|
Microfinance Initiative in Indonesia
November 2009
By Sahil Sondhi

Overview of Micro-Business in Indonesia
There are 51 million businesses in Indonesia, most of which do not have access to formal banking. A breakdown of the industry is shown below:

Our partner organization KOMPIP (discussed below) has and will continue to service the productive poor segment.
An overview of loans and savings in Indonesia’s financial system is provided in the table below. Legal structures for microfinance initiatives in Indonesia vary and include banks, non-bank financial institutions (NBFI), non-profit foundations, and cooperatives.

While the above data is outdated it is still useful to demonstrate the low level of microfinance representation in the aggregate financial activity of Indonesia. This implies a significant potential for growth. More current data will be acquired from Bank Indonesia if needed.
The KOMPIP Model
Branches of KOMPIP:
- Social Justice
- Good Governance
- Microfinance (DARMA & DAMAR-KOMPIP)
KOMPIP attempts to achieve a holistic approach to improving the lives of marginalized people in central Java by focusing on both social empowerment and economic advancement. This includes social service delivery, community organizing, disaster risk-reduction training, advocacy, livelihood and employment education, and microfinance. The organization’s long-term vision is to achieve the provision of healthcare, education, housing and employment to as many people as possible.
The management structure of KOMPIP consists of a seven-member supervisory board, seventeen daily officers split across four branches and a four-person administrative structure for each neighborhood.
KOMPIP has a strong presence in central Java and has established a wide network and broad-based support.

The microfinance wing of KOMPIP is comprised of a three-year old neighborhood endownment fund and a newly created cooperative.
1. NEF
This is the fourth operating year of DARMA-KOMPIP’s revolving fund. Out of 198 original neighborhoods, 193 are still operating with a membership of 7000 people. 5 neighborhoods are in Jogjakarta and the remainder are in Klaten.
DARMA-KOMIP’s neighborhood endowment fund provides its members with access to small loans for microbusiness purposes. Each neighborhood has an administrative structure composed of a leader, secretary, treasurer and debt collector.
DARMA-KOMPIP provides marketing and microbusiness management training to its borrowers. Loan repayment percentage rates have been in the high 90’s and the community has responded well to KOMPIP’s holistic approach. Additionally, in all 193 neighborhoods the revolving fund has grown substantially larger, allowing increased access and larger loans.
Due to the success of this program in increasing incomes and standards of living, DARMA-KOMPIP is in the process of replicating its NEF model in the Solo area, encompassing 2668 neighborhoods and 500,000 people. In order to facilitate this pilot project, a 2.3 billion rupiah (~US$240,000) seed grant has been pledged by the government of Solo from its poverty alleviation budget. It is hoped external grants will be obtained to cover adminstration and capacity building costs.
2. Cooperative
The cooperative will act as a legally independent microfinance institution that builds on the successful NEF model and supplements the services it currently provides. This is imperative because while the NEF has been remarkably successful in improving the lives of its members, it is limited in that it only provides access to relatively small loans. Vital services such as savings are not provided.
Named DAMAR-KOMPIP (“Power of the Marginalized People”), the cooperative will allow members to access larger loans, savings, and retirement services. The NEF will act as a screening process to identify the most economically productive poor who will thereafter be eligible for membership and access to these services. In addition, KOMPIP will use its network and ten years of experience in community empowerment to assist the cooperative’s members to gain access to social services that have been pledged by the government, especially in the areas of education and healthcare.
A separate office with new staff will be established for DAMAR-KOMPIP. For the first year, a small staff consisting of a treasurer, coordinators and secretaries will oversee the initial base of 2000 members. At this juncture, a conceptual model is being put together that will capture the strategy and specific mechinisms of DAMAR-KOMPIP. An ensuing financial projection will provide a timeline for reaching profitability.
A draft proposal has been submitted to HIVOS for consideration and we have received a response requesting clarification on certain issues, a strategy for measuring development outcomes and a financial projection for three years.
