil National des Coopératives (CNC) legal Counsel Josué Beaubrun for their availability. A special word of thank you to Jocelin Jn Baptiste from Banque de la République d’Haïti (BRH) for the transmission of data that was crucial for the study. PHARVIEW wishes to express its gratitude to IICA Representative in Haiti Alfredo Mena and to the whole staff of the SYFAAH Project. PHAREVIEW also wishes thanks the HIFIVE staff, particularly Claude Clodomir Jr., Beatrice Louis and Yvrose Joseph for their supervision and stimulating discussions throughout the consultation. Last but not least, we salute the memory of our friend Lhermite François for leading the way. PHAREVIEW SA is solely responsible for the content of this report and the views expressed therein. xvi 1. Background and rationale for the study Haiti is the only country of the Latin America – Caribbean region to bear the LDC label (Least Developed Country), a qualification the country owes to the level of extreme poverty under which live almost 25% 4 of its population of roughly 11 million 5. Rural areas where extreme poverty affects as much as 38% of the population are particularly affected by this phenomenon. Successive Haitian governments have prioritized economic growth as a strategy to fight poverty and help the country meet its many social and economic challenges. These options are documented in several official documents such as the DSNCRP (French acronym for National Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction Paper) published in 2008 and the PSDH (French acronym for Strategic Plan for the Development of Haiti) published in 2012. In keeping with the socio-economic goals set forth by Haitian authorities, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) launched the "Integrated Finance for Value Chains and Enterprises (HIFIVE)” project in 2009. The project targets economic growth and job creation, particularly in rural Haiti through improved access to credit and, more generally to financial services. According to the Institut Haïtien de Statistique et d’Informatique (IHSI, Haitian Institute for Statistics and Computer Science), the formal sector of the Haitian economy accounted for only 5.3% of the economy’s employment in 2010 and, the same source reveals that over half of the formal-sector jobs come from the public sector 6. Employment in the country is strongly concentrated in the agricultural sub-sector, and in small and medium enterprises (SMEs), most of which operate in the informal sector 7. However, in spite of their economic weight, SMEs 8 have limited access to credit via commercial banks. Obviously, without financial resources they are unable to multiply or grow. There are two main reasons that explain why they are put aside by commercial banks: 1) First, the banking system has traditionally perceived SMEs as high risk. Whether this perception is justified or not, it entails prohibitive terms on loans. 2) Second, the informal structure of most SMEs, which is at least partly due to the delays and costs associated with the process of formally registering a business in Haiti, when added to the shortcomings of the legal framework, reduce the profitability of such lending for creditors. The microfinance industry has been striving since the 1980s to meet Haiti’s socio-economic challenges. In its early stages, microfinance was seen as an instrument to combat poverty and was considered 4 World Bank. Pauvreté et inclusion sociale en Haïti : gains sociaux à petit pas. 2014. 5 Ministère de l’Économie et des Finances, Institut Haïtien de Statistique et d’Informatique-Bureau du Recensement et Centre Latino-Américain De démographie (CELADE/CEPAL) Estimations et projections de la population totale, urbaine, rurale et économiquement active, Mai 2008. 6 Enquête sur l’Emploi et l’Économie Informelle (EEEI), Institut Haïtien de Statistique et d’Informatique (IHSI), 2010. 7 « Workers in the informal sector make up more than 90% of the workforce in the national economy » (Mérat, 2011). 8 Agriculture has a very high weight in the branch « Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing » of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) which constitutes on average 23% of the GDP during the past five years. Trade shows a similar predominance in the branch « Trade, Restaurants, and Hotels » which represented about 27% of GDP between 2009 and 2014. 1 predominantly as an activity in the social realm. This was justified by the clientele targeted and also because of the overwhelming number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), bearers of “free” money, involved in the sector. Although this aspect still remains today, major commercial players have entered the sector: subsidiaries of banking institutions, and non-cooperative institutions. Since the last update that took place in 2011, new data are not yet available on the microfinance sector in Haiti. Five years after the earthquake and more importantly, six years after the launch of the HIFIVE project, it is imperative to assess the sector’s current situation. In 2011, there were 200 microfinance institutions (MFIs) in Haiti. They had collected deposits estimated at 4.44 billion gourdes from 1,169,213 depositors. According to the same estimates their credit portfolio totaled 6.9 billion gourdes divided among 310,064 borrowers; subsidiaries of banking institutions accounted for almost 16% of this volume. The vast majority of the loans (over 76%) were used to finance trade activities while only 6% of the total value of the loans was attributable to production9. Furthermore, if at the end of 2011 the sector appeared to have had fully recovered from the disaster caused by the January 12, 2010 earthquake, and boasted of an even better financial health than before, that performance may have been due to the inflow of aid which had contributed to recapitalize MFIs. Before the earthquake occurred, the microfinance sector was already facing serious challenges that threatened its effectiveness: high administrative costs, low returns on assets, and deterioration in the quality of the portfolio. These problems have been exacerbated by the earthquake 10. What is the present situation, and more specifically what has been the impact of targeted interventions such as those of HIFIVE on sector developments? What has changed at the financial and organizational levels? What of institutional aspects? The current report pursues four key objectives: 1. Documenting main developments in the microfinance sector over the past five years; 2. Updating financial data available on the sector. 3. Assessing specific contributions of the HIFIVE project to the development of the sector. Let us remember that HIFIVE was designed to expand the availability of financial products and services tailored to the needs of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) operating in the agricultural sector and other production sectors on one hand, and to support the extension of financial products and services to underserved rural areas, on the other hand. 4. Analyze the challenges the sector will have to face in the short and medium terms to improve access to credit for SMEs. The analysis helps identify the strengths and weaknesses of the 9 Census of the microfinance industry in Haiti, Lhermite François, Strategic Management Group (SMG), September 2012. 10 A survey of 15 important microfinance associations indicate that losses on capital property resulting from the earthquake totaling more than US$6,2 million ; the same study reported that nearly 26% of the credit portfolio of these associations was affected and that losses could reach US$6,0 millions, Microfinance Sector : Assessment of Impact of the January 12, 2010 Earthquake: Part-1, Haiti Integrated Financing for Value Chains and Enterprises (HIFIVE), February 2010. 2  sector and makes recommendations on the issue of financial inclusion, governance, and effectiveness. The balance of the report is structured as follows. The methodological approach is presented in the next section (Section 2). Survey results are discussed in section 3. Data collected inform the analysis and allow for a detailed assessment of the microfinance sector. Several key domains are covered: i) institutional characteristics; ii) MFI operations; iii) governance; iv) product mix; v) financial performance. Gauging the impact of the HIFIVE project on the sector is the subject of a fourth section, and section 5 concludes the report with an analytical summary and final recommendations. 2. Methodology In light of the objectives of the study, the data collection strategy involved the choice of instruments and operators (statistical units) to contact. Table 1 below shows the instruments used for each category of repondents. Table 1: Instruments used by category of respondents and institutions. Instruments Actors Institutions 1) Banque de la République d’Haïti (BRH) ; 2) Conseil National des Coopératives (CNC) ; 3) Fédération Le Levier ; 4) Association Nationale des Caisses Populaires Haïtiennes Federating or Regulating Institutions (ANACAPH) ; Interview Guide 5) Association Nationale des Institutions de micro-finance Haïtiennes (ANYMH) ; 6) Konsey Nasyonal Finansman Popilè (KNFP) 7) Systhème de financement et d’assurances agricole en Haïti (SYFAAH) Questionnaire for Financial MFI (Cooperatives and Non 1) Caisses affiliées à la Fédération Institutions Cooperatives) Le Levier ; 2) Caisses exclusivement affiliées à l’ANACAPH ; 3) Caisses non affiliées ; 4) Membres de l’ANIMH (secteur non coopératif) Questionnaire for Agricultural Agricultural Associations 1) Coopératives membres du Associations réseau KNFP ; 2) Coopératives/Associations membres du réseau KNFP; 3) Coopératives/Associations bénéficiaires de crédit de l’Association des Banques Communautaires de l’Arrondissement de Belle- Anse (ABCAB). 3 The interview guides were used to obtain comments and opinions from targeted institutions to gain a deeper understanding of the salient trends and developments that characterized the evolution of the microfinance sector over the past five years. In addition, an emphasis is placed on the opportunities, constraints and challenges in the sector and the subject of financial inclusion is discussed: improving or not? The subject of "The performance of the HIFIVE project," especially in the context of financial inclusion is covered, and "public policy options for improving the access to credit to rural farmers " is addressed. In summary, the interviews were structured around five major themes: a) History: experiences b) Developments in the microfinance sector over the past five years; c) Financial inclusion; d) Performance of the HIFIVE project; e) Opinions on the options that need to be considered to better attain financial inclusion and improve access of rural farmers to credit. The questionnaire for financial institutions covers three main fields. The first one concerns the collection of information relating to the following topics: i) institutional characteristics; ii) MFI operations; iii) governance; iv) product mix; v) financial performance. The data is used to make a detailed assessment of the sector’s current status but also makes it possible to track its development as annual data spans the 2010-2014 intervals. The second domain involves the collection of information on the level of attainment of the major objectives targeted by the HIFIVE project. These include: a) Better access of value chains to financing; b) Better access of rural areas to financial products and services; c) Increased use of information and communication technology (ICT) in order to foster greater financial inclusion as defined by greater access of targeted groups to financial services. The third domain is dedicated to elicit two kinds of recommendations from respondents: general and specific to HIFIVE. In the first instance, one seeks to obtain respondents’ views on the best strategies to be used in order to achieve greater financial inclusion, while in a second instance - with regard to HIFIVE- comments are requested in two areas: a) improvements of existing initiatives; b) expansion of services currently offered. The questionnaire for agricultural associations has been designed specifically to document the impact of HIFIVE Project on farmers. It has four sections. The questionnaire was administered to heads of associations rather than direct beneficiaries (farmers). Hence, much of the instrument’s first section attempts to establish the credibility of the respondents by documenting their familiarity with the membership’s operations. This is done to better gauge the validity of the answers offered on the experiences of direct beneficiaries with credit. With this line of questioning as a backdrop, a second set of questions addresses the fundamental issues concerning both the successes and the failures suffered by the members. The nature of the constraints faced by farmers and the credit given to HIFIVE in alleviating these constraints are other topics covered in the same section. The third domain, as is the case for the questionnaire for financial institutions, is the space for recommendations, while outlook on the future (expectations) and the factors underlying these expectations are the subject to a fourth line of questioning. 4 Data was collected from umbrella institutions and regulatory agencies mainly through interviews with the people in charge of the various entities identified in Table 1. Questionnaires were sent to respondents (credit unions and agricultural associations) through the umbrella organizations: a) Le Levier; b) ANACAPH; c) KNFP. Study personnel nonetheless ensured adequate follow-up (phone calls, e- mail exchanges, field visits) with respondents to facilitate full understanding of the instruments and the availability of the information required for the study. The MFIs surveyed, in particular those from the cooperative sector, represent only a subset of all institutions in Haiti. To the extent that the study aims to identify major trends that have characterized the sector over the past five years, its objectives can be met if the sample is sufficiently representative. Apart from the data made available using the described instruments, the methodology rests on information from other available sources: 1) Documentation on the microfinance sector in Haiti. In particular, various censuses of the microfinance industry sponsored by USAID and various reports drafted on the sector. 2) The identification and processing of cartographic data used to pinpoint the geographical areas covered by the MFIs. The strategy deployed and all of the data analyzed contribute to achieve the study’s objectives: 1) A description of the sector’s recent historical trend; 2) An assessment of its current situation; 3) A discussion on future prospects, in particular the identification of the determining factors for growth. 3. Haitian microfinance sector in 2014 The Haitian microfinance sector has been undergoing a major transformation for some time according to several directors of MFIs and heads other institutions involved with itctor: it is becoming more professional, in the sense that it is increasingly adopting a commercial business model based on criteria of efficiency and profitability. This phenomenon is partly explained by the sharp decline in financial resources channeled through associations and NGOs. Given scarcer funds, institutions have to strive for greater efficiency in their operations. However, this development can also be explained by the arrival of bank subsidiaries in the microfinance market segment. Because these subsidiaries are business- oriented, they heighten competition in the sector, thus causing other institutions to keep pace with them. Today, there are 4 bank subsidiaries or departments of banking institutions involved in microfinance, while two foundations or NGOs have stopped their direct involvement in the sector, delegating all their operations exclusively to their financial arms. This new environment calls for more skilled and better trained human resources and appropriate technologies so as to better serve customers and satisfy the information requirements that go hand in hand with more modern governance. Despite the observed reduction in the number of MFIs that occurred as a result of the reported professionalization and lower inflow of funds from donors, total assets have grown considerably since 2009 and so has total loan portfolio. Indeed, BRH data on Savings and Credit Cooperatives (SCC) over which it has oversight show a fairly significant growth in assets. They increased from 2.3 billion gourdes 5 (BG) in 2009 to 5.7 BG in 2014 11. Table 2 shows additional indicators that shed light on the evolution of SCCs. The credit portfolio has increased significantly, as well as the volume of deposits. Furthermore, the number of members has virtually doubled, while the number of borrowers has seen a less significant growth, at 33%. The slower growth in the number of borrowers and the higher growth in the SCC loan portfolio suggest that the average size of their loans has increased. Indeed, calculated by the ratio between the portfolio and the number of borrowers, average loan size has increased from 27,000 Gourdes in 2009 to approximately 50,000 gourdes in 2014 as a whole. The current investigation will determine whether this general trend also exists at the institutional level. Table 2: Trends in selected SCCs’ financial variables over the past six years (in Gourdes and %) % Change 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014-2009, Assets 2,326,824,573 2,704,516,659 2,846,184,071 3,721,888,755 5,116,823,286 5,653,305,263 143% Credit Portfolio 1,258,309,103 1,401,060,934 1,674,103,737 2,206,738,360 2,864,390,437 3,130,802,109 149% Member 1,635,994,405 1,901,169,695 2,090,626,091 2,329,620,816 3,159,823,408 3,570,151,406 118% Deposits Number of 339,485 376,414 404,280 432,997 638,958 720,745 112% Members Number of 46,637 43,574 57,283 56,570 59,196 62,090 33% Borrowers Source : DIGCP, BRH Data in table 3 express those of table 2 in real terms: 2004 gourdes. Changes remain significant. Table 3: Trend in selected SCC indicators expressed in real terms (2004 Gourdes & %). % Change 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2014- 2009 Assets 1,428,376,042 1,586,226,779 1,512,318,848 1,856,303,618 2,441,232,484 2,560,373,760 79% Credit 772,442,666 821,736,618 889,534,398 1,100,617,636 1,366,598,491 1,417,935,738 84% Portfolio Member 1,004,293,680 1,115,055,540 1,110,853,396 1,161,905,644 1,507,549,336 1,616,916,398 61% Deposits Greater supervision by BRH and the strengthening of the legal framework are not unrelated to these positive outcomes that may also be attributed to the greater confidence MFI members display in those institutions. However, unsolved issues remain particularly in the area of governance, and some institutions had to shut down while others are facing financial difficulties and others are on the verge of suspending their operations. Of the 84 SCCs supervised by the BRH, 7 are considered unsustainable due to mismanagement. 