Extensive coverage of the "You Deserve to Know" (#YouDeserveToKnow) campaign in the national Ghanian media features quotes from <a href="https://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/bio/alexandra-rizzi">Alex Rizzi</a>, Director of the Smart Campaign.

"This series aims to equip clients with the knowledge they deserve to know to make the best financial decisions for themselves,” Rizzi stated in a <a href="https://www.pulse.com.gh/lifestyle/events/consumer-protection-global-consumer-advocate-launches-you-deserve-to-know-campaign/72tlsjv">Pulse</a> article. Coverage of the campaign also appeared in <a href="https://www.graphic.com.gh/news/general-news/financial-literacy-campaign-launched.html">Graphic Online</a> and <a href="https://citinewsroom.com/2019/02/26/global-consumer-advocate-launches-youdeservetoknow-campaign/">Citi Newsroom</a>.

The campaign focuses on improving the financial enabling environment by educating the public in two topic areas, transparency and fraud.

Listeners in Ghana can tune in to <a href="https://www.facebook.com/adom106.3/">Adom 106.3 FM</a> on Thursdays, 5:30 pm local time, to hear the programs. The episodes include drama and expert interviews on the topics. <a href="https://radio.modernghana.com/station/adom1063fm">Live streaming</a> of Adom 106.3 FM is also available.

The "You Deserve to Know" campaign is in collaboration with <a href="http://www.fiforumafrica.org/">Financial Inclusion Forum Africa</a>.

This Smart Campaign video below provides an introduction.

Smart Campaign's "You Deserve to Know" Radio Campaign Featured in Ghanaian Media

The Smart Campaign

Ghana

Sub-Saharan Africa

Consumer Protection

Enabling Environment

Fraud

Transparency

News

As digital credit providers have grown exponentially over the past few years, and as digital products and models have proliferated, so too have concerns around consumer protection. In the recently published report, <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/publications-a-resources/browse-publications/1036-responsible-digital-credit">Responsible Digital Credit</a>, I argue that ensuring that digital credit customers receive responsible treatment requires more than enhanced consumer protection laws and regulations. It also requires strong commitment from the digital credit industry. Finally, it needs consumers who are empowered to play a more proactive role in managing their digital credit responsibly.

Over the past year, I have interviewed digital credit industry associations, credit providers and their third-party data analytic providers, regulators, policy makers, and various consumer protection leaders. Many of these groups are working to develop responsible digital lending principles. With their input, my report proposes a guiding framework for responsible digital lending.  The framework uses the Smart Campaign <a href="https://www.smartcampaign.org/about/smart-microfinance-and-the-client-protection-principles">Client Protection Principles</a> as a basis for grouping the issues. In addition, I propose an eighth principle: security and fraud protection.