Requirements for the Cooperative’s Conceptual Model & Financial Projection
Scale to be sustainable and profitable
a. Financial model?
b. Branch model?
c. B.E.P (break-even point) --> 3 or 5 year model
d. Roll out
Questions for the model:

1. First and foremost, what is the purpose of the proposed entity and efforts? This must be at the core of everything that is done.
Broadly, the purpose of microfinance initiative is to improve the lives of impoverished people. Using the NEF as a base, the cooperative is hoped to expand on the success seen so far by expanding scope and reach.
2. What is the target community of this operation? Geographically based? Industry-based? (i.e. Agriculture, seller, micro-business, service.) What kind of money are the potential members/clients currently working with? Who are the main players (microfinance) in the arena? What are the needs of the members/clients?
The target community begins with the Solo area but is hoped to expand outwards over time. Using the existing geographically-based neighborhood structure, members/clients of a variety of micro-business backgrounds will be included. The cooperative will target the “productive poor” category with loan sizes less than 3 million rupiah ($315). These communities mainly need access to savings services and loans at reasonable cost. While it is unclear what other microfinance options are technically available to our target community, it is evident that most people have effectively little or no access to microfinance services.
3. What is the “Unique value position” here? What is this proposed operation offering that differs from what is currently available? How will the results likely be different to those of other operations?
Firstly, KOMPIP is an established organization that has served the Solo area for years. KOMPIP has experience in community organizing and has good networking. In the economic realm, the NEF has operated for over three years and its success is known throughout the community. Therefore, attracting membership to the cooperative will be easier to facilitate. Also, KOMPIP aims to supplement its economic empowerment projects with social empowerment, such as advocating access of its members to government-subsidized heathcare and education so that increased economic power is used for livelihood instead of necessity.
4. What is the working system of this operation? The people? The process? (recruitment, training, performance management, management information system, measurement and evaluation techniques, etc.) Also, what is the key process- credit, operational, compliance?
There is currently no concencus on the working system of the cooperative but we are close to an agreement. The progress of the conceptual model is detailed below in “Issues to explore.”
All these factors must be in the financial model (3 or 5 years) that shows the approach to the break-even point.
Issues being explored
1) Objectives and results
Financial sustainability must be balanced with development outcomes; financial returns must be enough to ensure a path towards sustainability but modest enough so as not to dampen development outcomes. A framework of measuring results which combines these two umbrella objectives must be put in place.
i) Financial sustainability
A management report will be developed that regularly provides results based on the following items:
- Net interest income
- Operating expenses
- Cost of credit
- Delinquency
- Recovery
- Profit (dividends that can be re-injected into the community)
- Interest rate for borrowers and for savers
- Size of the solidarity groups (Most neighborhoods consist of 30-50 people; Grameen groups are usually 20 people)
Financial projection will be created at the solidarity group level and will be aggregated and extrapolated based on number of groups. The information above will be included in the projection, as well as the roll-out plan (number of groups in years 1, 2 and 3) and the break-even point.
ii) Measurement of development outcomes
Most microfinance initiatives share the same development outcome goals. Mitra Bisnis Keluarga’s (MBK- the most well-known Grameen-based microfinance initiative in Indonesia) method to measure these goals uses control groups that do not have access to finance and comparing several of their indicators to those of client groups
A) Housing index- access to and quality of housing
B) Financial- average income per household and per capita
C) Health & welfare- spending patterns, diet and meat consumption, education and healthcare
D) Empowerment- mumber of hours worked, rates of employment, change in level of participation, change in authority over spending decisions, and ID cards for access to government services
We will adapt and apply MBK’s method after assessing feasibility and availability of relevant data in KOMPIP’s operations.
2) Conceptual model for the cooperative
- What will be the decision-making process on matters such as membership eligibility, loan approval, loan extension, interest rates, etc?
- To what extent can the Grameen model be applied?
- Gender partiality in groups? All female like Grameen or representation by both genders? Current KOMPIP NEF model has strong male representation and therefore Grameen policy of females only may not be viable if we are to build on the NEF structure.