11 Internal report of the Direction de l’Inspection Génétrale des Caisses Populaires (DIGCP, Directorate for the General Supervision of Credit Unions) created a 2002 legislation, following the debacle causes by a pyramid scheme. 6 Data published by ANIHM for 2014 12 on all formal MFIs are shown in Table 4. They suggest, apart from the number of borrowers, that the SCCs supervised by BRH have a significant share of the sector’s total assets and credit portfolio. Moreover, the vast majority of savers (members) as well as the largest share of deposits are attributable to them. Table 4: Selected indicators for all formal MFIs in 2014 (in Gourdes) and in relative importance (in %) compared to the SCCs supervised by BRH. ITEM 2014 Shares of the SCCs supervised by BRH Assets 12,284,731,615 46% Credit Portfolio 8,323,474,415 38% Volume of Deposits 4,800,000,000 74% Number of Savers 903,000 80% Number of borrowers 324,456 19% Source: ANIMH and calculations by PHAREVIEW The next sections present and analyze data from the survey. 3.1 Institutional characteristics The survey sample comprises 28 institutions, a size that is significantly smaller than the 86 and 83 13 institutions reported by previous studies covering the 2011-2012 and 2010-2011 periods, respectively. The MFIs covered by the survey are located in 7 of the country’s 10 geographic departments, but they do include almost the full range of the various types of institutions that make up the sector. Tables 5 and 6 respectively show the types of institutions surveyed and their spatial distribution. Table 6: MFI by geographical department. Geographic Department Number Table 5: MFI by type of institution. WEST 15 Type of institution Number SOUTH 3 SCC 19 SOUTH-EAST 3 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 3 NIPPES 3 OTHERS: NORTH 0 NGO 2 NORTH-WEST 1 S.A. 4 CENTRE 1 TOTAL 28 ARTIBONITE 2 NORTH-EAST 0 GRANDE-ANSE 0 TOTAL 28 12 ANIMH, 2014 Annual Report, data relate to 194 MFIs consisting of 14 ANIMH members, of 6 other non-affiliated MFIS, of 64 SCCs affiliated to Fédération Le Levier and/or ANACAPH, of 9 institutions affiliated to KNFP, and 101 non-affiliated SCCs. These constitute the formal branch of the Haitian microfinance industry. According to the same source, there are about 3.500 informal structures composed mainly of community banks (CB) and Mutuelles de Solidarité (MUSO). The current report focuses exclusively on formal MFIs. 13 Recensement sur l’Industrie de la Microfinance en Haïti, Lhermite François, Strategic Management Group (SMG). 7 The sample size puts the following constraints on the study: 1) Inferences made for the entire sector using data from the survey may be biased. These limitations affect mostly the SCCs. A comparison between data (means of key variables) available from BRH and survey data will make it possible to quantify the size of the bias and to determine the extent to which the trends calculated with the survey data can be generalized to the entire MFI sector; 2) None of the MFIs located in the North, a geographic department targeted by HIFIVE, have replied to the questionnaire. As a consequence, the spectrum of opinions on the impact of the HIFIVE project is potentially reduced. Despite these limitations, data collected can be used to study trends in financial variables over the past five years. Indeed, data collected cover the 2010-2014 time frame, and the responding institutions display features sufficiently diversified both in terms types and geographical location. Moreover, preliminary data analysis revealed that the diversity is found both in terms of asset size and business model. Table 7 shows the categorization of institutions by stated business model. Table 7: Business orientation of MFIs covered by the survey. Objective of the institution Number For Profit 13 Non Profit 14 Missing Value (non response) 1 TOTAL 28 3.1.1 The Staff More than 2,600 employees were found in the 28 institutions surveyed. Men make up 67% of the staff and this percentage remains constant regardless of the type of institution: see Table 8. Table 8: Number of employees by type of financial institution surveyed. Institutions Men Women Total % Women OVERALL 1/ 1,788 873 2,661 33% SCC 190 93 283 33% BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 523 249 772 32% OTHERS 1,075 531 1,606 33% 1/ one bank subsidiary and one SCC failed to provide details on their staff. The average workforce (number of employees on average) per institution is shown in Table 9. On average, bank subsidiaries followed by other institutions (NGOs and SAs) employ far many more people than SCCs. Below, the relation between network size (number of branches) and number of employees is analyzed. The SCCs studied have an average workforce inferior to twenty people while other MFIs (non-cooperative) generally have one hundred employees. Furthermore, when one takes into account 8  the fact that women represent nearly 51% of the working age population of Haiti, the data show that they are underrepresented in the sector. Table 9: Average workforce size and distribution by sex according to the type of institution. Workforce (average number by institution) Men Women Total OVERALL 68 33 102 SCC 10 5 15 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 262 125 386 OTHERS 179 89 268 Gender-based distribution of employees Men Women Total OVERALL 67% 33% 100% SCC 67% 33% 100% BANK SUBSIDIARIES 68% 32% 100% OTHERS 67% 33% 100% Surveyed SCCs report that up to 77% of their credit department staff hold a university degree (or have attended university). Although this percentage is higher for bank subsidiaries and the "Others" group: (96% and 88.5%, respectively), it is nevertheless true that SCCs have a significant stock of human capital. Table 10: Educational level of MFI credit personnel EDUCATION LEVEL INSTITUTION LOW LEVEL OF UNIVERSITY VOCATIONAL UNSCHOOLED OTHER SCHOOLING EDUCATION SCHOOL OVERALL 0.2% 3.1% 81.6% 14.9% 1.6% SCC 0.3% 3.9% 76.9% 20.3% 2.5% BANK SUBSIDIARIES 0.0% 0% 96.0% 4.0% 0.0% OTHERS 0.0% 2.0% 88.5% 5.0% 0.0% These findings are compatible with the professionalization process alluded to earlier. The set of occupations and professional skills available in the sector appear in Table 11. Overall, nearly 30% of the workforce is made up of mid-level staff. Managers and accountants are predominant among them, while one finds few computer specialists or agronomists in their ranks. This situation may have implications for the ability of MFIs to adopt and implement ICT, and also for their capacity to properly manage agricultural credit. Both of these areas are targeted by the HIFIVE project. Table 11: Occupations of mid-level managers on MFIs’ staff. Mid-level Occupations staff Number by Institution COMPUTER institution MANAGERS ACCOUNTANTS AGRONOMISTS ENGINEERS OTHERS* TECHNICIAN TOTAL OVERALL 269 276 42 10 2 161 760 2,647 9 Table 11: Occupations of mid-level managers on MFIs’ staff. Mid-level Occupations staff Number by Institution COMPUTER institution MANAGERS ACCOUNTANTS AGRONOMISTS ENGINEERS OTHERS* TECHNICIAN TOTAL SCC 15 21 4 1 0 7 48 269 BANK 21 22 4 2 2 31 82 772 SUBSIDIARIES OTHERS 233 233 34 7 0 123 630 1,606 Share in total workforce OVERALL 10% 10% 2% 0% 0% 6% 29% 100% SCC 6% 8% 1% 0% 0% 3% 18% 100% BANK 3% 3% 1% 0% 0% 4% 11% 100% SUBSIDIARIES OTHERS 15% 15% 2% 0% 0% 8% 39% 100% *Several economists 3.1.2 Network size and coverage Surveyed MFIs are spread over a network of 193 offices or points of services (POS). Bank subsidiaries have, on average, the highest number of service POS, while the SCCs have the lowest coverage. The high number of branches for bank subsidiaries explains why they have a larger workforce. They have an average of about 14 employees per branch, while the SCCs have, on average 11.5, and the latter are highly concentrated in headquarters. Therefore, they operate, at least individually, within a radius that is limited compared to other institutions that have a larger network 14. In this context, the "OTHER" MFIs have an average of 17 POS and 15.4 employees per branch. Table 12: Number of branches per type of institution and number of employees per branch. AVERAGE AVERAGE NUMBER NUMBER OF AGENCY NUMBER OF OF EMPLOYEES BRANCHES BRANCHES PER BRANCHES OVERALL 193 6.9 12.6 SCC 27 1.4 11.5 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 64 21.3 14.2 OTHERS 102 17 15.4 Branches of the surveyed MFIs are somewhat evenly distributed over the country by type of location. Indeed, 30% of them are located in Port-au-Prince, while 33% and 37% are located in provincial towns and rural areas, respectively. Table 13: Distribution of branches by location. 14 The law governing the operation of SCCs forces them to operate solely within the geographic department in which they are registered. 10  AGENCY Port-au-Prince Provinces Rural Areas Total OVERALL 57 64 72 193 SCC 7 15 5 27 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 21 30 13 64 OTHERS 29 19 54 102 Total 57 64 72 193 Percentages (%) within total of 30% 33% 37% 100% branches 3.1.3 MFIs’ average number of years in operation The MFIs surveyed have been operating for about 17 years on average. They are, on average, 4-12 years younger than the private commercial banks in Haiti. SCCs are on average slightly younger than the MFIs taken as a whole. Table 15: Date of creation of Haitian banking institutions Date of Number of years Table 14: Average age of MFIs (number of years) Institution creation of existence SOGEBANK 1985 29 OVERALL 16.9 UNIBANK 1993 21 SCC 17.7 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 13.7 BANQUE NATIONALE DE 1979 35 CREDIT (BNC) OTHERS 16 CAPITAL BANK 1986 28 BANQUE POPULAIRE 1973 41 HAITIENNE (BPH) 3.1.4 Size of the Balance sheet The average size of total assets for surveyed MFIs crosses the 257 million gourdes threshold (MG), while total assets are estimated at about 7 BG. This amount represents 56% of the 12.3 BG in total assets reported by ANIMH for 2014. In addition, the 1.3 MG recorded for the SCCs corresponds to 23% of the total assets for SCCs supervised by BRH. Table 16: Total assets (in Gourdes) and breakdown (%) by type of institution. AGENCY TOTAL % of Total AVERAGE OVERALL 6,939,201,858 100% 257,007,476 SCC 1,297,068,988 19% 68,266,789 BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 2,518,755,783 36% 1,259,377,891 OTHERS 3,123,377,087 45% 520,562,848 Bank subsidiaries own, on average, more assets than the other types of MFIs. The composition of assets will be analyzed in the next sections. However, it must be recalled here that a significant growth in total assets is a salient feature that characterizes the sector’s developments. Furthermore, the significant 11 weight of assets owned by MFIs in the study, compared to data available from BRH and ANIMH, provides some support to the validity of the sector wide trends that will be calculated for financial indicators. 3.2 MFI Operations This section is dedicated to the analysis of MFI operations. In the first subsection, the focus is placed on several aspects of the credit portfolio: its volume, distribution according to gender, sectors of activity, and locations. The numbers of depositors and savings, as well as financing from sources other than savings are studied in a second subsection. Finally, balance sheet items, especially assets, and income statement items (revenues, expenses, net income) are the subject of a third section. 3.2.1 Trend in the number of borrowers and the credit portfolio : 2010-2014 The number of borrowers more than doubled between 2010 and 2014, from 87,448 to 199,668, an increase of 128%, overall. The highest growth rate, 198%, was recorded for banks’ subsidiaries. The category "OTHERS" composed of NGOs and SAs doubled its loan portfolio (growth rate of 99% between 2010 and 2014), while SCCs created 6,584 additional loan accounts in 2014 compared to 2010, an increase of 172%. The strong increases in the number of borrowers (reflected also in the BRH data) require a significant influx of financial resources to ensure that access to credit at the individual level (measured by the average loan size) not be negatively affected. Two observations are warranted at this point: 1) Haiti’s GDP growth reached 16,3% 15 between 2010 and 2014 ; 2) The Haitian population has increased from 10.09 million in 2010 to nearly 10.8 million in 2014, a growth of about 7%. The GDP growth rate, an indicator of wealth creation and productivity in the economy, contrasts with the acceleration in the number of borrowers. Moreover, even if the lower population growth rate suggests an improvement in per capita GDP, the misalignment between demand and resources produced domestically remains significant. Unless external resources 16 fill the gap, resources available for lending will decrease. Table 17: Trend in the number of borrowers by type of institution: 2010-2014. % CHANGE AGENCY 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010-2014 OVERALL 87,448 126,341 150,765 178,641 199,668 128% % Change 44% 19% 18% 12% SCC 3,827 4,714 7,112 7,792 10,411 172% % Change 23% 51% 10% 34% BANK SUBSIDIARIES 22,786 36,367 48,552 52,050 67,928 198% % Change 60% 34% 7% 31% OTHERS 59,935 84,067 93,860 116,931 119,510 99% 15 IHSI : Les comptes économiques en 2014 via http://www.ihsi.ht/pdf/comptes_economiques_en_2014.pdf. 16 Private transfers from the Diaspora to Haiti increased by 22% between 2011 and 2014. 12  Table 17: Trend in the number of borrowers by type of institution: 2010-2014. % CHANGE AGENCY 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010-2014 % Change 40% 12% 25% 2% Data that appear in table 18 show trends in the total portfolio as well as the average size of loans in nominal and in real terms. A nominal increase in the average loan size is observed, but despite a significant real increase (51%) of the credit portfolio, the average loan size decreased by 18%. This result is attributable to the sharp acceleration in the number of borrowers: resources did not necessarily follow. An analysis by type of institution was conducted to further understand the phenomenon. That investigation reveals it is mainly attributable to banks subsidiaries and the "OTHERS" category. Indeed, the average loan size fell by 31% and 28% between 2010 and 2014 respectively for these two categories, while the SCCs as a whole, experienced a drop of merely 7%. For beneficiaries’, these reductions translate to unmet financial needs. Table 18: Trend in total credit portfolio in both nominal and real terms by institutions: 2010-2014. OVERALL Average size Average size YEAR Total portfolio Total portfolio of loans (in Taux de of loans (in Growth rate (in current (in gourdes as current croissance gourdes as gourdes) of 2004) gourdes) of 2004) 2010 2,648,960,968 47,916 1,553,642,797 28,103 2011 3,395,164,018 51,440 1,804,019,138 16% 27,333 -3% 2012 4,034,000,297 51,783 2,011,970,223 12% 25,827 -6% 2013 4,523,162,353 52,848 2,157,997,306 7% 25,214 -2% 2014 5,163,806,590 50,585 2,338,680,521 8% 22,910 -9% Variation 2010- Variation 51% -18% 2014 2010-2014 SCCs 2010 234,657,739 43,182 137,629,172 25,327 2011 339,005,726 51,569 180,130,567 31% 27,401 8% 2012 439,374,387 53,272 219,139,345 22% 26,570 -3% 2013 493,890,034 50,457 235,634,558 8% 24,073 -9% 2014 614,079,279 51,993 278,115,615 18% 23,548 -2% Variation 2010- Variation 102% -7% 2014 2010-2014 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 2010 1,391,685,264 110,588 816,237,691 64,861 2011 1,701,570,755 98,072 904,128,988 11% 52,111 -20% 2012 2,081,809,545 93,033 1,038,309,000 15% 46,401 -11% 13  Table 18: Trend in total credit portfolio in both nominal and real terms by institutions: 2010-2014. OVERALL Average size Average size YEAR Total portfolio Total portfolio of loans (in Taux de of loans (in Growth rate (in current (in gourdes as current croissance gourdes as gourdes) of 2004) gourdes) of 2004) 2013 2,298,593,984 114,741 1,096,657,435 6% 54,743 18% 2014 2,626,915,031 99,270 1,189,726,011 8% 44,959 -18% Variation 2010- Variation 46% -31% 2014 2010-2014 OTHERS 2010 1,022,617,966 23,570 599,775,933 13,824 2011 1,354,587,537 23,072 719,759,584 20% 12,260 -11% 2012 1,512,816,365 21,970 754,521,878 5% 10,958 -11% 2013 1,730,678,335 28,677 825,705,313 9% 13,682 25% 2014 1,922,812,280 22,016 870,838,895 5% 9,971 -27% Variation 2010- Variation 45% -28% 2014 2010-2014 The data in Table 19 show that there are, in all surveyed MFIs, significantly more women than men among the borrowers. But women, on average, hold loans of a smaller size than men. A nominal decline in the average size of loans attributable to women has even been observed: 43,243 gourdes in 2010 to less than 40,000 gourdes in 2014. Tableau 19: Number of borrowers and average size of loans by gender in all the MFIs of the study: 2010-2014. Total loans Average Number of MEN (in current size of borrowers gourdes) loans 2010 20,327 1,115,174,921 53,853 2011 28,216 1,444,382,345 55,860 2012 35,062 1,771,080,970 57,844 2013 41,128 2,112,108,369 56,159 2014 52,841 2,549,400,604 55,027 WOMEN 2010 66,057 1,432,996,274 43,243 2011 96,741 1,834,811,888 45,282 2012 114,199 2,110,956,921 55,038 2013 135,398 2,247,021,029 47,464 2014 144,706 2,414,782,618 39,446 A breakdown of loan size by type of institution and gender (See Table 20) was done to scrutinize the phenomenon. 