Digital credit, and especially the use of mobile phones, significantly alters interactions between borrowers and lenders. Lenders utilizing the mobile channel to advertise, acquire and transact with customers must pay particular attention to the limitations of mobile interaction with customers and follow industry <a href="http://onlinelendersalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Best-Practices-2016-1.pdf">mobile best practices</a>. While many of the standard consumer protection practices continue to apply, new concerns, or more accurately, new faces on older concerns, have emerged. In this post, I want to highlight several of the considerations I found most important and relevant for the digital lending industry.
<h2>Responsible Algorithms</h2>
Many digital credit models rely on algorithms to process data about clients and make credit decisions. Because most lenders consider their algorithms proprietary, it is difficult for observers to know on what basis credit decisions are actually made. This opaque situation raises the spectre of discrimination. Attributes that are considered inappropriate bases for differentiation, such as religion, language, gender, or ethnic origin, are areas of particular concern with regard to algorithm-based lending practices. As highlighted by a Smart Campaign <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/publications-a-resources/browse-publications/916-smart-brief-tiny-loans-big-questions">report</a>, while credit offers may differ based on risk analysis, such differentiation should be consistently applied, stated in advance, and made with the goal of benefitting clients. To prevent discriminatory digital credit practices, some recommendations include:
<ul>
 	<li><a href="https://www.whitecase.com/publications/insight/algorithms-and-bias-what-lenders-need-know">Pretest, test and retest for potential bias</a>. Digital credit providers and third-party data analytics providers should continuously monitor the outcomes of their algorithmic programs to identify potential problems. Such testing could involve running scenarios to identify unwanted outcomes and developing and building controls that prevent adverse outcomes.</li>
 	<li><a href="http://www.ijmo.org/papers/43-A10212.pdf">Document the rationale for algorithmic features</a>. Digital credit providers should be able to provide visualization and a decision tree for the factors their algorithms analyze, as well as the justification for relying on these factors. The rationale should address how borrower debt capacity is assessed, given the importance of this concept in traditional underwriting.</li>
 	<li>Independent review of companies' proposed data sets and/or algorithms.</li>
</ul>
A self-regulatory approach could be used to develop best practices guidelines for data inputs and the development of nondiscriminatory artificial intelligence systems, following the model that has been successful for the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council.
<h2>Indebtedness Monitoring</h2>
Because digital lending is often based on non-traditional underwriting criteria, to prevent over-indebtedness among digital borrowers it may be relatively more important to monitor outcomes at the portfolio level. Some of the ways to do this include:
<ul>
 	<li>Avoidance of debt traps by ensuring that clients are not forced into automated repeat loans.</li>
 	<li><a href="http://www.responsiblebusinesslending.org/">Responsible credit reporting</a> – Better compliance with reporting strengthens markets and leads to better client protection practices.</li>
 	<li><a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/storage/documents/Smart_Brief_Tiny_Loans_Big_Questions_Final_092617.pdf">Monitoring digital credit provider’s portfolio quality</a> – Industry benchmarks for portfolio quality can help to advance the understanding of risks and avoid business models that rely for their success on high default rates.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Digital Transparency </h2>
Digital credit platforms allow for 24/7 communications with clients that, if harnessed properly, can assist them with immediate technical support, remind them about upcoming payments and even identify counselors or resources for clients in financial stress. However, when communication is totally digital, there are heightened concerns about ensuring that clients really know what they are signing up for. Disclosure must lead to client understanding. Borrower disclosure standards should address:
<ul>
 	<li>Standards for honest advertising and penalties for misleading marketing materials of credit products. Furthermore, providers should advertise the name of the financial regulator they report to in all advertising materials.</li>
 	<li>Readability and format – Disclosures need to be easy to comprehend, available in the customer’s local language, and provided in print and digital formats.</li>
 	<li>Comparative tools – Standard summary disclosure documents would allow borrowers to compare credit offers, both digital and traditional.</li>
 	<li>Adequate notice periods – Consumers should be notified in advance of changes to interest rates, fees or terms and conditions.</li>
</ul>
A somewhat different but related and relevant concern, often overlooked in this context, is the vulnerability of individual investors who put their money into pure peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platforms. Protections need to be extended to them as well, with a focus on ensuring that they receive the information they need to evaluate risks and that they have recourse channels when something goes amiss.
<h2>Data Privacy and Usage Standards</h2>
While many regulators and most industry groups agree that it is important to protect the confidentiality and security of customers’ information, data use and the level of disclosure about its use are challenging topics. In the <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/reform/index_en.htm">EU</a> and in countries such as <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/data-access/thedraft">Australia</a>, regulators are enacting rules mandating that individuals be notified about the use of their personal data and allowed to opt out. Opt-out rules should be considered as a potential requirement for all digital credit providers, especially in markets where mobile push-marketing has become problematic.

Over the next several years it will be important for laws or regulations to be put in place to protect consumer data privacy and guide information sharing. The rules need to:
<ul>
 	<li>Provide for informed consent, such that customers explicitly permit electronic data collection prior to its collection and use, and are given the option to consent or not.</li>
 	<li>Require providers to have a clear data collection and handling policy which limits the amount of data collected as well as the timeframe it is stored.</li>
 	<li>Inform clients about their data trails and credit histories, including the ability to ensure accuracy and correct for any errors or discrepancies.</li>
 	<li>Give regulators the power to discipline providers who repeatedly allow personal data to be misused.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Fraud Prevention and Security </h2>
New security vulnerabilities arising from digital credit strongly point to fraud and cyber-security as consumer protection concerns. It is increasingly urgent for digital credit providers to adopt standard security compliance measures and then to regularly test and update them. Providers must also be responsible for ensuring that the third-parties they use, including lead generators, brokers, agents, and data analytics providers, also have adequate security in place. Ultimately, providers need to be responsible for the actions of their third-parties (e.g., agents, contractors, lead generators, brokers and collectors).

Consumers should be made aware of the potential for fraud and encouraged to report suspected fraud cases or security breaches. Consumer awareness campaigns on the most common incidents of fraud (via the internet, SMS alerts, signage at agent kiosks, etc.) can help with this.

While the recommendations just listed do not apply in all markets, they do point to the urgent need for regulators, industry bodies, individual providers and consumers to work together to construct the ground rules for responsible digital credit that will ensure that consumers are adequately protected.

Editor's Note: This research was made possible by support from Mastercard Foundation and other partners.

&nbsp;

A Framework for Responsible Digital Credit

CFI Research Fellows Program

Digital Credit

Financial Technology

Mobile Banking

Over-indebtedness

Policy, Regulation and Government Initiatives

Privacy

Responsible Digital Finance

Blog Post

Can your skin color help predict whether you may be financially exploited in the United States? Unfortunately, even in 2018, the answer is still yes.

In February of this year, Wells Fargo was <a href="http://www.wisebread.com/how-to-fight-back-against-mortgage-discrimination">sued</a> by the city of Sacramento, California for allegedly discriminating against black and Latino mortgage borrowers since 2004. The specific charge, raised against the country’s third-largest bank in terms of assets, was providing these clients with more expensive loans compared to those offered to white borrowers.

Across the country, in Baltimore, Maryland, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/31/opinion/sunday/racial-penalties-in-baltimore-mortgages.html">a study</a> that found that black homeowners were charged higher interest rates and disadvantaged at every stage in the borrowing process compared to similarly qualified white borrowers – even taking into account factors such as credit scores, income and down payments. Over the span of a 30-year loan, the researchers say, discrimination against black borrowers cost them an extra $14,904 each, compared with white borrowers.