- Solidarity group lending and mutual responsibility?
- Size of groups? The most straightforward way to employ the current NEF structure would be to use existing neighborhoods as groups, yet Grameen groups consist of twenty people while the NEF neighborhoods are between thirty and fifty people in size. Should these neighborhoods be split into two groups or is one much larger Grameen group viable?
- Systems of checks and balances
- Measurement and evaluation techniques
- How can the model become profitable as soon as possible, and how can profits be best re-injected into the community?
3) Mitra Bisknis Keluarga (MBK) Partnership issues
MBK is known as the most successful microfinance institution (MFI) in Indonesia and is renowned in microfinance circles around the world. Detailed information about this MFI can be found at http://www.mbk-ventura.com/
Currently, we are working to form a partnership with MBK. Operating mainly in West Java, MBK is looking to add a healthcare component to its communities. RMF is looking to set up a mobile clinic for MBK. Meanwhile, MBK has pledged its support and expertise for KOMPIP’s operations in central Java.
The current challenge regarding this partnership is how to best make use of the assistance MBK will provide for KOMPIP’s NEF expansion and cooperative creation. Our operating assumption at this point is that it is more reasonable to employ an existing and successful model for microfinance than to formulate a new and untested one. MBK’s Grameen implementation has met with great success and we hope to apply this model to KOMPIP’s cooperative as much as possible.
RMF’s objective with KOMPIP in Indonesia is the creation of a successful and replicable model for Microfinance. The realization of this objective depends on strong capacity building support and funding. With MBK as a partner and with the strong network of contacts listed below, capacity building support has likely been achieved. This support will facilitate the formation of strong proposals and financial projections to receive funding support.
|
| |
|
The Neighborhood Endowment Fund (NEF) as
Grassroot Income Generating Model in Java,
Indonesia
May 2009
By Nicholas Taranto & Akbar Oedin Arif
Key Take-Aways:
• RMF-KOMPIP developed a bottom-up model to enhance
family income. • More than 6,000 members spread across 190
neighborhoods. • Since 2007 KOMPIP has distributed US$32,900.
After two years, the fund has grown to US$52,452. • We are excited by funding
commitments from the local government and the opportunity to achieve large
gains in the fight against Indonesian
poverty.
Neighborhood Endowment Fund (NEF)
Supported by the Real Medicine Foundation since 2006,
KOMPIP has developed a bottom-up model to generate and enhance family
income. What we translate as “the neighborhood” is in fact a unique
Indonesian grass root organization consisting of 20 to 40 families.
Neighborhoods (Rukun Tetangga in Indonesian) are formal institutions
proscribed by the National Government of Indonesia. In most areas in
Indonesia, Neighborhoods have been playing the role of administrative
support to village governments for the past three decades. When Indonesian
citizens living in rural areas need identification cards or property
certificates, they must apply and register through their neighborhood
head. Neighborhoods also have their own tradition of social cohesion. They
have routine monthly meetings to discuss security, sanitation, and other
pressing needs.
The Neighborhood Endowment Fund is simply a community
savings and loan model which is designed for a lifetime of membership. By
being based in neighborhoods, NEFs can directly serve the poorest of the
poor. Starting with a village named Mlese, KOMPIP is now replicating its
model in seven other villages. More than 6,000 people have become members
in NEFs spread across 190 neighborhoods.