14 This approach makes it possible to rule out the hypothesis of discrimination by gender. Indeed, although the phenomenon is attributable to bank subsidiaries, the average loan size has decreased for both men and women within these institutions. Therefore, it is more likely that it is due a problem of resources or it stems from a risk management process. In this respect, let us recall that bank subsidiaries experienced the largest increase in the number of borrowers. Average loan size increased for the other two types of institutions. Table 20: Number of borrowers and average size of loans by type of institutions and gender: 20010-2014. SCC Number of MEN Volume of loans Average size of loans borrowers 2010 2,193 89,607,211 39,187 2011 2,773 161,953,610 52,332 2012 3,969 205,057,292 50,257 2013 4,476 231,945,989 46,757 2014 6,001 286,471,965 41,943 WOMEN 2010 1,470 52,174,255 36,367 2011 1,750 73,511,332 40,141 2012 2,880 115,369,503 57,161 2013 3,069 118,779,591 43,779 2014 4,108 144,651,946 44,736 BANK SUBSIDIARIES MEN 2010 10,036 769,935,569 121,314 2011 14,818 954,772,052 101,945 2012 20,259 1,160,433,704 98,689 2013 23,009 1,346,614,755 123,698 2014 31,037 1,596,933,038 111,563 WOMEN 2010 12,750 621,749,694 103,812 2011 21,549 746,798,703 106,681 2012 28,293 906,477,527 97,776 2013 29,041 951,979,229 111,381 2014 36,891 1,029,981,993 90,111 OTHERS MEN 2010 8,098 255,632,141 39,924 15  Table 20: Number of borrowers and average size of loans by type of institutions and gender: 20010-2014. 2011 10,625 327,656,684 30,998 2012 10,834 405,589,974 51,870 2013 13,643 533,547,626 44,327 2014 15,803 665,995,601 59,470 WOMEN 2010 51,837 759,072,325 13,285 2011 73,442 1,014,501,853 13,372 2012 83,026 1,089,109,891 16,085 2013 103,288 1,176,262,210 17,959 2014 103,707 1,240,148,679 20,018 As in previous studies 17, "individual credit" and "solidarity group" represent more than 90% of all loan types granted by MFIs. However, this study’s sample does not include the categories “mutuelles de solidarité" and "community bank." This is the reason why no amounts are recorded under these headings. According to the studies just referenced, the two categories of loans account for 6% to 7% of the number of borrowers. Table 21: Credit portfolio by loan type. Credit 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Methodology used Individual Direct 2,182,622,600 2,785,773,974 3,468,344,800 3,932,010,946 4,467,404,979 Credit Solidarity Group 443,025,082 585,388,983 542,362,320 532,882,361 561,838,354 Solidarity Credit - - - - - Cooperatives Community Bank - - - - - OTHER 5,832,130 510,844 3,302,265 34,909,291 135,947,016 TOTAL 2,648,960,968 3,395,164,018 4,034,000,297 4,523,162,353 5,163,806,590 Percentages in total credit Individual Direct 82% 82% 86% 87% 87% Credit Solidarity Group 17% 17% 13% 12% 11% Solidarity Credit 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Cooperatives Community Bank 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% OTHER 0% 0% 0% 1% 3% TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 17 François, L. : Census of the microfinance industry, various years. 16 The number of borrowers in rural communities and provincial towns has increased much more than in Port-au-Prince between 2010 and 2014, if we refer to the data (see Table 22) collected by the study. During the same period, the gross loan portfolio has increased significantly in both rural areas and in the provinces compared to Port-au-Prince. More detailed data (see Appendix 1) indicate that this result is due to bank subsidiaries. They have increased the share of their portfolios allocated to rural areas by 10 percentage points. A more modest increase was recorded in the SCCs, one percentage point, while the percentage in other institutions, taken as a whole, decreased. Improved access of the rural area to credit is one of the main objectives pursued by the HIFIVE project. Table 22: Trend in the loan portfolio by beneficiaries’ place of residence. YEAR Beneficiaries’ place of % Change residence 2010 2014 Number of loans Port-au-Prince 40,926 54,031 32% Provinces-Urban areas 28,495 35,531 25% Rural areas 133,453 110,198 -17% Total 202,874 199,760 -2% Total loans (current gourdes ) Port-au-Prince 1,311,706,159 2,113,662,708 Provinces-Urban areas 422,684,099 1,176,803,579 Rural areas 833,584,472 1,849,161,198 Total 2,567,974,731 5,139,627,485 Total loans (gourdes as of 2004) Port-au-Prince 769,329,126 957,274,777 24% Provinces-Urban areas 247,908,563 532,972,636 115% Rural areas 488,905,849 837,482,427 71% Total 1,506,143,537 2,327,729,839 55% The trade industry continues to dominate the sector: in 2014, surveyed MFIs directed 66% of their gross portfolio to that sector. But, other sectors are gaining ground. The share of the loan portfolio allocated to trade went from 79% in 2010 to 66% in 2014. At the same time, portfolio shares allocated to the production and services sectors increased from 2% to 6% and 2% to 3%, respectively. This corresponds to increases of 305% and 49% compared to 2010, respectively. Improved access to credit, especially for the line of business "production", is targeted by the HIFIVE project. The portion of the loan portfolio attributable to the production sector has increased by 194%, 662%, and 683% for SCCs, bank subsidiaries and other MFIs, respectively. On another score, it is important to note the new emphasis banks’ subsidiaries and SCCs placed on the education sector in 2014. 17  Table 23: Sectoral distribution of the loan portfolio. OVERALL SCC Line of business % 2014 2010 VAR 2014 2010 Change Production 6% 2% 305% 5% 2% 194% Commerce 66% 79% -17% 58% 72% -20% Services 3% 2% 49% 2% 1% 200% Consumption 10% 7% 27% 13% 11% 24% Housing 12% 9% 38% 18% 13% 35% Education 3% 1% 296% 3% 1% 180% OTHER 0% 0% 0% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% BANK SUBSIDIARIES OTHERS Production 11% 1% 683% 7% 1% 662% Commerce 74% 86% -14% 85% 95% -11% Services 5% 7% -25% 5% 4% 35% Consumption 4% 3% 23% 1% 0.14% 1066% Housing 1% 0% 155% 0% 0.07% -14% Education 4% 0.033% 11404% 2% 0% - OTHER 2% 2% 0% 0% 0% - Total 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% - 3.2.2 Trends in the number of depositors and savings accounts: 2010-2014 Given the number of missing values recorded for 2010, a number of respondents, particularly among the SCCs, must have experienced some difficulty in locating data on the number of depositors for that year. Consequently, the authors must express some reservations with respect to the percentage changes shown in Table 24 for this set of respondents. The data are reported nevertheless, as these shortcomings do not affect all respondents or even all institutions within a given category. Actual changes for SCCs may be less pronounced than those displayed in the table. However, the strong progression of mandatory deposits is consistent with the increase in the number of borrowers between 2010 and 2014. Table 24: Trend in the number of savers by type of savings account and institution: 2010-2014. Number of depositors 2014 2010 % CHANGES OVERALL VOLUNTARY 318,484 192,844 65% MANDATORY 16,095 6,411 151% TOTAL 334,579 199,255 68% SCC 18  Table 24: Trend in the number of savers by type of savings account and institution: 2010-2014. Number of depositors 2014 2010 % CHANGES VOLUNTARY 110,416 42,061 163% MANDATORY 5,379 867 520% TOTAL 115,795 42,928 170% OTHERS VOLUNTARY 208,068 150783 38% MANDATORY 10,716 5,544 93% TOTAL 218,784 156,327 40% Much more complete information was provided by the vast majority of respondents on the volume of savings for the period 2010-2014. Significant increases can be noted with regard to voluntary deposits. This result supports the hypothesis of renewed confidence of savers in the microfinance sector. Table 25: Deposits trend (current gourdes) by type of account and institution: 2010-2014. 2014 2010 TYPE OF SAVINGS TOGETHER VOLUNTARY 1,646,137,428 1,013,104,200 MANDATORY 453,637,587 408,633,415 TOTAL 2,099,775,015 1,421,737,615 CEC VOLUNTARY 511,870,026 285,911,690 MANDATORY 415,421,610 400,880,911 TOTAL 927,291,636 686,792,601 AUTRES VOLUNTARY 1,134,267,402 727,192,510 MANDATORY 38,215,977 7,752,504 TOTAL 1,172,483,380 734,945,014 Real values (adjusted for inflation) are computed to calculate the rates of increase in savings between 2010 and 2014. Real savings in the surveyed MFIs are shown in Table 26. A significant growth rate (25%) of voluntary savings (superior to the GDP growth) can be observed for MFIs as a whole. The increase recorded for SCCs is 38%, while that of other MFIs is 20%. Trends in mandatory deposits vary by types of institutions. The volume of these deposits has decreased in real terms for the SCCs, while a significant increase (281%) was observed for NGOs and S.As. 19  Table 26: Trend in deposits (gourdes as of 2004) by type of account and institution: 2010-2014. TYPE OF SAVINGS 2014 2010 % CHANGE ACCOUNT OVERALL VOLUNTARY 745,533,255 594,196,012 25% MANDATORY 205,451,806 239,667,692 -14% TOTAL 950,985,061 833,863,704 14% SCC VOLUNTARY 231,825,193 167,690,141 38% MANDATORY 188,143,845 235,120,769 -20% TOTAL 419,969,038 402,810,910 4% OTHERS VOLUNTARY 513,708,063 426,505,871 20% MANDATORY 17,307,961 4,546,923 281% TOTAL 531,016,023 431,052,794 23% 3.2.2.1 Other financial resources of the MFIs The MFIs avail themselves of other financial resources in addition to savings deposits in order to conduct their operations. These include equity, but some also resort to borrowed funds. A breakdown of the available resources by source of funding for surveyed MFIs is presented in Table 27 for the years 2010 and 2014. Table 27: Sources of additional funding for surveyed MFIs. OVERALL Source of additional funds 2014 2010 Mid- to long-term institutional loans, at commercial rate 430,821,148 322,820,095 Mid- to long-term institutional loans, at concessional rate 179,176,692 80,459,176 Short-term institutional loans, at commercial rate 135,531,459 0 Short-term institutional loans, at concessional rate 1,062,573,310 601,563,128.00 Other liabilities 247,545,584 81,923,490.41 Capitalized subsidies 399,816,140 27,802,712.00 Equity 1,246,058,923 410,453,321.14 Total 3,701,833,803 1,525,021,922.87 Percentages in the total Mid- to long-term institutional loans, at commercial rate 12% 21% Mid- to long-term institutional loans, at concessional rate 5% 5% Short-term institutional loans, at commercial rate 4% 0% Short-term institutional loans, at concessional rate 29% 39% Other liabilities 7% 5% Capitalized subsidies 11% 2% Equity 34% 27% 20  Table 27: Sources of additional funding for surveyed MFIs. OVERALL Source of additional funds 2014 2010 Total 100% 100% In summaryed: 1. Short-term loans at concessional rates, and equity are the two most important sources of additional funding for MFIs; 2. In 2014, compared to 2010, equity has replaced short-term loans at concessional rates as the primary source of additional funding; 3. 2014 saw a greater dependence of some MFIs’ on capitalized subsidies as a funding source. An analysis of data broken down by type of institutions (see Appendix 2) reveals a greater dependence of SCCs and banks’ subsidiaries on equity. Taken together, the other institutions have increasingly resorted to the capitalized subsidies. However, some of them requested short-term loans at commercial rates in 2014. 3.3 Loan price and product-mix The remuneration of mandatory savings deposits is not widely practiced and interest rates on voluntary savings deposits vary in the range of 2% to 4% per annum. Loans, on the other hand, are granted at monthly rates that can reach 4% per month. These nominal rates reflect the high level of risk associated with the sector and the effective rates are even higher when one considers application fees taken in the form of commissions (1.5% -3.7% of the loan amount) and the mandatory opening of a deposit account (up to 33% of the loan amount) as a condition for obtaining a loan. Surveyed MFIs offer a broad range of products and services and many use ICTs. Table 28 shows the number of institutions by type of services or products as well as their use of technology. Table 28: Range of services -aside from savings and credit services in gourdes- offered by the MFIs in the study. Products and services Buying/selling foreign currency 12 Banking certificate 2 Check 6 Safe deposit box 6 Credit/dollars: 3 Deposits/dollars: 14 Money transfer within the country 5 International money transfer 6 Others 7 Use of technology Ambulatory bank credit unions 3 21  Table 28: Range of services -aside from savings and credit services in gourdes- offered by the MFIs in the study. Automated services 10 Portable technology (i.e. : palm pilot) 2 Cellular phone 7 3.4 Financial performance In this section, key elements of the balance sheet and income statements are analyzed. 3.4.1 Assets quality: Quality of the Credit Portfolio and weight of productive assets Table 29 shows provisions (reserves) for doubtful debts (PAR30) as a percentage of total loan portfolio, the most important element of a financial intermediary’s productive assets. Between 2010 and 2014, the downward trend from the portfolio at risk (PAR) indicates an improvement in the total quality of credit portfolio for MFIs taken as a whole as well as for each of the categories of institutions that make up the sample. Banks’ subsidiaries hold a healthier portfolio than other types of institutions. Table 29: Trend in the share of the portfolio at risk (PAR30 provisions) in the total loan portfolio. AGENCY 2014 2010 OVERALL 10% 16% SCC 12% 19% BANKS 6% 8% OTHERS 9% 18% Since productive assets generate income for the institution, it is desirable that they have a sufficiently large weight in total assets. With respect to the MFIs in the study, the share of productive assets in total assets increased from 57% in 2010 to 68% in 2014. Table 30: Share of productive and unproductive assets in total assets. TOGETHER 2014 2010 Cash flow 18% 31% Net capital assets 11% 7% Other unproductive assets at fair value 4% 5% Total of unproductive assets 32% 43% Net portfolio 63% 55% Investments 2% 1% Other productive assets at fair value 2% 0% Total productive assets at fair value 68% 57% 22 3.4.2 Revenues Overall, total revenues of surveyed MFIs experienced real growth of 7% between 2010 and 2014. Growth in interests from loans was significantly more robust, with a rate of 25%, than that of total income, and the 13% increase observed for revenues derived from application fees is by no means insignificant. On the other hand, substantial declines occurred in other revenue items. Tableau 31: Trend in the average size of total revenues of the MFIs surveyed. 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation Revenue Item Revenues in current gourdes Revenues in 2004 gourdes Interest on loans 72,437,786 45,341,987 32,806,968 26,593,541 23% Application fee 10,570,759 7,248,590 4,787,481 4,251,373 13% Other credit revenues 1,943,008 1,731,146 879,985 1,015,335 -13% Investment income 213,531 266,177 96,708 156,116 -38% (deposits) Other income 6,682,091 11,630,841 3,026,309 6,821,608 -56% Total gross income 91,847,174 66,218,741 41,597,452 38,837,971 7% The growth in total revenue that occurred despite the sharp decline in some components is explained by the high weight (see Table 31 18) of "Interest on loans" and "application fee" in total revenues: 77% and 10%, respectively, for a total of 87%. Table 32: Trend the composition of revenues. 2014 2010 Item of income TOGETHER Interest income on loans 77% 77% Income from application fees 9% 10% Other income generating 5% 4% credit Interest income on 0% 1% investment (deposits) Other income 9% 8% Total gross income 100% 100% A breakdown of revenue by institution is presented in Appendix 4. The data indicate that total revenues for SCCs and bank subsidiaries grew by 35% and 53% in real terms, respectively. However, total revenues in other institutions have stagnated. 3.4.3 Expenditures Operating costs have increased overall (see Table 33) at a rate (9%) higher than that of revenues. A significant drop (-41%) is observed in “Losses due to loans". This confirms the earlier finding that the quality of the credit portfolio has improved. 18 More detailed statistics by type of institution appear in Appendix 4. 23  Tableau 33: Trend in average total expenditures of the MFIs surveyed. 