Homeownership is one of the most important ways for working and middle class families to build generational wealth. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, <a href="http://www.nareb.com/site-files/uploads/2017/09/SHIBA2017-final-for-web-0918.pdf">69 percent</a> of a household’s net worth in America lies in the net equity in their home. And investigations have repeatedly shown that people of color pay a heftier price to achieve wealth than their white counterparts.

What are the economic implications of financially exploiting people of color in home ownership? More expensive mortgage loans translate into higher monthly payments, lower savings, and a higher risk of default and foreclosure. On a macro-level, consequences include a stagnant homeownership rate among people of color, a yawning (<a href="https://qz.com/1087711/the-racial-wealth-divide-is-worse-than-people-think-and-its-growing/">and growing</a>) racial wealth gap, and continued institutional discrimination against people of color in the United States.

As a national consumer advocacy entity, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFBP) is designed to investigate claims of nefarious behavior among financial service providers and ensure that providers treat consumers fairly. However, its Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity was <a href="https://www.americanbanker.com/news/cfpbs-mulvaney-strips-his-fair-lending-office-of-enforcement-powers">stripped of its power</a> earlier this year, with the removal from its mandate of oversight and enforcement. Commenting on the move, Lisa Donner, executive director of Americans for Financial Reform <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/02/01/trump-administration-strips-consumer-watchdog-office-enforcement-powers-lending-discrimination-cases/p7L5FAbNZisXTAuUvkeeAP/story.html">remarked</a>, ‘‘These changes . . . threaten effective enforcement of civil rights laws, and increase the likelihood that people will continue to face discriminatory access and pricing as they navigate their economic lives.”

The burst of the U.S. housing bubble yielded the Great Recession, which spread throughout world. Its origins in reckless lending in the subprime market convinced many people involved in the financial sector that consumer protection was urgently needed. In response to this gap, the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law was passed. However, the current administration has since rolled back banking regulations, making it harder to detect discriminatory mortgage lending practices. <a href="https://www.stltoday.com/business/local/discriminatory-mortgage-lending-harder-to-detect-as-banking-regulations-rolled/article_c31cdd14-7b9e-5f55-80dd-28bbdf2fb6e3.html">Signed in May 2018</a>, the new Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act would exempt <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bank-bill-deregulation-congress_us_5b043b70e4b0c0b8b23ea6cd">85 percent</a> of banks from reporting detailed information about mortgage loan applicants. This means it will be more difficult to identify systemic issues, conduct research about them, and respond with corrective action.

As borrowers of color in the U.S. continue to access credit with the goal of owning a home, and the steady deliberate weakening of institutional watchdogs and regulations continues, the future of consumer protection in financial services for all remains in jeopardy. As banks continue to backslide into more discriminatory and predatory practices towards people of color, we as consumers and advocates should continue to be aware of and vigilant about them.

&nbsp;

Skin Color Still Costly: Discrimination in the U.S. Mortgage Market

United States

Financial Service Providers

Housing Finance

Underserved Groups

March 15 is <a href="http://consumersinternational.org/what-we-do/world-consumer-rights-day/">World Consumer Rights Day</a> (WCRD), a day marked by the consumer movement each year to raise global awareness about consumer rights and needs. It’s an opportunity to demand that the rights of all consumers are respected and protected, and to protest against market abuses and social injustices which undermine those rights. The Smart Campaign marks this occasion by talking about the importance of transparency and grievance redressal as key tenets of client protection and building consumer trust.

WCRD’s theme this year is “Making Digital Marketplaces Fairer.” With the volume of online transactions increasing, consumers are exposed to new – sometimes not fully understood – risks. For this reason, WCRD 2018 is calling for access to fair and secure internet for all, action against scams and fraud, and better consumer protection online.

According to Consumers International, <a href="http://consumersinternational.org/media/154916/e-commerce-overview-report.pdf">nearly half</a> of consumers that have access to internet but do not shop online cite lack of trust as the reason. Similarly, <a href="http://consumersinternational.org/what-we-do/world-consumer-rights-day/2018-making-digital-marketplaces-fairer/">almost 70 percent</a> of online consumers worry their digital payments are unsafe. What contributes to this lack of trust? The causes vary, but they often hinge on two things: lack of transparency and insufficient grievance redressal mechanisms.
<h3>Transparency</h3>
For the Smart Campaign, transparency means much more than disclosure agreements. Even when these are in place, <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Synthesis_Report_ENG_FINAL.pdf">research shows</a> that low-income clients rarely fully understand the terms and conditions (T&amp;Cs) of the product they purchased. Many times, when the T&amp;Cs are explained simply and thoroughly, they are <a href="https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/dfs/Documents/01_2017/ITU_FGDFS_Report-on-Review-of-DFS-User-Agreements-in-Africa.pdf">often in English</a> instead of in the language of the customer. Sometimes <a href="http://www.cgap.org/sites/default/files/Working-Paper-Competition-in-MFS-Kenya-Tanzania-Jan-2016.pdf">third-party charges or hidden fees</a> aren’t fully disclosed up front, but only after the purchase is finalized. In other cases, the entire price is hidden until <a href="http://www.cgap.org/sites/default/files/Focus-Note-Consumer-Protection-in-digital-Credit-Aug-2017.pdf">after the completion of the purchase</a>.