The KOMPIP-RMF partnership
supports these neighborhoods by distributing seed grants for about US$250
per neighborhood. Members in each neighborhood fund then add capital by
contributing membership fees starting at US$.50. Members also contribute
regular monthly savings as additional capital. Circulated as community
follow-on loans, NEFs grow as borrowers pay interest of 1 to 2% per month
until repayment of the principal. Since 2007 KOMPIP has distributed
Rp329.000.000,- or US$32,900. After two years, the fund has grown to
US$52,452. Tabel 1.5. Capital growth in seven villages (in
’000s Indonesian Rupiah*)
|
Village |
Seed
grant |
Membership savings
fee |
Monthly
saving |
Individual
saving
|
Early
capital |
Collected
interest |
Others |
Total May 2009
|
|
Brangkal
|
44.000 |
4.753 |
5.615 |
1.721 |
2.300 |
4.048 |
|
62.437 |
|
Mlese
|
47.500 |
37.049 |
13.358 |
|
|
21.520 |
28.829 |
148.256 |
|
Tirtomarto
|
38.000 |
9.595 |
6.773 |
2.318 |
|
5.164 |
|
61.850 |
|
Kalangan
|
84.000 |
5.531 |
5.373 |
2.520 |
|
1.940 |
765 |
100.129 |
|
Sumopur
|
48.000 |
3.391 |
4.726 |
|
|
5.897 |
1.010 |
63.025 |
|
Birit
|
42.500 |
4.577 |
3.983 |
|
|
4.151 |
660 |
55.871 |
|
Sawit
|
25.000 |
1.910 |
2.783 |
|
|
3.174 |
87 |
32.954 |
|
Total
|
329.000 |
66.806 |
42.611 |
6.559 |
2.300 |
45.896 |
31.352 |
524.525 |
* Exchange rate at time of report was 10,000 Rp to 1US$
Local Government of Surakarta/Solo is interested in
replicating and scaling the Neighborhood Endowment Fund (NEF)
model.
In late 2008, based on KOMPIP’s success, the Local
Government of the city of Surakarta/Solo expressed interest in replicating
the endowment fund model to all neighborhoods in Surakarta. However, due
to its limited local funding capacity, the Government is seeking a
continued partnership with RMF. Assuming that RMF can provide support for
human resource mobilization, the Government has committed to provide seed
grants to all 2,628 existing neighborhoods in Surakarta. The Mayor, Mr.
Jokowi has passed his letter of partnership interest to RMF and has
committed to provide US$262,800 in funding – a 5X expansion over KOMPIP’s
current loan portfolio.
Despite its small initial size, we believe
this partnership will make dramatic improvements in the lives of poor
people. As the Mayor plans to continue allocating additional seed funds in
the future each fiscal year, the opportunity to achieve large gains in the
fight against Indonesian poverty is very exciting.
People’s First Endowment: Large-Scale Use of Community Savings to Reduce Poverty: A Proposed Project Between Real Medicine Foundation & KOMPIP, March 2008
Nicholas Taranto & Akbar Oedin Arif
|
| “The most important principle is that the fund is always
working for and supporting the poor.” -- Akbar Oedin Arif, CEO KOMPIP |
|
|
KOMPIP has arrived at a juncture in its development of the
Community Savings Model. Pilot programs run over the past five years through
KOMPIP’s field laboratory have proven that Community Savings funds are not only
feasible, but that they produce returns of over 100% per annum in the most
successful cases. While Akbar and I were initially entertaining the idea of
taking the model for-profit – as has been done successfully in Mexico with Compartamos
– we ultimately have decided that maintaining not-for-profit status focused on
plowing profits back into the respective funds is the most effective way to
grow the community funds while providing maximal grants to prospective
borrowers, namely the extremely poor.
|
| |
Led by Akbar, KOMPIP is now ready to begin the executive
modeling phase of the Third Fiscal Devolution (TFD). The idea behind TFD is to
provide Java (and ultimately the rest of Indonesia) with a model that is
capable of integrating funding mechanisms and micro-credit distribution
channels to eliminate Indonesian poverty once and for all. To date, federal
budgeting has distributed funding through regency and city channels. The TFD
focuses on bringing the distribution of public funds down to the village and
neighborhood level. The distribution of public finance lower down the
proverbial social ladder has been empirically shown to reduce corruption and
enhance the impact of each dollar spent. |
| |
In order to begin execution of the executive modeling
phase, Akbar and I have made preliminary evaluations regarding the needed
financing. Akbar has engaged the district regent (Bupati) who has agreed to
provide the seed capital needed to launch a district-wide community savings
fund. KOMPIP’s work to date in eight different villages has proven their model,
and has prepared the regent to lend district government support to the process.