2014 2010 2014 2010 Expenditure items Expenditures in current Variation Expenditures in 2004 gourdes gourdes Financial costs 7,604,689 5,012,224 3,444,153 2,939,721 17% Personnel 37,067,213 24,293,073 16,787,687 14,248,137 18% Losses due to loans 12,013,761 15,683,553 5,441,015 9,198,565 -41% (including provisions) Other operational 34,003,473 19,156,950 15,400,124 11,235,748 37% expenditures Total expenditures 90,689,137 64,145,800 41,072,979 37,622,170 9% Two items account for more than 70% of total expenditure: i) personnel expenditures; ii) other operational expenditures 19. Moreover, with a share of 20% in total expenditure in 2014, losses related to unproductive loans are far from being negligible. However, it is important to note that the weight of this item in total expenditures has declined by five percentage points since 2010. Table 34: Trend in the composition of expenditures. Items of expenses 2014 2010 TOGETHER Financial costs 9% 10% Personnel costs 40% 38% Loan losses expenditures (including 20% 25% appropriation to provisions) Other operating costs 31% 27% Total costs 100% 100% Average salaries by type of institution for 2014 appear in Table 35. Salary is calculated by dividing personnel costs by the number of staff for each of the MFIs surveyed. Bank subsidiaries show, on average, higher wages than other institutions. Let us recall in this context that their employees have a higher academic profile than those of other institutions. Table 35: Average salary by type of institution in 2014. AGENCY Average salary TOGETHER 273,516.1 SCC 228,239.8 BANK SUBSIDIARIES 550,948.6 OTHERS 309,321.4 19 Energy, security, rent, other equipment and supplies, etc. 24 Estimates of employee productivity in the microfinance sector from previous studies 20 revealed that, in 2010, there were 52 loans and 1.3 MG per employee. The current study shows that some progress has been made. The number of loans per employee and the average size of the gross loan portfolio per employee in 2014 are shown in Table 36. Today, the average loan per employee has increased to 2.02 MG from 1.3 MG, a nominal growth of about 55% 21. However, as a whole, each MFI employee managed only 50 loans in 2014 compared to 52 in 2010. Banks’ subsidiaries have realized significantly more progress on that score. On average SCC employees handle 42 borrowers. Table 36 : Number of loans and average size of loan portfolio per employee in 2014. OVERALL 50 2,027,107 SCC 42 2,220,942 BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 86 2,952,125 OTHERS 59 1,137,264 Operating efficiency is measured by the ratio of operating expenditures 22 to loan portfolio. A slight deterioration of this indicator has been observed for banks’ subsidiaries between 2010 and 2014. Operating expenditures represented 35% of the gross portfolio of these entities in 2014, against 32% four years earlier. Efficiency gains have been achieved by the group "Others." Table 37: Trend in operational efficiency. AGENCY 2014 2010 TOGETHER 26% 30% SCC 15% 15% BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 35% 32% OTHERS 51% 63% 3.4.4 Profits Losses posted by the surveyed MFIs (Table 38) are attributable to the "Others" category. Profits of banks’ subsidiaries and SCCs have indeed improved between 2010 and 2014: they increased by 277% and 79% in real terms, respectively. Table 38: Trend in net profit by type of institution. AGENCY 2014 2010 2014 2010 % Change Net Profit (in gourdes) Net Profit (in gourdes as of 2004) TOGETHER (7,033,405.93) (7,528,461.82) (3,185,419.35) (4,415,520.13) 28% SCC 2,517,037.88 1,131,332.26 1,139,962.81 663,537.98 79% 20 Recensement sur l’Industrie de la Microfinance en Haït 2009-2010, Lhermite François, Strategic Management Group (SMG). 21 20% in real terms. 22 Total charges less interest expenditures. 25  Table 38: Trend in net profit by type of institution. AGENCY 2014 2010 2014 2010 % Change Net Profit (in gourdes) Net Profit (in gourdes as of 2004) BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 97,092,221.48 19,872,664.11 43,972,926.39 11,655,521.47 274% OTHERS (82,972,329.16) (44,752,643.17) (37,578,047.63) (26,247,884.56) -43% 3.4.5 Selected financial performance indicators 23 Two performance indicators have been calculated from the data collected: the ROE and the ROA. Table 39:Trend in selected financial performance indicators by type of institution. 2014 2010 AGENCY ROE ROA ROE ROA TOGETHER 0.08 0.03 0.05 (0.03) SCC 0.13 0.04 0.12 0.04 BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 0.20 0.12 0.16 0.07 OTHERS (0.23) (0.02) (0.72) (0.24) Because of losses, the "Others" group has negative ROEs. Their negative ROAs are due to high operations costs, which are not linked to financial expenses. Combined with the improved quality of the loan portfolio and increased the number of borrowers, the growth of the MFs’ performance is a very positive development. It reflects indeed a better ability to manage risk with the introduction of better procedures and the call for new technological means, for example. Overall, an improvement in financial indicators can be observed between 2010 and 2014. The ROE increased from 0.05 to 0.08. 3.5 Governance The budget of almost all the MFIs of the study was authorized by a Board of Directors (BD) composed of 7 members on average. In addition, nearly 90% of MFIs also have of a credit committee that meets on a regular basis: 71 times a year, on average. Generally, the credit committee is made up of three members. Some MFIs (14.2%) claim they do not have an internal audit section, but the most recent external audit has been performed as recently as 2014 or early 2015 in the majority of cases. However, some institutions report that external audit is performed by a federating entity or DIGCP 24. External audit is usually requested by the Board, but sometimes it is ordered by the General Directorate. It is much less frequently requested by the General Assembly. Many MFIs (32% to 79%) use modern administrative and financial management tools. The table below provides a listing of the types of tools used and their prevalence. 23 ROE, Return on Equity: Ratio of net profit to owners’ equity. ROA, Return on Assets: Ratio of profit before financial charges to total assets. 24 This suggests a need for reinforcement in the areas of governance and internal capacity. External auditing can be costly, and some MFIs may not have the financial means to carry them out. 26  Table 40: Prevalence in the use of modern management tools among survey MFIs. Equipped with tools of administrative % of the sample management Strategic Plans 39% Administrative Procedures Manual 79% Human Resources Handbook 64% Business Plan 61% Internal Regulations 75% Equipped with tools of computerized financial management Accounting 68% Credit 57% Personnel 32% 3.6 Validation, Inferences and analytical recap. The survey is rich in findings about trends that have characterized the evolution of the MFIs surveyed between 2010 and 2014. We need to determine if it is possible to generalize those trends to the entire sector given the small size of the sample, particularly with regards to the SCCs. In order to perform this analysis, BRH data were used. The DIGCP of that institution has data on the SCCs over which BRH has oversight. 3.6.1 Validation. The BRH sample covers 71 SCCs with branches across the country, including the ones located in the three geographic departments not represented in the sample of the study: the North, the Northeast, and Grande-Anse. Moreover, BRH data coverage includes 17 of the surveyed SCCs. The results of the comparative analysis for several key variables are presented in Table 41. Averages computed with the BRH data and the survey data are very close. Table 41: Comparison of averages computed with BRH data and those obtained using information from the MFIs surveyed. DIFFERENCE (BRH/SAMPLE ITEM BRH SAMPLE RATIO) ACTIF MOYEN 67,309,200 67,878,750 0.99 VOLUME DES PRETS 42,742,675 41,767,241 1.02 25 VOLUME DES DEPOTS 44,822,476 43,682,679 1.03 NOMBRE D'EMPLOYES EN MOYENNE 19.91 15 1.32 ROA 4% 4% 1 25 Refer to appendix 7 for more detailed information on surveyed SCCs. 27 The comparison suggests that it is possible to generalize the trends obtained from the study to the entire sector. 3.6.2 Inferences and analytical account. Analytical observations derived from study results cover five broad areas: 1) risk management; 2) credit portfolio allocation; 3) confidence in the sector; 4) Product-mix; 5) governance and institutional capacity. A) Risk Management The improvement of the credit portfolio and the corresponding decrease in intermediation risk despite a significant increase in the number of borrowers constitute a major development that marked the evolution of the microfinance sector in 2014 as compared to 2010. Specifically, the fact that the sector's financial performance 26 measured through the ROE and the ROA has improved deserves to be highlighted. B) Credit portfolio allocation Due to insufficient financial resources, the average size of loans shows a downward trend, a state of affairs that seems to particularly affect rural areas. In this context, the Port-au-Prince dominance appears to have declined in favor of cities and urban areas of the provinces to the extent that they have benefited from a much larger increase (2014 vs. 2010) of the volume of loans granted them, than rural areas. The rural population constitutes 52% of the Haitian population, but they received only 36% of the credit portfolio in 2014. Factors that explain this result include location accessibility, and the level of risk. The "Others" category, which includes NGOs, allocates a significant amount of resources to rural areas compared to other types of institutions. Still on the topic of misalignment between population distribution and allocation of resources, it would seem that less credit is made available to women than men, and women are underrepresented among the staff of the MFIs. Indeed, data available from the Survey of Households Living Condition, Post Earthquake (ECVMAS) conducted by IHSI in 2012 show a 47% rate of participation for women in the country’s higher education institutions, against 53% for men. Women make up 33% of MFI staff. Preference in lending afforded the trade sector has decreased, particularly with regards to bank subsidiaries. Their share of total loans to that sector has evolved from 85% in 2010 to 74% in 2014, while 11% of their portfolio was dedicated to the production sector in 2014 as opposed to 1% in 2010. Thanks to newly developed technical data sheets for several sub-sectors, previously unavailable resources reached the agricultural sector. However, while it is true that better-suited products have 26 Notwithstanding the bad financial performance of some of some major financial operators within the “Others” group and the increase in loan write-offs and provisions for nonperforming loans made by certain institutions between 2012 et 2014, as well as an observed decline in ROE and ROA for some institutions within the same time period. 28 come on line (i.e. repayment time in line with the agricultural calendar), high interest rates remain a concern for beneficiaries. C) Confidence in the system It can be argued that the significant increases in the number of depositors and total deposit amounts would not have been possible without renewed confidence in the financial cooperatives. The number of voluntary depositors has increased by 163% in 2014 compared to 2010 at the SCC level, while deposits increased by 38% in real terms. D) Product mix The MFI sector now offers a much more diverse range of financial services and is no longer solely confined to the capture of financial resources required for granting loans. However, revenues from interests on loans still remain predominant in their income structure. The more diversified menu of services is used to attract and secure customer fidelity. E) Governance and institutional capacity The increased use of modern computerized management systems in many credit cooperatives points to significant progress in the area of institutional capacity. The vast majority of MFIs are steered by a board of directors, but the internal control function still needs to be improved in more than a few cases. As for external audit, facilitation and financing could be sought from federating and regulatory institutions to address resource constraints. Efficiency gains must be achieved particularly by the SCCs. They have high operating costs and a large number of employees, compared to the size of their loan portfolio. This situation can also be the result of limited resources to extend credit. 4. HIFIVE impact About 36% of the surveyed MFIs stated they had received either directly (3/28,) or indirectly (7/28) assistance from the HIFIVE project. Direct support took the form of financial resources in two cases and consisted of implementation of ICT in another case. The menu of indirect assistance included a) financial support; b) training; c) acquisition of equipment; d) product development for agricultural credit. The study used three direct methods to gauge the impact of HIFIVE. First, it asked the MFIs to score the degree of achievement of the three project targets. Second, a general assessment of the impact of the HIFIVE project was sought from officials of regulatory agencies and heads of federating organizations via interviews. Finally, the experience of agricultural associations with HIFIVE is documented through a questionnaire administered to heads of those associations. 4.1 Financial institutions 29 Ten 27 MFIs provided an assessment of the impact of HIFIVE by answering the following question: How much credit do you give the HIFIVE Project with regards to the performance of your institution in the following areas? a) Improved access to credit for agricultural sub-sectors b) Improved access to credit in rural areas; c) Adoption of ICTs. They have to score each question on a scale of 1 to 5 corresponding to the following options: 1. Very little; 2. little; 3. Significant; Majority; 5. All the credit. The HIFIVE Project received a score of 3.2 in all three objectives. In other words, respondents grant significant credit to HIFIVE for the results obtained by their respective institutions in the three targeted areas. 4.2 Interviews In the opinion of most persons in charge interviewed, the HIFIVE project has made a positive contribution to the microfinance sector by enabling the development of suitable products and allowing financial education to take place on behalf of both clients and staff. Although financial inclusion remains a huge challenge, some believe that inclusion was improved by HIFIVE through the implementation of new technologies (interconnection of banks, management information systems, use of tablets in agriculture) and the building of sector capacity through training. Limited financial resources remain a major concern and financial assistance was appreciated. However, some have suggested that the program should include more organizations or partners among its beneficiaries. The financial support provided by HI FIVE produced a double effect. On one hand, it made it possible for beneficiaries among the MFIs to extend credit to borrowers who otherwise would not have received any. On the other hand, the very capacity of granting credit helped strengthen the credibility of the lending entity, usually a credit union, with its members. Financial resources are lacking, especially given the fact that ongoing initiatives have stimulated demand. Some interviewees believe that the mechanism used to intervene in the agricultural sector (procedures, technological means, and targeted financial support) can be used as reference for other sectors. Strengthening the capacity to implement diagnostics of additional sectors is, according to them, fundamental. 4.3 Agricultural associations A total of 32 agricultural associations were contacted in the course of the study 28, and 12 leaders of these heads returned their respective questionnaires. They cover several geographic departments of the 27 While all ten expressed their views on point b), only 9 and 6 commented on points a) and c) respectively. 28 The authors wish to thank the KNFP leaders for having made this contact possible. Data of agricultural associations linked to ABCAB were not available in the finalization of this report. 30 country: Artibonite, Centre, North, Northeast, and South. In addition, the associations they represent are involved in several sub-sectors: plantains, rice, livestock, and cocoa. There are agricultural cooperatives and organizations among their members and the number of individual members totals at least 5,000 individuals and more than a dozen institutions. Some leaders are involved in agricultural processing activities, while others are engaged in the storage of agricultural products. The leaders claim that they had good knowledge of the operations of their members and state that limited financial resources limited financial resources as the single most important constraint members face. Other important constraints include: a) difficult access to market; b) lack of inputs; c) the lack of water resources and d) the elements. Respondents were asked to identify the most important successful outcomes experienced by their members over the last five years in their agricultural activities. By order of importance, responses from the majority of the heads include: a) increased production; b) greater access to credit, and c) higher farmer income. Taking into account both the reported successes on one hand, and the identified constraints, on the other hand, and using a scoring method similar to the one used for the MFIs, the respondents had to assess the contribution of HIFIVE in the alleviation of constraints and the realization of successes. The questions asked and the scales used were as follows: 1) In reference to the successes experienced by your members, how much credit do you give the HIFIVE project? 1. Very little; 2. Little; 3. Significant; Majority; 5. All the credit. 2) To what extent do you think the HIFIVE project has helped to alleviate these constraints (meet these challenges) through better access to financial resources? 1. Not at all; 2. Not really; 3. More or less; 4. Substantial; 5. Many. As far as successes are concerned, HIFIVE obtained a score of 2.5 while on the topic of constraints a score of 2.9 was calculated. In summary, respondents somewhat associate HIIFIVE with their successful outcomes, but agree on the fact that it has contributed more significantly to the alleviation of financial constraints. However, challenges remain, and respondents complain particularly of high interest rates. 