On World Consumer Rights Day, we remind digital financial service providers and online marketplaces to transparently and effectively convey important product information so their customers fully understand. As pointed out in our recent Smart Brief, <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Smart_Brief_Tiny_Loans_Big_Questions_Final_092617.pdf">“Tiny Loans, Big Questions,”</a> clients should also be able to store and save T&amp;Cs related to their digital purchase or transaction, just as they should for a face-to-face one. If clients are confused or feel misled by the provider, trust is eroded. Alternatively, when providers meet consumers where they are by using their language and being completely transparent about business practices and pricing, they are taking an important step in building customer trust and loyalty.
<h3>Recourse Mechanisms</h3>
<img class="alignright wp-image-25279" style="border: 0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/03/pull-quote-2.png" alt="" width="315" height="207" />Consumers of practically every product or service are bound to have complaints or questions regarding their purchase or transaction. This issue is especially relevant in digital marketplaces, since there tends to be limited human interaction. On top of that, customers who are new to the technology or not familiar with digital interfaces may be confused and are therefore likely to require customer service. <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Smart_Brief_Tiny_Loans_Big_Questions_Final_092617.pdf">“Tiny Loans, Big Questions”</a> points out that problem resolution can be particularly difficult when clients are using a lending service that involves multiple companies, as in the case of mobile lenders using a mobile network operator’s agent network for cash-in and cash-out payments. Borrowers in this situation are interacting with agents who are not full-time employees and likely do not work for the lender. Although agents offer a human touch, as cash transactions are their primary duty, they may have little ability to field questions or resolve problems related to the loan product.

On World Consumer Rights Day, the Smart Campaign stresses the right of consumers to access simple, fair redress. We know that if customers do not have an easily accessible grievance redressal mechanism when things go wrong, they will be less likely to trust the product or service they’re buying. However, if the customer feels heard and sees that their needs are adequately addressed, trust is strengthened. Fair redress can be achieved by setting up well-staffed call enters or establishing online chats between staffers and customers, for example. <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/storage/Uniting_TechandTouch_Kenya_FINAL.pdf">CFI Fellow Alexis Beggs Olsen</a> advocates for “centaur solutions” combining digital and human interfaces to best support low-income customers using digital financial services, while improving customer acquisition and retention.
<h3>Moving Forward</h3>
At the Smart Campaign, it’s our job to stay on top of risks to clients around the world and to work with financial service providers and other parties to help mitigate those risks.  While the risks themselves change over time, one thing remains constant: if consumers do not trust the service, product, provider or platform, these entities will struggle to reach their full potential and it will be harder to achieve meaningful financial inclusion.  At the end of the day, customers being heard and respected through grievance redressal channels and transparent business practices are two of the most critical components to building consumer trust. Only when this trust is in place can digital marketplaces and financial services providers do their part in making a <a href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%23BetterDigitalWorld&amp;src=tyah">#BetterDigitalWorld</a>.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/06/05/the-smart-campaign-promotes-stronger-client-protection-and-sector-collaboration-in-uganda/">The Smart Campaign Promotes Stronger Client Protection and Sector Collaboration in Uganda</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/08/03/the-microfinance-ceo-working-group-reports-out-consumer-protection-by-the-millions-and-other-updates/">The Microfinance CEO Working Group Reports Out: Consumer Protection By the Millions and Other Updates</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/12/19/nigeria-needs-to-include-consumer-protection-in-its-ambitious-financial-inclusion-plans/">Nigeria Needs to Include Consumer Protection in Its Ambitious Financial Inclusion Plans</a>

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

&nbsp;

This World Consumer Rights Day, Let’s Build Trust

Keeping Clients First

Complaint Resolution

Credit

Nano Loans

CFI Fellow Patrick Traynor, an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) at the University of Florida, explains the second part of his research effort on the security and privacy of data in digital lending applications. Patrick’s previous post, explaining the first part of his research on evaluating the privacy policies of digital lending applications, can be found <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/06/28/why-do-privacy-policies-matter-for-digital-credit/">here</a>.

“I’m sorry, but we are just not interested in providing security for our customers.”

Here is a phrase that you are unlikely to see from any company, at least if they want to stay in business. In fact, you are far more likely to see statements to the opposite. Yet time and again, the same services that tout security as something they care about prove to be tremendously vulnerable. Think about it – when was the last week that you didn’t hear about stolen Bitcoins, ransomware attacks, or data breaches?

If companies care so much about security, what is going on?
<h2>What Does "Secure" Mean?</h2>
Security is one of the least well-defined terms I know. By itself, it completely lacks context. Secure against what? Against whom? Under what conditions? Based on what assumptions?