The regent has agreed to provide the equivalent of US$50,000 in seed capital in
the form of a grant to KOMPIP to establish Lumbung Rakyat Pertama (the People’s
First Endowment). |
| | Real Medicine’s Role |
| |
The $50,000 provided by the regent will serve as the
Endowment’s seed, generating returns on the order of 18-30% per annum. In
addition to the seed, yet-to-be determined initial and subsequent deposits
(most likely $1 per month and $.50 per month, respectively, depending on the
ultimate decision framework) made by villagers who belong to the Endowment will
continue to bolster the fund. |
|
|
In order to execute on this strategy, the Endowment will
need initial capitalization from Real Medicine to cover the costs of
administration, education, and documentation. These costs, as estimated on the
next page, total US$31,050. These costs include overhead for district level
administration; village level administration, education, and documentation for
15 villages; and neighborhood level education for 450 neighborhoods. These
costs are estimated around comparable costs incurred while establishing
previous programs. |
|
| The potential exists to partner with Hands On Disaster
Relief (HODR) in order to split the costs of funding. While commitments from
HODR have not yet been secured, the organization has supported community
savings work through KOMPIP in the past, has worked on the ground in Klaten after
the 2006 earthquake, and is likely to support future financial engagements. |
|
|
I have agreed to take on this project, and will serve as a
consultant and liaison between Western donors and project administrators on the
ground in Indonesia. |
|
|
Throughout the process of implementing the People’s First
Endowment, KOMPIP will, per usual, collect poverty data that can be used by
local, district, provincial, and ultimately the federal government in order to,
as Akbar has put it, “Spoil the poor.” When expanded to its full potential, the
Endowment will provide loans to over 25,000 poor individuals.
|
|
ESTIMATE OF COSTS FOR INITIAL CAPITALIZATION | |
BY REAL MEDICINE
FOUNDATION | |
| COSTS |
US$ per 4 months |
| DISTRICT LEVEL |
|
| ADMINISTRATION |
|
| Coordinator |
1200 |
| Treasurer |
1000 |
| Accountant |
1000 |
| Assistant |
700 |
| TOTAL (1X) |
3900 |
| |
|
| VILLAGE LEVEL |
|
| ADMINISTRATION |
|
| Field Staff |
800 |
| EDUCATION |
|
| Village Meeting |
150 |
| DOCUMENTATION |
|
| Laptop (used) |
200 |
| Guide Modules |
20 |
| Stationery |
20 |
| Misc |
20 |
| TOTAL (15X) |
18150 |
| |
|
| NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL |
|
| EDUCATION |
|
| Neighborhood Meeting |
20 |
| TOTAL (450X) |
9000 |
| |
|
| TOTAL COSTS |
31,050 |
|
Third Fiscal Devolution For Neighborhood Endowment Fund (NEF) | Résumé From 7 Years of Field Laboratory KOMPIP-Indonesia |
| March 2008, Akbar Oedin Arif |
| | KOMPIP is developing a new model of Community Savings
called the Neighborhood Endowment Fund (NEF). The development of this new fund
goes along with the effort to realize the third fiscal devolution. | |
The first fiscal devolution happens when the central
government delivers publicly budgeted finance and a certain degree of authority
to the regency level. The second fiscal devolution happens when regency
governments deliver comparable budgeting from the regency to the city. The
third fiscal devolution is KOMPIP’s proposed next evolution in public finance.
The third fiscal devolution happens when cities and villages deliver budgetary
discretion to the village and neighborhood level.
|
|
KOMPIP has worked on materializing
the third fiscal devolution for over seven years. After a long struggle
together with other NGOs in Indonesia to manifest the second fiscal devolution,
Indonesia has now implemented this second fiscal devolution. |
|
Since 2003 KOMPIP has succeeded to
persuade one village to implement the third fiscal devolution as an example.