4.4 Contextualization and additional considerations The HIFIVE project has disbursed nearly 15 million US dollars (647.5 MG) in areas that are very important for the microfinance sector. In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake, HIFIVE provided funds that allowed some operations to start over. In addition to recovery efforts, the initiative provided resources to facilitate lending to farmers 29. Nearly forty microfinance institutions and many agricultural sectors benefited from these resources. Beyond just the amounts allocated, owing to competition, the initiative incited operators other than the direct beneficiaries to engage in agricultural credit themselves. The methods, procedures, and institutions created in this process resulted in a better 29 The sub-sectors concerned include: cocoa, coffee, mangoes, rice, peanuts, beans, salt, and poultry farming. 31 understanding and appreciation of the risks associated with the sector, a prerequisite for the channeling of additional resources towards agriculture. Table 42: HIFIVE Disbursements by sector. TYPES OF INTERVENTION HIFIVE Disbursements PERCENTAGES Institutional 39,143,871.25 6% strengthening Promotion of TIC 164,421,031.32 25% Post earthquake 99,226,888.15 15% Recovery Risk Management 27,415,223.62 4% Financial aid and technical support to 317,304,179.57 49% agricultural sub-sectors (synergy) TOTAL 647,511,193.91 100% Source: HIFIVE Project In the opinion of several practitioners, the interconnection of branches was a great help, and others further stated that “tablets" introduced to facilitate the management of the agricultural credit portfolio opened doors that were once closed to that sector. As such, it is important to mention that 2014 marks the first year for which agriculture is listed as a sector, under the sectoral risk concentration in BRH’s statistical reports. Surveyed MFIs are spread across 193 offices. Combining ANIMH data for 2014 and information (including averages) by type of institution from this study, it is possible to produce a national estimate of the MFIs’ coverage. The estimates for each type of institution appear in Table 43. Table 43: Number of MFI branches throughout the country. SCC 230 BANK SUBSIDIAIRIES 65 OTHERS 96 TOGETHER 391 The estimate is somewhat conservative 30, and the number of branches could reach 400. A recent mapping (2013) of the POS (points of services) within the country is presented in Appendix 8. The HIFIVE project has contributed to the establishment of new branches. 4.4.1 Agricultural credit The HIFIVE project disbursed significant financial resources for agricultural credit. The study has made it possible to assess the impact of this initiative by analyzing the trends in two variables: a) the number of 30 For example, the total number of non-cooperative MFIs affiliated to ANIMH is 6, and only one branch was attributed to them. 32 borrowers; b) the volume of loans. In 2014, nearly 50,000 farmers were granted loans from the MFIs surveyed and received 666.4 MG. This amount represents 110% of the financial package disbursed by HIFIVE within this category, a result that serves to illustrate the incentive side of the program. Table 44: Number of customers reached and volume of credit allocated by the MFIs surveyed in 2014. PLACE OF NUMBER OF RESIDENCE OF THE VOLUME OF CREDIT CUSTOMERS BENEFICIAIRIES CEC Port-au-Prince - - Provinces 3,035 5,700,014 Rural zones 1,049 37,959,076 TOTAL 4,084.00 43,659,090.49 BANQUES Port-au-Prince 4,014 84,614,162 Provinces 9,962 146,387,197 Rural zones 24,707 274,674,971 TOTAL 38,683 505,676,330 AUTRES Port-au-Prince 3,077 32,720,725 Provinces 1,670 84,332,551 Rural zones 1,893 NA TOTAL 6,640 117,053,276 ENSEMBLE Port-au-Prince 7,091 117,334,887 Provinces 14,667 236,419,762 Rural zones 27,650 312,634,048 TOTAL 49,408 666,388,697 Data in table 45 show the larger scope of agricultural credit among surveyed MFIs. While it is a limited sample, the data display significant increases in the number of borrowers and in the volume of credit in 2014 compared to 2010. Table 45: Development of agricultural credit among surveyed MFIs surveyed. Volume of Volume of Number of credit credit Year Variation Variation customers (current (gourdes as gourdes) of 2004) 2010 2,299 - ND ND - 575,784 2011 3,267.00 42% 1,083,625 - 15,448,870 2583% 2012 4,902.00 50% 30,974,985 33  Table 45: Development of agricultural credit among surveyed MFIs surveyed. Volume of Volume of Number of credit credit Year Variation Variation customers (current (gourdes as gourdes) of 2004) 30,588,904 98% 2013 6,343.00 29% 64,114,343 301,806,475 887% 2014 49,408 679% 666,388,697 Two years ago, a new product was introduced as a pilot project and it facilitates lending to farmers. It is the system of financing and insurance to Haitian agriculture (SYFAAH) 31. HIFIVE provided technical support to that project. 4.4.2 Support to exportable agricultural products Agricultural activities supported by HIFIVE include two export crops: coffee and cocoa. In this section, we highlight the importance of these sectors in the Haitian economy. A graph of the production levels of these crops between 1961 and 2013 32 appears in Figure 1. Coffee production is erratic, while cocoa production shows an upward trend. Figure 1: Trends in coffee and cocoa production (tons : 1961-2013) 50,000 40,000 30,000 CAFÉ 20,000 CACAO 10,000 - ANNEE 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 Source : FAO Volatility in coffee production has resulted in the collapse that crop’s exports, while more favorable conditions have allowed the value of cocoa exports to exceed those of coffee since 2004. 31 Between September 2012 and December 2014, 18.376 loans were granted for a total amount of over 930 MG. 32 FAOSTAT, 2014. http://faostat3.fao.org 34  Figure 2: Trends in the value of coffee and cocoa exports (thousands of dollars US) 100,000.00 90,000.00 80,000.00 70,000.00 60,000.00 50,000.00 CAFÉ 40,000.00 30,000.00 CACAO 20,000.00 10,000.00 - ANNEE 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 Source: FAO Areas for coffee and cocoa productions measure 14,850 carreaux (1 carreau=1.29 hectares) and 3.850 carreaux 33 respectively. An analysis was carried out to illustrate potential gains and to foster a better understanding of the stakes involved in stimulating activities in the agricultural sector. Should coffee exports be boosted, and cocoa production enhanced tens of thousands of farmers involved in these sub-sectors nationwide would likely be significantly impacted. In addition, the realization of progress in these sectors seems promising in view of favorable price trends (see Appendix 9) for these products on the international market. Given the growing importance of cocoa exports over coffee in recent years, an econometric model, the VECM 34 was developed to assess the potential impact of an increase in the value of cocoa exports on Haitian GDP 35. The model indicates that a 1% increase in the value of cocoa exports produces a 0,278% increase in GDP. In reference to the 2014 real GDP, and assuming that a 1% increase in the value of cocoa exports occurs through appropriate policies, ceteris paribus, GDP would have increased from 15.02 MG to 15.06 MG, an impact of approximately 41.7 MG in real terms. When additionally, one considers the fact that real per capita GDP stands at about 1,400 gourdes, we understand that this result translates to a significant effect on the income level of several thousands of Haitian households. Indeed, it corresponds to the per capita income of more than 29,000 people. 5. Conclusions and recommendations Recommendations formulated in the report are derived from various analyses carried out with study findings, but they also stem from comments and opinions expressed by respondents: 1) heads of regulatory and federating agencies; 2) MFI managers; 3) heads of agricultural organizations. 33 Recensement Général de l’Agriculture (RGA)/Synthèse Nationale des Résultats. Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Ressources Naturelles et du Développement Rural (MARNDR), Octobre 2012. 34 Vector Error Correction Model. 35 In the absence of an input-output matrix. 35 5.1 Opinions and recommendations expressed by respondents. The respondents’ comments and recommendations were grouped and treated under three main themes. A) Absence of the State and need for support. Several operators deplore the fact that a public policy for microfinance has not yet been formulated. Public resources are almost non-existent, the legal framework is deficient, and the proposed establishment of a credit bureau is taking time to materialize. In addition to a strengthened legal and regulatory framework, financial support is requested from the State. These resources must be used for the establishment of a guarantee fund, the purpose of which is to ensure that achievements of projects such as HIFIVE’s will last, particularly in the field of agriculture. Reservations were expressed about the prospect of reviving agricultural credit banks (Banques de Crédit Agricole, BCA). On one hand, these institutions would constitute somewhat unfair competition to MFIs, and poor past performance of this type of institution- rooted in cultural attitudes "det leta pat det" (debt owed to the State is no debt, ergo it does not need to be repaid) that still exist today- cast a shadow of doubt on the viability of such entities. However, Government support is needed to alleviate the constraints involving poor communication and energy infrastructure as a means of reducing the MFIs’ high operating costs. These issues are relevant for several sectors, but they are of vital importance for the MFIs if they are to lower their operating costs and implement a well-working interconnection network. While interconnection serves to facilitate customers, it also contributes significantly to better management and improved operational efficiency. The use of the ICTs is frequently mentioned by MFIs as a mechanism that can enhance financial inclusion, and the laying of fiber optic cables throughout the country (backbone) is expected to accelerate the adoption of ICTs by the whole sector. The design of well-suited products also leads to greater financial inclusion. In the specific case of agricultural credit, it is not enough to adjust the repayment schedule based on the production cycle. It is also necessary to adjust the duration of loans as well as interest rates? To that end, new and strong partnerships can be formed and public resources can be channeled toward credit institutions. B) Additional need for capacity building and expansion of that activity. Overall, credit cooperatives have improved their operations. However, there are still many discrepancies in the sector, a situation which causes some cooperatives to malfunction, a situation that results in a lack of appropriate services to certain segments of the population, especially the poor. Two categories of credit unions and customers are said to emerge: "the well served" and "the poorly served." In that respect, training programs and technical support should be strengthened and expanded. In addition, efforts must be made towards the delivery of materiel and equipment needed to enable more MFIs to modernize their operations. As far as human resources are concerned, some operators state those with greater means are taking away their best employees. This phenomenon can disrupt the smooth running of an organization to the extent that it leads to attrition and that organization does not have the financial resources to counter these offers. Training is also needed to prepare for that contingency. 36 C) Additional resources required for lending. Together with the better reputation enjoyed today by MFIs, an increase in the number of people with access to the financial system is among the great successes observed over the past five years. However, resources available for loans are limited, and new partnerships should be identified and established, especially if services to the poor are to continue. The financial support provided by HI FIVE produced a double effect. On one hand, it made it possible for beneficiaries among the MFIs to extend credit to borrowers who otherwise would not have received any. On the other hand, the very capacity of granting credit helps strengthen the credibility of the lending entity, usually a credit union, with its members. Financial resources are lacking, especially given the fact that ongoing initiatives have stimulated demand. 5.2 Recommendations derived from study analyses. Significant improvements were observed in the microfinance sector over the last 4 to 5 years. Among those the process of professionalization takes first place. Indeed, good management and sector sustainability depend on it. In the course of the study, staff profile was examined as were the modern management tools used by several MFIs. Furthermore, the analysis focused on some aspects of governance. Good practices are not universally applied, while the renewed confidence in the system and the positive financial benefits depend on them. Accordingly, the following recommendation is made. A) Support and strengthen the professionalization process in the MFI sector. Four courses of actions need to be considered: 1. Financing the implementation of accounting and management information systems in institutions or branches where they have not yet been put in place. To the extent that there are lessons to be learned from the use of already installed systems, assessments should be undertaken and improvements made where necessary. 2. Continue to ensure management training for professional staff in order to familiarize them with any new products or procedures, but also to ensure the availability of human resources in the event of attrition. 3. Accelerate the use of the ICTs to increase staff productivity. In fact from past experience we know that ICTs help reach more clients especially in remote areas, and increase capacity to manage the loan portfolio more efficiently. 4. Strengthen governance by establishing greater internal control capacity. The study found weaknesses in that area. Innovations that have been introduced in the area of credit to production sectors, namely agricultural credit, are the second major development that occurred in recent years in the Haitian financial sector. The agricultural sector had long been neglected by financial institutions. In addition to direct financial support granted by HIFIVE, farmers' access to credit is made possible by the introduction of a number of mechanisms that allow creditors to calculate and manage risk. This new knowledge can be adapted to other production sectors, which like the agricultural sector have very limited access to finance. In this respect, the second recommendation is: 37 B) Encourage production credit. Four types of actions are proposed. 1. Identify promising production sub-sectors, particularly but not exclusively in agriculture, by performing diagnostics for these sectors and preparing related technical fact sheets. 2. Ensure training for staff destined to manage new products. In the case of agriculture, agronomists, agricultural technicians and agro economists had to be recruited. 3. Finance the acquisition of technology tools and equipment adapted to new sectors and products. Find the resources necessary for granting loans. As for agricultural credit, a donor must lead the way. 4. Seek needed resources for lending purposes. As was the case for agricultural credit, a donor needs to lead the way. The study identified an imbalance at two levels as far as gender is concerned. On one hand, women are underrepresented in the MFIs’ workforce and, on the other hand, the amount of loans granted to them are on average lower than the resources allocated to men. These observations form the basis of the following recommendation. C) Ensure greater gender equity in the microfinance sector. Three types of actions are proposed: 1. Deploy recruitment efforts towards to have women join the ranks of MFIs staff. 2. Offer training programs to afford women greater access to higher level positions in the MFIs. 3. Investigate the reasons why average loan sizes are generally smaller for women than men. Despite advances made in the field of agricultural credit, the results of the study suggest that the lack of financial resources prevents SCCs from expanding their reach in that sector. However, these entities operate in close proximity with farmers. These elements form the basis of a fourth recommendation. D) Strengthen technical and financial support for the SCCs and the network of community banks (BC) and Mutuelles de Solidarité (MUSO) in agriculture Four types of actions should be considered for the implementation of this recommendation. 1. Extending the network of partner associations and institutions; 2. Extending the insurance program and financial support throughout the country; 3. Finding new financial partners; 4. Consider prolonging HIFIVE’s mandate. SCCs lack financial resources. Practitioners are concerned that economically active but poor people are becoming excluded from the microfinance sector. Estimates published by Fonkoze in 2008 36 show that hundreds of thousands of 36 Market sizes for Ti Kredi (U$ US25 - $ US 75) and Solidarity Credit (U$ US75 - $ US 1.300,00) could be 171.478 et 1.286.083, respectively. Fonkoze, Haitian Microfinance Industry Overview, 2008. 38 people have a demand for loans of less than 50,000 gourdes in size. Findings from the study are consistent with data from BRH and reveal the average loan size to be about 50,000 gourdes. That figure is greater than the monthly salary of some economists in the Haitian Civil Service: 27,000 gourdes. This consideration justifies the following recommendation. E) Provide financial support to economically active but poor people. 1. Channel social protection resources to support programs for the poor through the MFIs. Analyses conducted in this study suggest that an increase in agricultural exports can have significant economy-wide effects on income. Moreover, the information gathered by other studies (Mattern and Wilson, 2013)3437 suggest that some MFIs would not have engaged in agricultural credit, had it not been for the financial support and guidance provided by HIFIVE. Considering that exportable crops represent high stakes for the economy and that there are opportunities to be realized in that respect, the following recommendation is made. F) Strengthen technical and financial support to producers of exportable commodities through MFIs. Four types of actions are proposed. 