As an analog, think about a restaurant that claims to care about “consumer health.” Is this statement regarding ingredients in their meals? Calories? What about cleanliness? How is the food prepared? Do employees really wash their hands after using the restroom? Most would agree that it is insufficient to simply trust such claims, and we rely on external entities (e.g., health department ratings, government regulations for calorie counts on menus, etc.) to give “consumer health” more measurable meaning.

The answers to my above “security in context” questions become deeply technical very quickly. In fairness, it is debatable whether it is realistic for the general public to understand these details. Regardless, this gap between specificity and understanding often permits real security considerations to end at exceedingly broad public statements. If nobody checks or bothers to define what security means, the thinking often goes, why bother to go further?

That’s where my team comes in – think of us as the health department for the security of online credit systems.

Before I go into further details, let’s make something clear. “Security” is hard. Even if you answer all of the context questions above, ensuring that you get it right all of the time in every location is something that nobody seems to know how to do well. Unlike most other engineering, where major assumptions remain within a predictable range (e.g., when building a bridge, winds, currents and the pull of gravity are all accounted for in the design), security faces the problem of constantly evolving adversaries. That means that what worked perfectly well yesterday may do very little to protect systems tomorrow. That said, we cannot write off security as an inevitable failure just because it is hard. Moreover, there are many tried and true techniques that absolutely should be in place for anyone to begin tossing around the word security. Our job is to ensure that we see these techniques in place and working correctly.
<h2>What Are We Measuring?</h2>
If we are specific about what we claim is secure, it is possible to understand the ways in which systems are likely to be strong. For my <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/programs-a-projects/cfi-fellows-program">CFI Fellowship research</a> on the security of online credit applications, I am measuring the characteristics of the connection between mobile devices and the server within the application provider’s network. While it possible to measure the security of many parts of an online credit system, the most critical is ensuring that connections between mobile devices and the service provider’s servers is secure. Accordingly, we focus our attention here. The figure below shows this in more detail.

[caption id="attachment_23960" align="aligncenter" width="616"]<a href="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/patrick-traynor-graphic.png"><img class="wp-image-23960" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/patrick-traynor-graphic.png" alt="" width="616" height="215" /></a> A high-level overview of our security analysis[/caption]

Why is this the right thing to measure? Simply, if a user cannot communicate securely with a company’s server, nothing else matters. An adversary need not bother to try to breach other security if this portion is poorly executed. Think of it this way – if the online credit provider’s system were a castle, we are most interested in the protections around the drawbridge over the moat. If nobody is watching who and what comes across that drawbridge, it does not matter how high the castle walls may be. Said differently, systems that do not get this part of security correct might as well be saying that quotation from the beginning of this post.

My team will characterize security with regards to the following metrics. First, we will look to see whether or not the mobile device uses strong encryption algorithms to protect the confidentiality (i.e., the secrecy) and integrity of all communications. Mobile platforms contain many different encryption algorithms, but even the best algorithms can be used in dangerous ways. Accordingly, we will reverse engineer mobile applications (where available) and determine which algorithms their developers have chosen.

Second, we will measure how mobile devices confirm the identity of the server. This is critical – when done poorly, a mobile device is happy to divulge any and all secrets to an adversary on the other end of a connection. There are some standard ways that an expert would expect this step to be done, and our previous published work on mobile money (<a href="http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~traynor/papers/reaves-usenix15a.pdf">Reaves, et al., Mo(bile) Money, Mo(bile) Problems: Analysis of Branchless Banking Applications in the Developing World, Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium (SECURITY), 2015</a>) showed that approximately 50 percent of applications analyzed in that space did so incorrectly.

Finally, we will measure the configuration of the servers with which a mobile device communicates. Poor configuration here could again render the connection vulnerable as an adversary may be able to force the selection of weak/no cryptographic algorithms encrypting communications.

One major advantage to this analysis is that fixes to these problems can also be achieved at relatively low cost. Specifically, any faults that we find will not require impacted companies to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to deploy advanced detection systems. Rather, a combination of changes by their development team and administrators can potentially address these issues in short order. We intend to alert all of the impacted companies prior to the release of our final report.

As a final note, finding no faults in this portion of a system does not mean that everything is secure. Moreover, this kind of analysis requires significant resources and time to carry out. It is our hope that each of the companies we study see these results as a first step, and use them to start a broader internal discussion about what they are doing to ensure security inside their company (e.g., creating policies about software updates and patching machines, establishing mechanisms for researchers who discover vulnerabilities to provide responsible disclosure of vulnerabilities, deployment of mechanisms for the secure storage of sensitive data, etc.).

No single analysis can measure all aspects of security. However, we look forward to sharing our results with the general public and the financial inclusion community in the near future. Together, we can ensure the transformative power of these systems while minimizing risks to users.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/05/01/how-secure-is-data-used-in-digital-credit/">How Secure Is Data Used in Digital Credit?</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/05/15/data-are-not-neutral-part-1-of-2/">Data Are Not Neutral (Part 1 of 2)</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/06/28/why-do-privacy-policies-matter-for-digital-credit/">Why Do Privacy Policies Matter for Digital Credit?</a>

&nbsp;

How Secure Are Emerging Digital Credit Services?