However, it is important for KOMPIP to continue this process and to keep piloting
this vision to determine how the funds should be used in the most effective way
and for the highest benefit to the poor. | |
As the CEO of KOMPIP, I have
piloted participatory poverty assessment since the year 2003. The piloting has been
followed by giving seed grants to three neighborhoods in Boyolali City in
Central Java, Indonesia. These three neighborhoods used the seed grants for
poverty alleviation applying different strategies. The first neighborhood,
Tegal Harjo, used the seed grant implementing revolving ducks. The second
neighborhood, Deresan, used the fund for revolving goats. Different from the
other two neighborhoods, the third neighborhood used the seed grant for the implementation
of community saving. We received our inspiration from this third neighborhood.
| |
After one year, the first and the
second neighborhoods stopped their process of poverty alleviation. Meanwhile,
the third neighborhood has been sustaining the implementation of community
savings up to today.
|
|
A pilot program of the Neighborhood Endowment Fund has run
for the past five years. Through field laboratory work, we could prove that
Community Endowment funds, which work like community savings, are not only
feasible, but they produce returns of over 100% per annum in the most
successful cases. | |
However, the NEF is different from
community saving. The difference is in its management which is organized by
volunteers and it does not attract individual saving. Can it survive being
managed voluntarily? The answer is yes. NEF’s members meet once a month to
collect savings and distribute loans. By meeting only once a month, the burden
on the volunteer workers will not be too much. Volunteers rotate every year so
all members take responsibility in how to sustain the NEF. |
|
Why does it not need to attract
individual saving? So it won’t have to risk sustainability. Why does individual
saving risk sustainability? Because the individual saver
tends to ‘invest’, not to donate. When a member starts to save
individually, he will make it a priority to receive benefits of his investment.
The more benefit he wants, the more will he try to control and direct the rules
in the save and loan processes. Rules should always go in direction of the poor
while the rich merely support and strengthen them. | |
Individual saving would also
direct the saving and loan process to a need of professionals who need salary.
Imagine as an example that if there are 40 members in one neighborhood of NEF, there
will be potentially about 80 to 120 transactions a month. Officers will very
soon complain: I work everyday now! I cannot go to do other work now! Finally, they
will say: You have to pay me! When NEF has to pay professionals, the
professionals will start to swallow the benefit of interest or even all the
endowment in the neighborhood.
|
|
Rules that people can learn from
NEF is that “You as people in your neighborhood can donate without you losing
your money!” But if you are very much eager to donate your money without having
to get it back, that would be great! People from anywhere else may donate to
NEF, but the rules of the NEF will be the only ones applied: |
|
So, possible sources of NEF could be: | |
1.Membership savings
2.Monthly savings
3.Interest
4.Donations 5.Third Fiscal devolution | |
So, if community savings and coop are
mostly entertaining the idea of taking the model for-profit, NEF should
ultimately be maintained as having not-for-profit status. To focus on plowing
profits back into the respective funds is the most effective way to grow the
funds while providing maximal grants to prospective borrowers, namely the
extremely poor. |
|
KOMPIP is currently replicating the
experiment in Sorowaden to seven villages in earthquake areas in Central Java
and Yogyakarta. The NEF in the seven villages is very promising in its
sustainability, as the total seed endowment has increased 37% after a mentoring
period of four to six months. This again verifies that after every year the
fund can increase 50 to 100%. |
|
Judging from our experiences in the
field, one neighborhood can potentially collect NEF US$3,000 to US$5,000 after
seven years. Imagine you have US$5,000 and you will need to alleviate half of the
families in your neighborhood out of poverty. |
|
The biggest challenge of NEF in neighborhoods
in Indonesia within the next two to five years is to establish a good example
and model that one city in Java adopted for its third fiscal devolution for
NEF. It is also important to have a good example in each of the big islands in
Indonesia. Why? Because NEF should be able to be successful,
sustainable and scaleable in different social and cultural contexts. It
is our goal to pioneer and practice, and to find challenges in different
neighborhoods, in different social and cultural situations, to resolve those
challenges before NEF is truly replicated in a wide range of neighborhoods in
Indonesia. |
|
|
|