1. Locate all centers of production of exportable agricultural products and identify their technical and financial needs; 2. Design and implement technical support programs; 3. Identify the MFIs capable of carrying out agricultural credit programs in short order; 4. Use umbrella organizations or associations to build capacity of MFIs that are not yet ready but show potentials. The recommendations are designed to enable the State, the donor community, and the MFIs themselves to seize opportunities and address challenges that hinder the growth of the MFI sector. Opportunities include the potential to impact more than a million individuals involved in the MFI sector. In this respect, it is appropriate to emphasize the positive outcomes for: i) economic growth through the development of production sub-sectors and the implication for income and employment; ii) poverty reduction via greater access to credit. Lack of financial resources emerges as the most important constraint against the growth of the microfinance sector. Some MFIs have to face heavy financial charges when they attempt to secure more resources. Unstable political and macroeconomic frameworks exacerbate market conditions, making this situation even worse. In that regard, the State should demonstrate a stronger presence in the sector by channeling financial resources to it. However, more importantly, public policy in the field of microfinance needs to be formulated. 37 Max Mattern and Kim Wilson, Integrating Finance to Support Agricultural Value Chains: A Study of HIFIVE Grants in Haiti The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. September 2013. 39 Finally, the study has revealed some needs, which, if they are met, will help enhance the vitality of the MFIs: 1) Strengthening of the legal and regulatory frameworks; 2) Strengthening MFI governance; 3) Capacity building and supply of equipment; 4) Additional technical assistance for agricultural credit. 40 Bibliography ANIMH, Rapport Annuel, diverses années. Banque de la République d'Haïti, Rapports Annuels, diverses années. Banque de la République d'Haïti, rapports internes Direction Affaires Internationales. Banque de la République d'Haïti, rapports internes Direction de l'Inspection Générale des Caisses Populaires. Banque Mondiale. Pauvreté et inclusion sociale en Haïti : gains sociaux à petits pas. 2014. Fonkoze, Haitian Microfinance Industry Overview, 2008. Food and Agricultural Organization. FAOSTAT, 2014. http://faostat3.fao.org François, L. Recensement sur l’Industrie de la Microfinance en Haïti, Strategic Management Group (SMG), diverses années. Haiti Integrated Financing for Value Chains and Enterprises (HIFIVE), Microfinance Sector : Assessment of Impact of the January 12, 2010 Earthquake: Part-1, February 2010. Haiti Integrated Financing for Value Chains and Enterprises (HIFIVE), POS mapping. IHSI : Les comptes économiques en 2014 via http://www.ihsi.ht/pdf/comptes_economiques_en_2014.pdf . IHSI, Enquête sur les conditions de Vie des Ménages après le Séisme (ECVMAS-2012). Institut Haïtien de Statistique et d’Informatique (IHSI), Enquête sur l’Emploi et l’Économie Informelle (EEEI), 2010. Mattern, M. et Wilson, K. Integrating Finance to Support Agricultural Value Chains: A Study of HIFIVE Grants in Haiti The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University. September 2013. Mendez England and Associates, EVALUATION OF THE USAID/HAITI INTEGRATED FINANCING FOR VALUE CHAINS AND ENTERPRISES (HIFIVE) PROGRAM Mérat, J.P. L'état de la protection sociale en Haïti - entre les prescrits de la constitution et la réalité, 2011. Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Ressources Naturelles et du Développement Rural (MARNDR), Recensement Général de l’Agriculture (RGA)/Synthèse Nationale des Résultats. Octobre 2012. Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Ressources Naturelles et du Développement Rural (MARNDR) et Affaires Etrangères, Commerce, et Développement, CANADA, Présentation SYFAAH, Mars 2015. 41 Ministère de l’Économie et des Finances, Institut Haïtien de Statistique et d’Informatique-Bureau du Recensement et Centre Latino-Américain De démographie (CELADE/CEPAL) Estimations et projections de la population totale, urbaine, rurale et économiquement active, Mai 2008. 42  Appendix 1: Trend in the number of borrowers and total loan portfolio by type of institution between 2010 and 2014 ENSEMBLE CEC FILIALES DE BANQUES AUTRES Volume du Volume du Volume du Volume du Nombre Nombre Nombre Nombre portefeuille portefeuille portefeuille portefeuille d'emprunteurs d'emprunteurs d'emprunteurs d'emprunteurs brut brut brut brut Port-au-Prince 54,031 2,113,662,708 2,538 142,306,225 24,969 1,166,139,574 26,524 805,216,909 Provinces-zones urbaines 35,531 1,176,803,579 4,827 364,157,130 12,058 611,729,623 18,646 200,916,826 Zones rurales 2014 110,198 1,849,161,198 4,921 149,610,323 30,900 849,045,837 74,377 850,505,037 Total 12,286 199,760 5,139,627,485 656,073,678 67,927 2,626,915,035 119,547 1,856,638,772 Part dans les totaux Port-au-Prince 27% 41% 21% 22% 37% 44% 22% 43% Provinces-zones 18% 23% 39% 56% 18% 23% 16% 11% urbaines Zonesrurales 55% 36% 40% 23% 45% 32% 62% 46% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Port-au-Prince 30,345 1,311,706,159 747 50,019,792 9,187 840,279,490 19,968 421,406,877 Provinces-zones urbaines 13,464 422,684,099 1471 101,770,729 3,912 240,627,378 6,238 80,285,992 Zones rurales 41,899 833,584,472 1,492 43,306,109 6,342 309,947,767 34,065 480,330,596 Total 3,710 2010 85,708 2,567,974,731 195,096,630 19,441 1,390,854,635 179,723 982,023,465 Part dans les totaux Port-au-Prince 35% 51% 20% 26% 47% 60% 33% 43% Provinces-zones 16% 16% 40% 52% 20% 17% 10% 8% urbaines Zones rurales 49% 32% 40% 22% 33% 22% 57% 49% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% VARIATION Port-au-Prince 7% -10% 1% -4% -10% -16% -11% 0% 43 AU Provinces-zones NIVEAU 4% 6% 0% 3% -2% 6% 6% 3% urbaines DES PARTS Zones rurales -11% 4% 0% 1% 13% 10% 5% -3% Appendix 2: Breakdown of additional funding by type of institution: 2010, 2014 2014 2010 Source de fonds additionnels CEC Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 4,777,875.00 0 Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 8,714,344.24 3,453,500.00 Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 112,563.55 0 Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 5,400,000.00 0 Autres passifs 27,945,873.37 9,995,953.21 Subvention capitalisée 665,667.00 0 Fonds propres 111,696,508.68 96,127,555.50 Total 159,312,831.84 110,023,883.71 Parts dans le total Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 3% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 5% 3% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 0% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 3% 0% Autres passifs 18% 9% Subvention capitalisée 0% 0% Fonds propres 70% 87% Total 100% 100% FILIALES DE BANQUES Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 336,565,295.37 319,366,595 Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 68,336,550.00 80,012,301 Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 0 - Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 972,498,553.00 601,291,097 Autres passifs 167,066,388.74 69,543,801 Subvention capitalisée - - Fonds propres 1,004,337,685.44 325,996,604 Total 2,548,804,472.55 1,396,210,398 Parts dans le total Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 13% 23% Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 3% 6% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 0% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 38% 43% Autres passifs 7% 5% Subvention capitalisée 0% 0% Fonds propres 39% 23% Total 100% 100% AUTRES Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 89,477,977 0 44 Source de fonds additionnels 2014 2010 Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 102,125,798 0 Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 135,418,895 0 Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 84,674,757 272,031.0 Autres passifs 52,533,322 2,383,736.00 Subvention capitalisée 399,150,473 27,802,712.00 Fonds propres 130,024,729 (11,670,838.00) Total 993,405,951 18787641 Parts dans le total Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial 9% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel 10% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial 14% 0% Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel 9% 1% Autres passifs 5% 13% Subvention capitalisée 40% 148% Fonds propres 13% -62% Total 100% 100% 45 Appendix 3: Weights of productive and non-revenue-generating assets in total assets ENSEMBLE 2014 2010 Liquidités (Caisse+Comptes courants) 18% 31% Immobilisations nettes 11% 7% Autres actifs improductifs par nature 4% 5% Total actifs non-productifs 32% 43% Portefeuille net 63% 55% Placements 2% 1% Autres actifs productifs par nature 2% 0% Total actif productifs par nature 68% 57% CEC 2014 2010 Liquidités (Caisse+Comptes courants) 21% 36% Immobilisations nettes 12% 8% Autres actifs improductifs par nature 3% 4% Total actifs non-productifs 36% 48% Portefeuille net 59% 51% Placements 1% 0% Autres actifs productifs par nature 4% 1% Total actif productifs par nature 64% 52% FILIALES DE BANQUES Liquidités (Caisse+Comptes courants) 4% 7% Immobilisations nettes 6% 5% Autres actifs improductifs par nature 4% 5% Total actifs non-productifs 12% 17% Portefeuille net 86% 81% Placements 2% 2% Autres actifs productifs par nature 0% 0% Total actif productifs par nature 88% 83% AUTRES Liquidités (Caisse+Comptes courants) 12% 29% Immobilisations nettes 9% 6% Autres actifs improductifs par nature 9% 8% Total actifs non-productifs 29% 42% Portefeuille net 68% 54% Placements 3% 4% Autres actifs productifs par nature 0% 0% Total actif productifs par nature 71% 58% 46 Appendix 4: Average size of total revenues and revenue breakdown Taille moyenne des revenus en termes nominales et réels et variation entre 2010 et 2014DES REVENUS 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation Gourdes de Poste de revenu Gourdes courantes 2004 ENSEMBLE Revenus d’intérêt sur prêts 72,437,786 45,341,987 32,806,968 26,593,541 23% Revenus de frais de dossiers 10,570,759 7,248,590 4,787,481 4,251,373 13% Autres revenus du crédit 1,943,008 1,731,146 879,985 1,015,335 -13% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 213,531 266,177 96,708 156,116 -38% Autres revenus 6,682,091 11,630,841 3,026,309 6,821,608 -56% Total revenus bruts 91,847,174 66,218,741 41,597,452 38,837,971 7% CEC Revenus d’intérêt sur prêts 8,162,703 4,414,306 3,696,876 2,589,036 43% Revenus de frais de dossiers 729,817 445,031 330,533 261,015 27% Autres revenus du crédit 509,083 386,489 230,563 226,680 2% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 96,369 86,769 43,645 50,891 -14% Autres revenus 497,290 396,871 225,222 232,769 -3% Total revenus bruts 9,995,261 5,729,466 4,526,839 3,360,390 35% FILIALES DE BANQUES Revenus d’intérêt sur prêts 384,962,230 191,835,831 174,348,836 112,513,684 55% Revenus de frais de dossiers 65,131,544 31,563,468 29,497,982 18,512,298 59% Autres revenus du crédit 8,570,746 3,847,017 3,881,678 2,256,315 72% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 1,600,016 1,161,289 724,645 681,108 6% Autres revenus 2,452,144 4,719,918 1,110,572 2,768,280 -60% 47 Taille moyenne des revenus en termes nominales et réels et variation entre 2010 et 2014DES REVENUS 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation Poste de revenu Gourdes de Gourdes courantes 2004 Total revenus bruts 462,716,680 233,127,522 209,563,714 136,731,685 53% AUTRES Revenus d’intérêt sur prêts 98,288,302 55,672,113 44,514,629 32,652,266 36% Revenus de frais de dossiers 11,173,036 7,722,219 5,060,252 4,529,160 12% Autres revenus du crédit 2,691,926 3,150,936 1,219,169 1,848,056 -34% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 83,327 133,068 37,739 78,046 -52% Autres revenus 26,320,666 40,492,131 11,920,591 23,749,050 -50% Total revenus bruts 138,557,256 107,170,467 62,752,381 62,856,579 0% 48  Parts des postes de revenu dans le total des revenus. 2014 2010 Poste de revenu ENSEMBLE Revenus d'intérêt sur prêts 77% 77% Revenus de frais de dossiers 9% 10% Autres revenus du crédit 5% 4% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 0% 1% Autres revenus 9% 8% Total revenus bruts 100% 100% CEC Revenus d'intérêt sur prêts 79% 80% Revenus de frais de dossiers 7% 7% Autres revenus du crédit 6% 4% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 1% 1% Autres revenus 7% 7% Total revenus bruts 100% 100% FILIALES DE BANQUES Revenus d'intérêt sur prêts 82% 82% Revenus de frais de dossiers 14% 14% Autres revenus du crédit 2% 2% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 0% 0% Autres revenus 1% 2% Total revenus bruts 100% 100% AUTRES Revenus d'intérêt sur prêts 69% 66% Revenus de frais de dossiers 11% 13% Autres revenus du crédit 2% 4% Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) 0% 0% Autres revenus 18% 17% Total revenus bruts 100% 100% 49 Appendix 5: Average size of total expenditures and breakdown of expenditures Taille moyenne des charges en termes nominales et réels et variation entre 2010 et 2014 INSTANCE 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation ENSEMBLE Gourdes courantes Gourdes de 2004 3,444,153 2,939,721 17% Charges financières 7,604,689 5,012,224 16,787,687 14,248,137 18% Frais du personnel 37,067,213 24,293,073 Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 5,441,015 9,198,565 -41% 12,013,761 15,683,553 (dont les dotations aux provisions) 15,400,124 11,235,748 37% Autres dépenses d’exploitation 34,003,473 19,156,950 41,072,979 37,622,170 9% Total charges 90,689,137 64,145,800 CEC 255,479 167,476 53% Charges financières 564,098 285,547 1,232,694 841,315 47% Frais du personnel 2,721,789 1,434,442 Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 815,251 701,843 16% 1,800,074 1,196,642 (dont les dotations aux provisions) 1,159,339 732,226 58% Autres dépenses d’exploitation 2,559,820 1,248,445 3,462,763 2,442,860 42% Total charges 7,645,781 4,165,077 FILIALES DE BANQUES 16,600,059 9,801,894 69% Charges financières 36,652,929 16,712,229 69,460,473 46,655,575 49% Frais du personnel 153,368,724 79,547,755 Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 20,902,165 34,238,098 -39% 46,151,980 58,375,957 (dont les dotations aux provisions) 58,380,727 34,917,954 67% Autres dépenses d’exploitation 128,904,645 59,535,112 165,343,423 125,613,521 32% Total charges 365,078,278 214,171,053 AUTRES 4,837,884 6,030,252 -20% Charges financières 10,682,047 10,281,580 29,338,776 26,980,046 9% Frais du personnel 64,780,018 46,000,979 Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 9,274,851 14,566,978 -36% 20,478,871 24,836,697 (dont les dotations aux provisions) 50 Taille moyenne des charges en termes nominales et réels et variation entre 2010 et 2014 INSTANCE 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation 27,138,321 22,234,877 22% Autres dépenses d’exploitation 59,921,413 37,910,465 70,589,832 69,812,153 1% Total charges 155,862,348 119,029,721 51 Parts des postes de dépenses dans le total des charges INSTANCE 2014 2010 ENSEMBLE Charges financières 9% 10% Frais du personnel 40% 38% Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 20% 25% (dont les dotations aux provisions) Autres dépenses d’exploitation 31% 27% Total charges 100% 100% CEC Charges financières 9% 11% Frais du personnel 37% 38% Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 24% 24% (dont les dotations aux provisions) Autres dépenses d’exploitation 30% 28% Total charges 100% 100% FILIALES DE BANQUE Charges financières 13% 11% Frais du personnel 39% 33% Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 12% 29% (dont les dotations aux provisions) Autres dépenses d’exploitation 35% 26% Total charges 100% 100% AUTRES Charges financières 9% 8% Frais du personnel 51% 43% Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts 11% 24% (dont les dotations aux provisions) Autres dépenses d’exploitation 29% 24% Total charges 100% 100% 52 Appendix 6: Reduction in risk by improvements in the quality of the loan portfolio- favorable trends in write offs, provisions for bad debts, and net portfolio. Poids des radiations et des provisions dans le portefeuille brut. INSTANCE 2014 2010 ENSEMBLE 5% 9% RADIATIONS CEC 4% 4% FILIALES 7% 8% AUTRES 6% 17% ENSEMBLE 7% 10% CEC 9% 10% PROVISIONS FILIALES 4% 7% AUTRES 4% 10% 2014 2010 2014 2010 INSTANCE Variation Gourdes courantes Gourdes de 2004 ENSEMBLE 187,607,142 115,614,171 84,967,003 67,808,898 25% CEC 41,729,597 18,650,707 18,899,274 10,938,831 73% FILIALES DE BANQUES 1,087,458,350 555,352,974 492,508,311 325,720,219 51% AUTRE 300,976,451 191,823,658 136,311,799 112,506,544 21% 53 Appendix 7: Average size of deposits by type of institution in nominal and real terms: 2010-2014 2014 2010 2014 2010 Variation TYPE D'EPARGNE ENSEMBLE ENSEMBLE Gourdes courantes Gourdes de 2004 VOLONTAIRE 87,570,870 59,752,817 39,660,720 35,045,641 13% OBLIGATOITE 15,958,995 26,153,661 7,227,806 15,339,390 -53% TOTAL 92,443,846 79,513,299 41,867,684 46,635,366 -10% CEC CEC VOLONTAIRE 36,302,942 23,223,880 16,441,550 13,621,044 21% OBLIGATOIRE 15,405,432 31,592,774 6,977,098 18,529,486 -62% TOTAL 43,682,679 43,609,317 19,783,822 25,577,312 -23% AUTRES AUTRES VOLONTAIRE 378,089,134 242,397,503 171,236,021 142,168,624 20% OBLIGATOIRE 6,921,715 2,584,168 3,134,835 1,515,641 107% TOTAL 385,010,850 366,745,157 174,370,856 215,099,799 -19% 54  Appendix 8: Trends in ROE, ROA, write offs, and provisions bor bad debts: 2010-2014 Evolution du ROE: 2010-2014 