&gt; Posted by Kyle Burgess, Executive Director and Editor in Chief, Consumers Research

[caption id="attachment_23631" align="aligncenter" width="490"]<img class="wp-image-23631 size-large" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/4880265002_5bf1a62db3_z.jpg?w=490" alt="From cash to digital currency" width="490" height="210" /> Image Credit: <a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/famzoo/">FamZoo Staff</a>. No alterations made. <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/">CC BY-SA 2.0</a>[/caption]

Digital currencies, such as Bitcoin and its underlying blockchain protocol, introduce a technical platform for a new global payment infrastructure that <a href="http://consumersresearch.org/research/bretton-woods-2015-white-paper/">has the potential</a> to level the playing field for the 2.5 billion people across the globe who are unbanked or underbanked. The immutable and distributed nature of digital currencies and a number of the platforms built on top of blockchain protocols can provide improved security, efficiency, affordability, privacy, and transparency in financial transactions, as well as a whole host of other transfers of value or information. Furthermore, thanks to the proliferation of mobile devices, blockchain-based digital currencies can even remove the middleman, and serve as a bank in your pocket. However, fully removing a third party intermediary comes with significant risks, as there’s no one to call if you lose your private key (which functions as your password), break your hardware wallet (which acts as your digital vault), or want to dispute a payment because the goods you purchased are damaged (because digital currency transactions are irreversible). Like any other product, consumer protection must be at the forefront of the development and implementation of digital currency and blockchain-based financial services.



Over the last few years, policy makers and federal regulators have been advising the blockchain community to develop a set of best practices to address such consumer protection concerns. Several have even cautioned that government solutions may prove to be over-burdensome if the industry fails to demonstrate that it takes consumer protection seriously. This has the potential to diminish the benefits of blockchain technology and limit its ability to foster financial inclusion. Each year <a href="http://consumersresearch.org/">Consumers’ Research</a> hosts a workshop in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in the spirit of the first such conference in 1944. The <a href="http://www.brettonwoods2016.com">Bretton Woods 2016</a> conference brought together representatives from legislative, regulatory, and enforcement bodies, as well as a diverse array of fintech, traditional financial industry, and blockchain experts in order to tackle these consumer protection challenges collaboratively. Consumers’ Research, along with the help and expertise of its workshop participants, produced the first industry-led, self-regulatory consumer protection effort in the digital currency space.

The guiding principles document, “<a href="http://consumersresearch.org/research/bretton-woods-2016-protecting-consumers-in-the-digital-currency-economy/">Consumer Protection in the Digital Economy</a>” has four main components:
<ol>
 	<li> The State of Consumer Protection in the Financial Services Industry&nbsp;

This section identifies the assumptions from which current consumer protection models are derived – the first being that consumers must trust their money and information to third parties in order to participate in the formal economy and the second being that individual consumers are ill-equipped to assess the trustworthiness of third parties. It then describes how blockchain-based digital assets, such as bitcoin or a tokenized property title, challenge those assumptions. This section also identifies which types of digital currency entities the proposed guiding principles are meant for, and reviews the U.S. government entities that have released consumer advisories, taken enforcement actions, or developed rules regarding bitcoin, other digital currencies, and the entities utilizing digital currencies and assets."</li>
 	<li> Consumer Bill of Rights &amp; Guiding Principles&nbsp;

A consumer bill of rights and 14 parallel guiding principles address consumer protection challenges in terms of security, privacy, usability, and disclosures and liability. The bill of rights outlines the baseline "rights" of consumers along with the minimum standards needed to protect those rights. Furthermore, it encourages companies to uphold these guiding principles by implementing processes and detailed protocols that are well-suited to their unique business models, instead of prescribing a one-size-fits all set of mechanisms that may work for some businesses but not others.</li>
 	<li> Consumer Protection Challenges&nbsp;

This section examines the flaws, failures, and weaknesses of existing financial industry frameworks, as well as newer digital currency and distributed ledger products and services. Using a top down approach, this section identifies the problems faced by consumers using traditional financial services and digital currency or distributed ledger financial services, as well as the source of those problems – be it regulation, corruption, or bad design.</li>
 	<li> Recommended Solutions&nbsp;

Working from the bottom up, this section recommended solutions to the problems posed in the previous section are offered, identifying which guiding principles address the various challenges faced by consumers.</li>
</ol>
Across the globe, policymakers and regulators that are prioritizing financial inclusion efforts, tend to achieve the most success in places where policy and regulatory environments protect consumers while fostering innovation and encouraging competition through “regulatory sandboxes.” As such, it’s urgent that the blockchain industry demonstrates that it takes consumer protection seriously in order to stave off regulation that hampers the value proposition of digital currencies and blockchain technologies. If the industry fails to take action to put consumers first, it is possible that government entities will take a reactionary and overzealous approach to solving issues as they arise.

We are already seeing U.S. regulators shoehorn some digital currency businesses into ill-fitting or inappropriate regulatory frameworks. For example, some state licensing regimes apply money transmitter laws to <a href="https://coincenter.org/entry/food-for-thought-a-federal-safe-harbor-for-non-custodial-cryptocurrency-users">non-custodial blockchain businesses</a> that do not have custody of or control the movement of digital currencies; rather, they manage and supply the infrastructure that enables other businesses or individuals to hold and move digital currencies. This harms American consumers, because these businesses cannot afford to operate in an environment that requires unnecessary licenses. Instead, these businesses seek safe harbor abroad, taking their innovations and product offerings with them.

Furthermore, no consumers are better off when the regulatory environments of states with strong institutions and effective rule of law are so cumbersome that businesses flee to states where consumer protection laws are paltry or unenforced. Thankfully, as blockchain businesses adopt consumer protection best practices, regulators may be encouraged to put down Maslow’s hammer and focus on offering light-touch regulation, only where necessary. This will give businesses the breathing room they need, and it will afford consumers greater access to these transformative technologies, along with the protections necessary to safeguard their meaningful participation.

Protecting Consumers in the Digital Currency Economy

Agent Banking

Digital Financial Services

CFI Fellow Patrick Traynor, an Associate Professor in the Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) at the University of Florida, is launching his research effort on the security of data in mobile lending applications.

Mobile phones and networks are transforming the world of financial inclusion. However, we know that we cannot simply “copy and paste” traditional financing mechanisms into this mobile context and expect widespread inclusion. For example, the traditionally-excluded often lack the standard data lenders use to underwrite credit decisions (such as government audited tax forms, formal pay stubs, property deeds, and so forth). A plethora of companies are attempting to measure creditworthiness using alternative data – including the data trail created through mobile money applications. Alternative data for underwriting holds the potential to dramatically expand access to credit if successful, but it also poses new challenges.

For instance, how secure is data used in digital credit?

In my CFI Fellowship, I will measure the state of data security in the mobile money space and provide both a goal and a path towards responsible online credit.

My team and I are performing an extensive teardown of mobile applications including those offering online credit. After a technical analysis of these applications and how they handle user data, we plan to evaluate the privacy policies for each application to see if they describe how the data will be protected, how it will be used, and the recourse available to users should it be incorrect.

It is only by having deeply characterized the behaviors of the industry that we can begin to offer recommendations for what responsible online credit looks like and how far the industry is from achieving it. We expect to find that the integrity of data gathered from mobile money applications will vary dramatically and that the lack of a process to verify and/or challenge such information will limit the reach of alternative efforts to establish creditworthiness.

Methodological approach:

My past research looked at the security of mobile money applications for the Android mobile platform. Through that work, I was able to demonstrate that much of the industry fails to adhere to security best practices. Moreover, the terms of service dictated by companies in this space hold users liable for all fraud. These findings have called the industry to attention and provoked corrective efforts. Under the CFI Fellowship, I will conduct a similar analysis targeting specifically online credit applications for mobile money users.
<ul>
 	<li>App Identification and Gathering: The first step is to work with stakeholders throughout the community to identify candidates for analysis. This process will allow to identify the most relevant players in this space (i.e., those with the largest potential market and impact), and ensure a geographically representative sample.</li>
 	<li>App Teardown and Analysis: Analysis of the collected mobile applications will involve automated techniques. The tools that allow rapid assessment of the state of communications security between the mobile device and the online credit provider’s back end servers. This analysis will include not only a determination of whether or not the mobile application properly determines identity at the other end of communications, but also whether the back end servers are properly configured against the most up-to-date attacks against the SSL/TLS security suites.</li>
 	<li>Policy Analysis: Each application comes with a terms of service document. My past experience demonstrated that such documents place the consequences of fraud solely upon the user regardless of the technical soundness of the application. Accordingly, in this round, I will analyze terms of service documents for online credit providers, looking specifically for language that indicates 1) which data will be targeted by the provider, 2) how it will be used to determine creditworthiness, 3) how users can challenge or confirm the validity of such data, and 4) if such data can be resold to other parties without further explicit notification to the user.</li>
</ul>
All technical advances made as part of this work will be offered to the public as free, open-source projects. One broad objective of the work is that these tools will enable students from universities across the world to be trained in the security analysis of applications, and that the companies in this industry will recreate the methodology and apply it to future offerings of their products to improve security.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/03/01/mobile-money-in-myanmar-going-directly-from-cash-to-digital/">Mobile Money in Myanmar: Going Directly from Cash to Digital</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2017/02/07/modelo-peru-whats-next-for-the-groundbreaking-mobile-money-platform/">Modelo Peru: What’s Next for the Groundbreaking Mobile Money Platform?</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/01/why-do-we-so-often-get-the-mobile-money-agent-value-proposition-wrong/">Why Do We So Often Get the Mobile Money Proposition Wrong?</a>

&nbsp;

How Secure Is Data Used in Digital Credit?

When most microfinance clients start out, they’re first-timers at a formal financial institution. Like anything unfamiliar, a first foray with banks can be intimidating. You don’t want to be duped or make a mistake and lose precious savings. Peace of mind was granted to clients of two microfinance institutions, one in Paraguay and the other in the Dominican Republic recently as the first <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/certification/">Smart Certifications</a> in those countries were awarded. Fundacion Paraguaya and Banco ADOPEM were certified as meeting all the standards needed to treat their clients with adequate care. This certification demonstrates to prospective clients as well as investors and other industry stakeholders that their institutions are operating responsibly.