Evolution du ROA: 2010-2014 2010 2010 AUTRES 2011 2011 AUTRES BANQUES 2012 BANQUES 2012 CEC CEC 2013 ENSEMBLE ENSEMBLE 2013 Poly. 2014 2014 (ENSEMBLE) -100% -50% 0% 50% -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 EVOLUTION DES RADIATIONS EN % DU PORTEFEUILLE : 2010- Evolution des provisions (PAR30) en % du portefeuille : 2010-2014 2010 2010 2011 2011 AUTRES AUTRES 2012 FILIALES 2012 FILIALES CEC CEC 2013 ENSEMBLE 2013 ENSEMBLE 2014 2014 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 55 Appendix 9: MFI location - POS throughout the country 56 Source: HIFIVE Appendix 10: Trends in coffee and cocoa prices on the international market EVOLUTION DU PRIX DU CAFÉ ARABICA PAR MOIS (JANVIER 1980-MARS 2015, CENTIMES US/LIVRE) 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 100.00 50.00 0.00 1980M1 1981M6 1982M11 1984M4 1985M9 1987M2 1988M7 1989M12 1991M5 1992M10 1994M3 1995M8 1997M1 1998M6 1999M11 2001M4 2002M9 2004M2 2005M7 2006M12 2008M5 2009M10 2011M3 2012M8 2014M1 EVOLUTION DU PRIX DU CACAO PAR MOIS , USD/TM (Janvier 1980-Mars 2015) 4000.00 3500.00 3000.00 2500.00 2000.00 1500.00 CACAO 1000.00 500.00 0.00 1980M1 1982M1 1984M1 1986M1 1988M1 1990M1 1992M1 1994M1 1996M1 1998M1 2000M1 2002M1 2004M1 2006M1 2008M1 2010M1 2012M1 2014M1 Source: Fonds Monénaire International (FMI) 57 Appendix 11: Does there exist a long term relationship between real GDP and the value of cocoa exports? Présentation du modèle et des résultats. Données Les données utilisées proviennent de deux sources. La série chronologique du PIB haïtien à prix constants (1986-1987) couvrant la période 1961-2012 a été obtenu de l’IHSI. Les statistiques de commerce international (valeur des exportations de cacao) pour la période 1961-2012 viennent de la base de données de la FAO. Le modèle : Antécédent : Quand deux variables (x et y) sont cointégrés leur relation est modélisable sous la forme d’un modèle à correction d’erreur (MCE). Ce dernier constitue une représentation de la relation dynamique de court terme entre deux variables x et y aussi bien que leur relation à long terme. Le modèle doit son au nom au terme d’erreur qui représente un écart à court terme avec l’équilibre de long terme. Spécification simple: Ecart par rapport à l’équilibre Formulation générale : Si les variables ne sont pas intégrées de même ordre, on ne peut pas utiliser le modèle à correction d’erreur. On ne peut pas non plus utiliser le VECM si les tests révèlent la non existence d’une relation de cointégration entre elles. Ce test coïncide avec le rang de la matrice Π, où : dans Procédures d’estimation: 58 a) Tester la stationnarité des variables (test de racine unitaire) b) Vérifier le décalage optimal des variables; c) Vérifier l’existence d’une relation de cointégration d) Spécifier le VECM e) Déduire la relation d’équilibre Résultats : A) Tests de stationnarité Augmented Dicky-Fuller MackKinnon, p-value PIB constant(en logarithme naturel) * 0.7049 Différence première 0.0010 Valeur réelle ($ US 82-84, IPC UX, all urban customers) des exportations de cacao (en logarithme naturel) * 0.1723 Différence première 0.0001 * pas significatif au niveau de 5% Conclusion : Les variables ne sont pas stationnaires à niveau, mais sont stationnaires en différence première. Il faut estimer la relation en différence première. La stationnarité (valeur anticipée, variance, covariance ne varient pas avec le temps) est une propriété importante pour les inférences statistiques. Quand les variables ne remplissent pas cette condition, les résultats des régressions (estimations économétriques) sont dites illusoires ou fallacieuses. B) Décalage optimal CRITÈRES Décalage LL LR df p-value FPE AIC HQIC SBIC 0 -42.9505 .023215 1.91279 1.94241 1.99151 1 46.8231 179.55* 4 0.0000 .0006604* -1.73715* -1.64828* -1.50097* 2 50.1534 6.6605 4 0.159 .000622 -1.70866 -1.56052 -1.31501 3 53.9797 7.6526 4 0.002 .000628 -1.70126 -1.49388 -1.15016 4 56.7461 5.5329 4 0.0000 .000666 -1.64877 -1.38213 -.940204 *Décalage optimale : variables décalées 1 fois C) Test du rang – existe-t-il une relation de cointégration ? 59  trace 5% Critical Maximum rank parms LL eigenvalue statistic Value 0 2 37.522672 24.6605 15.41 1 5 48.756332 0.36195 2.1931* 3.76 2 6 49.852905 0.04291 * Ne peut pas rejeter l’hypothèse nulle d’une relation de cointégration entre les variables au niveau de 5%. D) Spécifier le VCEM Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval] ∆ PIB constant CORRECTION 1/ -0.0812624 0.024346 -2.34 0. 001 -0.1289804 -0.03354 D'ERREUR (δ) ∆ PIB constant -0.1304726 0.208229 2.81 0.005 0.0044031 0.024693 décalé une fois ∆ Valeur Constante des exportations de 0.0995147 0.097005 3.08 3.06 0.4753102 2.175682 cacao décalée une fois CONSTANTE -0.00084793 0.006754 0.01 0.992 -0.179853 0.181637 1/ δ est négatif et significatif au niveau de 5% → Il existe un équilibre stable à long terme entre les deux variables. E) Relation d’équilibre Ln(PIB constant) = 7.2 + 0.2775591* ln (Valeur constante des exportations de cacao) Conclusion : Une augmentation de 1% de la valeur des exportations de cacao produit une augmentation de 0,278% du PIB. 60 Appendix 12: Terms of reference, main consultants’ profiles, list of persons met, survey instruments. A) Termes de référence de l’étude 1 Termes de Références pour l’Évaluation du secteur de la microfinance en Haïti INTRODUCTION Dans le but de promouvoir la croissance économique et la création d'emplois notamment dans les zones rurales d'Haïti, l'Agence Américaine pour le Développement International (USAID) a lancé, en 2009, le projet Financement Intégré pour le Développement des Filières de Production et des Entreprises (HIFIVE). L'objectif principal de HIFIVE est d'élargir la disponibilité des produits et services financiers adaptés aux besoins des micros, petites et moyennes entreprises (MPMEs) opérant dans les filières agricoles et autres filières de production, et soutenir l'extension des produits et services financiers aux zones rurales mal desservies. HIFIVE collabore avec une variété d'institutions financières et d'autres partenaires afin de soutenir un flux de produits et services financiers commercialement viables. L’USAID/Haïti, dans le cadre de cet appui au secteur de la microfinance et de son projet HIFIVE, en collaboration avec d’autres acteurs sur le terrain dont DID, ANIMH, KNFP, ANACAPH, a aussi commencé, au début de l’année 2008, un processus de constitution d’une base de données sur le secteur de la micro finance en Haïti. Cette année, il souhaite, avant la fin de son projet d’appui au secteur, réaliser une étude afin de permettre aux différents acteurs d’avoir une idée précise de la santé financière du secteur et de présenter l’état de la situation de l’inclusion financière dans le pays. Ainsi, les principaux objectifs de l’étude sont les suivants: 1. Mettre à jour les informations financière sur le secteur de la microfinance ; 2. Fournir aux différents acteurs des résultats sectoriels et sous- sectoriels pouvant servir de base de comparaison et d’appréciation des performances individuelles (benchmarks); 3. Evaluer la taille du secteur selon différents critères, et sa contribution effective à l’économie du pays ; 4. Présenter la situation comparée à l’année de référence ; 5. Présenter une cartographie des institutions financières opérant sur le territoire. 61  6. Comment les apports d’ HIFIVE ont pu contribuer au développement du secteur. Pour la réalisation de cette étude, HIFIVE compte recruter un consultant. HIFIVE choisira un expert (te) ou une firme locale pour exécuter la mission en toute transparence. Le choix de l’expert (te) sera fait selon les procédures de l’USAID. L’expert ou la firme sera choisi sur l’évaluation de la qualité de son offre technique et financière soumise. L'offre technique, de maximum 10 pages, inclura: la compréhension des termes de référence et de l'objectif des services à fournir, l’estimation des difficultés et des défis à relever; l’approche méthodologique, l’organisation des tâches, un calendrier d’activités ainsi que la composition de l’équipe disponible pour la réalisation de la mission. L’offre financière présentera le budget détaillé proposé pour la réalisation de la mission. Pour faciliter le travail, l’Equipe du projet HIFIVE offrira tout son support dans toutes les étapes de la mission et mettra à la disposition du candidat retenu tous les moyens nécessaires pour la bonne réalisation de la mission. Elle pourra participer à toutes les réunions ou elle jugera pertinent de participer, recevra et validera tous les rapports produits. L’expert (te) ou la firme retenue devra : 1. Avoir une expérience d’au moins 5 ans dans le domaine de la gestion et de l’analyse financière et posséder une maitrise ou préférablement un doctorat dans le domaine de la finance, des sciences économiques, de la gestion, de la comptabilité, du monitoring et évaluation et du maping ou tous autres domaines reliés à l’étude. 2. Avoir déjà réalisé au moins des études similaires en Haïti ou à l’étranger. 3. Avoir une excellente connaissance de la situation économique d’Haïti particulièrement du secteur financier. 4. Avoir une très bonne connaissance de l’Anglais, du français et du créole. 5. Être disponible durant toute la période proposée pour la réalisation de la mission et par la suite pour répondre aux questions qui pourraient surgir. OBJECTIFS L’objectif général du travail est d’effectuer une évaluation financière comparative du secteur de la microfinance en Haïti. La mission devra pouvoir évaluer le niveau de croissance du secteur surtout après le tremblement de terre en tenant compte de l’impact du projet HIFIVE sur les activités financières du secteur. De plus, l’évaluateur (trice) doit pouvoir identifier les principaux changements internes et institutionnels réalisés dans le secteur. Il (Elle) établira, les forces et faiblesses des différentes institutions retenues ainsi que les menaces externes et les opportunités que ce secteur continue à offrir. Cet exercice devra permettre aux différents acteurs tels que le Gouvernement haïtien, l’USAID, le secteur financier, les universités, d’avoir des données actuelles sur la situation financière du secteur micro-financier en Haïti comparée à la situation de référence de l’année 2008. La mission devra prendre en compte, d’une part, les changements en terme de progrès réalisés, d’autre part, faire ressortir les faiblesses récurrentes. Elle devra permettre au bailleur de fonds de HIFIVE de comprendre comment les activités réalisées par HIFIVE pendant ces cinq (5) dernières années ont pu permettre aux institutions appuyées de répondre de façon satisfaisante aux besoins financiers des clients du secteur tant au niveau de la production agricole qu’au niveau des 62 autres secteurs d’activités en Haïti. Aussi, cette étude doit indiquer aux commanditaires en quoi le projet HIFIVE a pu jeter les bases pour l’inclusion financière en Haïti. Les recommandations qui seront produites devront permettre aux acteurs locaux et internationaux d’ajuster leur stratégie de manière à renforcer les résultats atteints et de mieux les préciser en cas d’une éventuelle action future de coopération. La mission devra, en fonction des données recueillies de la part des institutions, préciser les priorités et les grandes lignes d'interventions à développer dans les domaines prioritaires. Un annexe avec plus de détails pourrait être prévu et amener des propositions concrètes quand à un éventuel appui à accorder au secteur. RESULTATS ATTENDUS ET POINTS CLE DU RAPPORT Le résultat final attendu est le rapport de l’étude remis en deux copies dures et deux CD. Le rapport comprendra un résumé de 3 pages et le texte ne dépassera pas 50 pages en interligne simple. Il doit être illustré, selon les cas, par des cartes, des graphiques et des tableaux. Une carte de la répartition des zones d'intervention des institutions est obligatoire (à joindre en annexe). Le rapport est soumis à des exigences de qualité. ANNEXES DU RAPPORT Le rapport doit comporter les annexes suivantes: 1. Les termes de référence de l'étude. 2. Le nom des consultants proposés (leurs CV, résumés et limités à une page par personne, doivent être fournis) 3. Une description détaillée de la méthodologie d'évaluation comprenant: les options choisies, les difficultés rencontrées et les limites de l'évaluation, le détail des outils et des analyses. 4. Les outils de collecte d’informations (questionnaires, grilles d’entretien, d’analyse) etc. 5. La carte de la zone géographique couverte par les IMF. 6. La liste des personnes/institutions consultées 7. Les ouvrages et la documentation consultés 8. Les autres annexes techniques (analyses statistiques, tables des matières et chiffres) 9. Une réponse détaillée aux questions d'évaluation, critères de jugement et indicateurs. 10. La liste des sigles utilisés 63  B) PROFIL DES PRINCIPAUX INTERVENANTS • Daniel Dorsainvil, Ph.D. Daniel Dorsainvil détient un doctorat en sciences économiques de l’University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (1996). Il obtient deux diplômes de maîtrise, l’un en économie agricole à Rutgers University de New Brunswick à New Jersey (1987), et l’autre en agency counseling à State University of New York de Plattsburgh à New York. Il est licencié en gestion des affaires (Business Management) à cette même université. De 1999 à 2006, avant sa nomination au poste de Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances, Daniel Dorsainvil offre ses services de consultant à de nombreuses institutions internationales dans le cadre de projets relatifs à l’économie, pour l’analyse économique et financière, le montage et l’évaluation de projets, les études de marché, l’analyse quantitative et la formation. Daniel Dorsainvil réalise de nombreux projets pour des organismes internationaux et des institutions haïtiennes privées et publiques. M. Dorsainvil est directeur de Monnaie et analyse économique à la Banque de la République (1998- 1999); conseiller économique au ministère de l’Économie et des Finances (1996-1998); assistant professeur à la recherche à Georgetown University Medical Center, Economics Research Unit de Washington (1996-1997) ; consultant-économiste à la Banque mondiale dans le cadre du programme Impact de la mortalité des adultes sur le développement économique (1995-1996) ; consultant- économétricien à The Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. De Kalamazoo à Michigan (1995-1997) ; assistant professeur du cours « Intermediate Macroeconomics » à la Faculté des sciences économiques de l’University of Pennsylvania (1994-1995) ; assistant à la recherche en « Penn World Table » (construction des indices de parité de pouvoir d’achat) de la Faculté des Sciences économiques, de l’University of Pennsylvania (1993-1994) ; économiste à Environmental Degradation, Children Productivity in Agriculture and Fertility Choices de l’International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC (1992-1993) ; instructeur en microéconomie à l’University of Pennsylvania (1991) ; assistant à la recherche en « Analyse quantitative : modélisation et estimation économétrique » à l’ University of Pennsylvania de Philadelphia et au National Bureau of Economic Research de Boston (1989-1991) ; chercheur associé en « Traitement des produits agricoles et fruits de mer » de Rutgers University de New Jersey (1988); ééconomiste au bureau d’analyse économique de l’U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) en Haïti. Daniel Dorsainvil reçoit des distinctions de l’University Fontaine Fellow (1988-1989 et 1992-1993) et du National Bureau of Economic Research (1990-1991). Il est l’auteur de nombreuses publications dont : « Latest Development in the Haitian Economy : the 1996 Adjustment Program. Banque de la République d'Haïti, Conférencier, Centro de Estudios Monetarias para Latin America (CEMLA), Curacao.»; «Moral Hazard in Credit Relations. PH.D dissertation. Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, 1996.»; «Saving, Demographic Structure and Productivity Growth: The Case of Japan, (joint with A. Ando, L. Guiso and D. Gerlizzesse), Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol. 94, No. 2., 1992. »; «An Analysis of Pricing in the Haitian Coffee Market, (avec R.A. Lopez), The Journal of Developing Areas, 1990. » 64  • Eslyn Jean-Baptiste, Ph.D. Eslyn Jean-Baptiste est un expert en finance et en économie. Le Dr. Jean-Baptiste a fait ses études de troisième cycle à la Wharton School de l’Université de Pennsylvanie où il a obtenu les diplômes de maitrise et de doctorat. Il a également obtenu une maitrise de l’Institut Polytechnique Rensselaer aux Etats-Unis. Il a fait ses études de premier cycle à la Faculté des Sciences de l’Université d’Etat d’Haïti qui lui a décerné le diplôme d’Ingénieur en électronique. M. Jean-Baptiste a été professeur de finance et d’économie à l’Université Columbia à New-York où il a pendant six ans effectué des recherches sur la problématique de la gestion financière de l’entreprise et des institutions financières. Les résultats de ces recherches ont été publiés dans plusieurs revues académiques. En Haïti, il a animé des séminaires de formation continue pour les cadres de la Banque de la République d’Haïti (BRH). En tant que consultant il a, pendant les sept dernières années aidé des institutions tant du secteur privé que du secteur public, en Haïti aussi bien qu’à l’étranger à formuler des solutions à une variété de problèmes qui s’étendent de l’évaluation et du renforcement des systèmes statistiques nationaux en Haïti et en République Dominicaine à la problématique de la taxation des appels internationaux entrants en Haïti. Il a travaillé comme consultant pour plusieurs organisations internationales comme la Société Financière Internationale, la Banque Mondiale et la CARICOM. 65  C) Liste des personnes rencontrées Prénom Nom Poste / Institution Monsieur Michel Chancy Secrétaire d’Etat de l’Agriculture pour les questions animales, MARNDR Madame Marie Laurence Boyer Directrice, BRH/DIGCP Avocat Conseil, Ministère de la Planification et de la Coopération Externe, Monsieur Josué Beaubrun (MPCE), Conseil National des Coopératives (CNC) Monsieur Lionel Fleuristin Coordonateur, KNFP Monsieur Jocelin St Jean Directeur Général, Le Levier Madame Yolène Jacquet Directrice Générale, ANACAPH Monsieur Luc Ladouceur Directeur Général, ABCAB Monsieur Frantz Elyzée Directeur Général, ANIHM Directeur Général, Association pour la Coopération avec la Micro Monsieur Sinior Raymond Entreprise (ACME) Monsieur Matthew Brown Directeur Général, FONKOZE Monsieur Joseph Similien Directeur Général, Micro Crédit National (MCN) Monsieur Julio Hullam Larosilière Directeur Général, Micro Crédit Capital (MCC) Madame Marie Marcelle Gérard Directrice Générale, FINCA Monsieur Evans Baptiste Directeur Développement Commercial, Sogesol Madame Guila Venance Lenne Directrice Exécutive, Palmiste Monsieur Claude Clodomir Jr. Chief of Party, HIFIVE Madame Beatrice Louis Deputy Chief of Party, HIFIVE Madame Yvrose Joseph Directrice, Produits Financiers-HIFIVE Monsieur Alfredo Mena Représentant Résidant. Institut Interaméricain de Coopération pour l’Agriculture (IICA) Monsieur Claude Lapointe Directeur de projet, SYFAAH 66 D) Instruments d’enquête 67 D.1 Guides d’interview a) Historique: experiences 1) Pourriez-vous partager avec nous l’expérience de votre institution avec la microfinance ? A quand remonte cette expérience ? 2) Pouvez-vous nous renseigner sur la nature exacte de vos interventions dans le secteur de la microfinance ? 3) Où dans le pays, dans quelle région, vos activités sont-elles concentrées? 4) Avez-vous des partenaires techniques et financiers dans ce domaine? Qui sont-ils ? b) Evolution du secteur de la microfinance au cours des cinq dernières années ; 5) Quels sont selon vous les plus grands succès enregistrés par le secteur de la microfinance au cours des cinq dernières années? 6) A quels facteurs attribuez-vous ces succès? 7) Quels échecs a-t-il essuyés et contre quelles contraintes s’est-il heurté? 8) A quels facteurs attribuez-vous ces échecs? c) Inclusion financière 1) Ensemble de politiques publiques et de stratégies ont eu le plus d’impact sur l’inclusion financière du monde agricole et des zones rurales ? Pourquoi? 2) Quels ont été dans ce même contexte les politiques et stratégies moins porteuses? Pourquoi? 3) Avez-vous, toujours dans ce contexte, des commentaires particuliers à formuler quant au rôle des technologies de l’information et de la communication (TIC) 4) …. le système « mobile money » d) Performance Projet HIFIVE 1) Etes-vous familier avec le projet HIFIVE ? 68  2) Avez-vous eu l’opportunité d’interagir avec des bénéficiaires ou des opérateurs de ce projet ? 3) Où, et dans quelle contexte ? 4) Quelles sont les actions les plus pertinentes menées par le projet HIFIVE pour faciliter l’inclusion financière des agriculteurs du monde rural? 5) Quelles ont été les actions les moins pertinentes menées par le projet HIFIVE pour faciliter l’inclusion financière des agriculteurs du monde rural? e) Opinions sur les options qui devraient être prises pour mieux garantir l’inclusion financière et améliorer l’accès des agriculteurs du monde rural au crédit 1) Quelles recommandations souhaiteriez-vous formuler pour réorienter les (ou guider l’orientation des) politiques publiques pour une plus grande inclusion financière? 2) Quels programmes prendriez-vous comme cible, et quels objectifs voudriez-vous spécifier? 3) Quels sont les défis et les contraintes les plus importants qui vont s’opposer à l’atteinte de ces objectifs? 4) Sur quels grands axes d’intervention/d’actions planifiez-vous vous lancer dans les prochains mois ou les années à venir ? 69 D2. Questionnaires, Institutions financières 70 CHAMP 1 IDENTIFICATION & CARACTÉRISTIQUES GÉNÉRALES 1 NOM ET PRÉNOM DU REPONDANT NOM PRÉNOM 2 TITRE/FONCTION 3 NOM DE L'INSTITUTION 4 TYPE D'INSTITUTION 1 Caisse d’épargne et de crédit 2 Banque, filiale et satellite de banque 3 ONG 4 Fondation 5 Association 6 Autres 5 BUT DE L'INSTITUTION LUCRATIF NON LUCRATIF 6 NOMBRE D'ANNÉES D'ACTIVITÉ 7 LOCALISATION DU SIEGE SOCIAL COMMUNE DEPARTEMENT 8 NOMBRE DE SUCCURSALES Port-au-Prince Villes de province Zones rurales 9 MOIS DE DÉBUT EXERCICE FISCAL 71  JANVIER AVRIL OCTOBRE 10 ACTIF FIN EXERCICE FISCAL 2014 (EN GOURDES) DECEMBRE MARS SEPTEMBRE 11 NOMBRE D'EMPLOYÉS Hommes Femmes 12 ACTIF AU 30 SEPTEMBRE 2014 NIVEAU DE FORMATION DU PERSONNEL DE CREDIT 13 (%) NON SCOLARISE PEU DE SCOLARISATION ECOLE PROFESSIONNELLE UNIVERSITAIRE AUTRE TOTAL 100% 14 CORPS DE MÉTIER DES CADRES (NOMBRE) GESTIONNAIRE COMPTABLE INFORMATICIEN AGRONOME INGENIEUR AUTRES (SPECIFIER) 72  15 AFFILIATION 1 ANACAPH 2 ANIMH 3 DID (LE LEVIER) 4 KNFP 5 ANACAPH/DID 6 ANIMH/KNFP 7 Autres 16 BÉNÉFICIEZ-VOUS DIRECTEMENT OU INDIRECTEMENT D'UNE ASSISTANCE DU PROJET HI-FIVE? OUI-DIRECTEMENT OUI-INDIRECTEMENT NON SI OUI, POUVEZ-VOUS LISTER LE STYPES D"ASSISTANCE QUE VOUS 16.1 FOURNIT HI-FIVE 16.2 DEPUIS QUAND? (ANNÉEE) BÉNÉFICIEZ-VOUS DIRECTEMENT OU INDIRECTEMENT D'UNE ASSISTANCE 17 SIMILAIRE A CELLE OFFERTE PAR LE PROJET HI-FIVE A TRAVERS UNE AUTRE INSTITUTION? OUI-DIRECTEMENT 73  OUI-INDIRECTEMENT NON SI OUI, POUVEZ-VOUS LISTER LES TYPES D'ASSISTANCE QUE VOUS 17.1 FOURNIT CETTE AUTRE INSTITUTION? INSITUTION 17.2 DEPUIS QUAND? (ANNÉEE) 74  Ventilation par sexe des bénéficiaires et selon la 18 méthodologie employée Méthodologie/sexe Nombre d’emprunteurs (Hommes) Nombre d’emprunteurs (Femmes) Au Au Au Au Au Au 30/9/2014 Au Au Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2014 30/9/ 30/9/2012 30/9/2011 30/9/ 30/9/2013 30/9/2012 2013 2010 Crédit direct individuel Banque communautaire Groupe solidaire Mutuelles de solidarité Autre crédit _______________________ _________ Total Ventilation par sexe des bénéficiaires et selon la 19 méthodologie employée Méthodologie/sexe Portefeuille brut en gourdes (Hommes) Portefeuille brut en gourdes (Femmes) Au Au Au Au Au Au 30/9/2014 Au Au Au Au 30/9/2014 30/9/ 30/9/201 30/9/201 30/9/ 30/9/201 30/9/2012 30/9/2011 30/9/2010 2013 2 1 2010 3 Crédit direct individuel Banque communautaire Groupe solidaire Mutuelles de solidarité Autre crédit _______________________ _________ Total 75  Ventilation par 20 secteur d’activité Secteur d’activités En % du portefeuille brut (en HTG) Au Au Au Au Au 30/9/2014 30/9/2013 30/9/2012 30/9/2011 30/9/2010 Production Commerce Services Consommation Logement Education Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Ventilation par zone (urbaine ou rurale) - nombre 21 d’emprunteurs Zone Nombre d’emprunteurs Au Au Au Au Au 30/9/2010 30/9/201 30/9/201 30/9/201 30/9/2011 4 3 2 Port-au-Prince Province zones urbaines Zones rurales Total 76  Ventilation par zone (urbaine ou rurale) - volume de 22 crédit Portefeuille en HTG Zone Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 Port-au-Prince Province zones urbaines Zones rurales Total L'INSTITUTION RECOIT-ELLE DES 23 DEPOTS? OUI NON NOMBRE DE 23.1 DÉPOSANTS Type Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 Déposants volontaires Déposants obligatoires Total NOMBRE DE 24 COMPTES Type Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 77  Déposants volontaires Déposants obligatoires Total SOURCE DE FONDS : 25 Volume de dépôts Type Volume d’épargne (en HTG) Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 Déposants volontaires Déposants obligatoires Total SOURCE DE FONDS : 26 Autres ressources Ressources autre Montant des autres ressources financières (en gourdes) que l’épargne Au 30/9/2014 Au 30/9/2013 Au 30/9/2012 Au Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2011 Emprunt institutionnel à moyen et long terme, à taux commercial Emprunt institutionnel à 78 moyen et long terme, à taux concessionnel Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux commercial Emprunt institutionnel à court terme à taux concessionnel Autres passifs Subvention capitalisée Fonds propres Total 79  Champ 3 : Données financières 27 Qualité du portefeuille de prêts Montant en gourdes Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 Portefeuille de prêts Portefeuille avec plus de 30 jours d’arriérés Montant des provisions (Bilan) Montant des radiations de l’année 28 Structure de l’actif Type Montant en gourdes Au 30/9/2014 Au Au 30/9/2012 Au 30/9/2011 Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2013 Liquidités (Caisse+Comptes courants) Immobilisations nettes Autres actifs improductifs par nature Total actifs non-productifs Portefeuille net Placements Autres actifs productifs par nature Total actif productifs par nature Total de l’actif Amortissements accumulés 80 29 Structure des revenus bruts Type Revenus bruts (en HTG) Au Au Au Au Au 30/9/2010 30/9/2014 30/9/2013 30/9/2012 30/9/2011 Revenus d intérêt sur prêts Revenus de frais de dossiers Autres revenus du crédit Revenus d’intérêts sur placement (dépôts) Autres revenus Total revenus bruts Perte nette 30 Structure des charges Type Montant des charges financières (en gourdes) Au 30/9/2014 Au Au Au Au 30/9/2013 30/9/2012 30/9/2011 30/9/2010 Charges financières Frais du personnel Dépenses liées aux pertes sur prêts (dont les dotations aux provisions) Autres dépenses d’exploitation Total charges Total Bénéfice net 81  Champ 4 : Produites et services 31 Avez-vous les produits et services OUI NON SI OUI, DEPUIS QUAND? MOTIVATION/INCITATION suivants ? Achat / Vente de devise Assurance Chèque Coffre-fort Provision de petite monnaie Transfert d'argent sur l'étranger Transfert d'argent à l'intérieur du pays Dépôts/gourdes: Dépôts/dollars: Crédit/gourdes: Crédit/dollars: Autres services (spécifier) Utilisez-vous les technologies 32 suivantes dans la livraison des OUI NON SI OUI, DEPUIS QUAND? MOTIVATION/INCITATION services et le suivi des opérations ? Guichet ambulant Technologies portables (ex : palm pilot) Téléphone cellulaire Services intercaisse 82  Cartes à puce Services informatisés 33 Taux d’intérêt moyen sur l’épargne Type Taux d’intérêt moyen Epargne volontaire Epargne obligatoire Taux moyen nominal de rémunération des prêts 34 Taux d’intérêt moyen sur les prêts Taux moyen de commission % d’épargne oblig. (en moyenne) 83  Champ 5 : Gouvernance 35 Avez-vous un Conseil d'Administration? OUI NON 35.1 Si OUI: Nombre de membres Nombre de réunion par année 36 Avez-vous un comité de crédit? OUI NON 36.1 Si OUI: Nombre de membres Nombre de réunion par année Existe-t-il une structure de contrôle interne 37 au sein de votre insitution? OUI NON 37.1 Si OUI: 37.1.1 Comment s'appelle cette structure 84 37.1.2 De quelle instance dépend-elle? 38 Est-ce que vous effectuez des audits externes régulièrement? OUI NON 38.1 Quelle instance commandite l'audit externe? 38.2 A quand remonte le dernier audit externe effctué? (DATE) 39 Quelle instance approuve le budget? 40 De quels outils de gestion administrative disposez-vous? DATE OUI NON D'APPLICATION Plans stratégique Plan d'affaires Règlement intérieur Manuel de procédures administratives Manuel de gestion des ressources humaines 41 De quels outils de gestion financière informatisé et sécurisé disposez-vous? DATE OUI NON D'APPLICATION Comptabilité Crédit Personnel 85 Autres 86 OBJECTIF 1: MEILLEUR ACCES DES CHAINES DE VALEUR AU FINANCEMENT OBJECTIF 2: AMELIORATION DES ZONES RURALES AUX PRODUITS ET SERVICES FINANCIERS Combein de nouveau produits et services financiers avez-vous 42 lancés depuis 2010, et dans quel domaine ou segment du marché? Produit/service Domaine Non Agricole (filière) agricole Combien de clients avez-vous pu toucher grâce à ces 43 innovations? 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Nombre de clients Port-au-Prince Villes de province Zones rurales Dans le cas des filières agricols, quelle est la valeur totale du 44 portefeuil de prêts accordé? 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Port-au-Prince Villes de province Zones rurales 87 OBJECTIF 3: PLUS GRANDE UTLISATION DES TIC A L'EFFET D'AUGMENTER LE NIVEAU D'INCLUSION FINANCIERE 45 Quels nouvaux moyens technologiques (TIC) avez-vous adoptés ou introduits entre 2010 et 2014 pour augmenter l'accès de la population que vous desservez aux services financiers? Outil 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Système de paiement Système de back office 46 Avez-vous apporter des modifications à votre système de gestion d'information (MIS) pour l'adapter aux nouvelles outils adoptés? NON OUI 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 A combien estimez-vous le nombre de clients servis par les TIC adoptés? 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Nombre de clients Variation en % (d'année en année) 47 A combien estimez-vous le nombre de clients enregistrés au système "mobile money" sur les cinq dernières années ? 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Nombre de clients 88 48 A combien estimez-vous le nombre d'usagers actifs du système "mobile money" ? (ayant effectué au moins 1 transaction au cours des derniers trois mois ou 90 jours) Nombre de clients actifs 49 De combien d'agents disposez-vous pour le système de "mobile money"? Nombre d'agents Quel volume de transactions (en gourdes) pouvez-vous imputer au channel "mobile money" au cors des 6 derniers mois? Volume 89  Evaluation et recommandations 50 Quel crédit accordez-vous au projet HIFIVE quant à la performance de votre institution quant aux résultats suivants? Très Peu Significatif Majorité peu 1 2 3 4 Amélioration de l'accès des filières agricole au crédit Amélioration de l'accès au crédit dans les zones rurales Adoption des TIC Par ordre d'importance, selon vous, quelle stratégie ou intervention garantit mieux l'inclusion 51 financière? 1 2 3 Pourriez-vous formuler cinq recommandations par ordre de priorité à l'endroit de HIFIVE ou 52 de programmes similaires pour l'amélioration et l'étendue des services offerts? AMÉLIORATION INTERVENTIOSN EXISTANTES ÉTENDUE SERVICES OFFERTS 1 2 3 4 5 * inclusion financière: amélioration de l'accès d'un plus gand nombre aux services financiers. 90 D3. Questionnaire : responsables associations agricoles 91  0 Nom de l'association 0.1 Localisation du siège social: Département Commune Ville 1 Dans quelles filières agricoles vos membres évoluent-ils? 1.RIZ 2.Banane 3. Café 4. Cacao 5. Aviculture 6. Sel 7. Mangue 8. Autres 1.1 Nature des principaux services aux membres-producteurs Appui technique Crédit Formation Achat de matière première Autre ________________ 2 Quelle fonction occupez-vous au sein de cette association? 3 Depuis quand occupez-vous cette fonction? 4 Depuis quand votre association existe-t-elle? 5 De combien de membres cette association est-elle composée? 1. Producteur 2. Non Producteur 92  6 Etes-vous agriculteur? 1. OUI 2. NON Sur une échelle de 1 à 5, pouvez-vous nous dire votre degré de 7 familiarité avec les opérations, les activités, et le fonctionnement de vos membres? 1. Pas du tout familier 2. Pas familier 3. Plus ou moins familier 4. Familier 5. Très familier 8 Par quels moyens assurez-vous ce degré de familiarité? 1. Visite de leurs opérations 2. Echanges/Conversations 3. Tourner des affaires (vente/acquisition) avec eux 4. A travers des tiers 5. Ensemble de ces moyens Autres 9 Quelles sont les principales activités commerciales de l'association? Vente d'intrants Commercialisation groupée 10 Diriez-vous que la majorité des membres participe activement aux activités de l'association? 1. OUI 2. NON 11 Combien de fois l'association se rencontre-t-elle par année? 93  Quels ont été selon vous les plus grands succès enregistrés par vos 12 membres dans le déroulement de leurs activités au cours des cinq dernières années 1. Plus grand accès au crédit 2. Augmentation de la production 3. Accès amélioré aux circuits de la commercialisation se traduisant par de meilleurs prix pour leurs produits 4. Adoption de techniques améliorés 5. Augmentation de leurs revenus 6. Autres 13 En référence aux succès enregistrés par vos membres, quel crédit accordez-vous au programme HiFIVE? 1. Très peu 2. Peu 3. Significatif 4. Majorité 5. Tout le crédit Référez-vous à la liste ci-dessous pour identifier les 3 facteurs les plus 14 importants qui expliquent les échecs essuyés par (ou le manque de performance de) vos membres au cours des cinq dernières années dans le domaine de leurs activités agricole? Manque d'accès au crédit Intempéries (cyclones, glisement de terrain, innondation, ...) Manque d'accès au marché Prix trop bas sur le marché Irrigation 94  Manque d'assistance technique (agronomes et techniciens) Distance jusqu'au marché Manque de bras Manque d'intrants (engrais, semances) Autres Dans quelle mesure, pensez-vous que le programme HIFIVE a contribué à 15 alléger ces contraintes (relever ces défis) grâce à un meilleur accès aux ressources financières? 1. Pas du tout 2. Pas vraimemt 3. Plus ou moins 4. Substantiel 5. Beaucoup 16 Quelle proportion de vos membres a accès au crédit? Aucun Très peu La moitié La grande majorité Tous Concernant le crédit, quels ont les plus grandes complaintes de vos 17 membres? 1. Trop onéreux 2. Montant accordé insuffisant (trop faible) 3. Ressources non disponibles à temps 95  4. Demande de collatéral (garanties) 5. Temps de remboursement trop court Autres Pensez-vous que les femme parmi vos membre s ont un accès plus 18 restreint au crédit? 1. OUI 2. NON 18.1 Si OUI, A quoi attribuez-vous ce résultat? Par ordre d'importance, selon vous, quelle stratégie ou intervention 19 garantit mieux l'inclusion financière? 1 2 3 Pourriez-vous formuler cinq recommandations par ordre de priorité à 20 l'endroit de HIFIVE ou de programmes similaires pour l'amélioration et l'étendue des services offerts? AMÉLIORATION INTERVENTIOSN EXISTANTES 1 2 96  3 4 5 1 ÉTENDUE SERVICES OFFERTS 2 3 4 5 Comment de manière générale pensez-vous que vos 21 membres envisagent le futur de leurs production agricole? 1. Très pessimiste 2. Pessimiste 97  3. Quelque peu pessimiste 4. Optimiste 5. Très Optimiste A quoi attribuez- vous ces 22 anticipations? 98