Fundacion Paraguaya and Banco ADOPEM are both market leaders in their own right. Banco ADOPEM is one of the largest microfinance institutions in the Dominican Republic. According to the MIX, 351,000 depositors in the Dominican Republic bank with Banco ADOPEM. When Banco ADOPEM pursues and achieves Smart Certification, that sends a message to MFIs and other stakeholders in the country that client protection is a key priority. In 2014 ADOPEM was named “Most Innovative Microfinance Institution of the Year” by Citi, in part because of <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;cad=rja&amp;uact=8&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiqm5rRtcvNAhVBVT4KHQJ6A7AQFggfMAA&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bancoadopem.com.do%2Fapp%2Fdo%2Fproductos.aspx%3Fid%3D1408%26iid%3D1406&amp;usg=AFQjCNGgptkSBD2J3D7ZsUJPbBnM2oBakA&amp;sig2=2F9CvETC8A2D75Fe1H3ozw">ATA-Movil</a>, a portable electronic application that allows credit advisers to assess customers in their businesses or in their homes. The mobile information system also allows for convenient and direct communication with clients.

Mercedes de Canalda, President and Founder of Banco ADOPEM, told the Smart Campaign that the MFI’s decision to pursue Smart Certification was to evaluate the institution’s policies and practices against the industry’s best practices in areas like transparency and communication with clients. She said, “The deep evaluation of our policies and procedures opened our eyes to what we can improve. The biggest advantage is that it gave us reasonable and concrete goals and a specific timeline to improve our practices. It was a detailed requirement. It challenged us to innovate and continue to improve to ensure that clients are treated well and that they are heard.”

Fundacion Paraguaya has long been a leader and innovator in microfinance and in the broader fight against poverty, contributing to areas like <a href="http://www.fundacionparaguaya.org.py/?page_id=490">poverty assessment</a>, <a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2013/09/05/disability-inclusivity-and-the-smart-campaign-at-fundacion-paraguaya/">financial inclusion for persons with disabilities</a>, and <a href="http://www.fundacionparaguaya.org.py/?page_id=77">youth empowerment</a>. The <a href="http://www.centerforfinancialinclusion.org/publications-a-resources/global-microscope">Global Microscope</a> 2015 reports that client protection regulation in Paraguay is lacking. For example, it lacks strong grievance redressal mechanisms and does not adequately prevent aggressive collection practices. The report also finds there are mounting concerns over over-indebtedness among lower-income groups in the country and that the government needs to devise and implement a national program to ensure greater education about financial services. Fundacion Paraguaya, along with its strong client protection practices, offers <a href="http://www.fundacionparaguaya.org.py/?page_id=491">a range of financial education services</a>, including services to <a href="http://www.fundacionparaguaya.org.py/?page_id=517">children and youth</a> via uniquely structured, financially sustainable programs.

There have been a number of other recent Smart Certifications: Amret Microfinance, Prasac, Sathapana Bank, and VisionFund in Cambodia; Grooming Centre and Fortis Microfinance Bank in Nigeria; AgroInvest in Serbia; Pro Mujer in Nicaragua; FINCA in Georgia; Annapurna Microfinance in India; Tamwil El Fellah in Morocco; Pichincha Microfinanzas in Ecuador; and FINCA in Mexico. The total number of certified institutions is now 60, and together these institutions serve over 26 million consumer protected clients.

For more on Smart Certification, including a listing of certified institutions, visit <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/certification/certified-organizations">the Smart Campaign website</a>.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2016/03/21/a-client-protection-milestone-50-smart-certified-institutions-25-million-clients-covered/">Disability Inclusion, in Ecuador and Around the World: An Interview with Larry Reed</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2016/03/21/a-client-protection-milestone-50-smart-certified-institutions-25-million-clients-covered/">A Client Protection Milestone: 50 Smart Certified Institutions; 25 Million Clients Covered</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/03/26/smart-certification-kashf-foundation-takes-the-lead-in-pakistan/">Smart Certification: Kashf Foundation Takes the Lead in Pakistan</a>

&nbsp;

Client Protection Firsts in Paraguay and the Dominican Republic

Dominican Republic

Latin America and The Caribbean

Paraguay

Global Microscope

Microfinance Institutions

Smart Certification

If you’re plugged into the world of online marketplace lending then you heard this week’s <a href="http://www.pymnts.com/news/alternative-financial-services/2016/lending-club-investigation-renaud-laplanche/">news</a> about Lending Club’s internal scandal which culminated in the resignation of its founder, chairman, and chief executive, Renaud Laplanche. Lending Club, a U.S.-based company, is the first billion dollar online lending marketplace, and Laplanche was viewed by many as the industry’s biggest advocate and one of its pioneers. Accordingly, industry participants and followers are wondering what Lending Club’s news means for the future of the company and the industry. Is this a sign that the promise of marketplace lending is too good to be true?

For dramatic pause, and context, a few facts on what happened. On Monday, after an internal review, Lending Club <a href="http://ir.lendingclub.com/file.aspx?IID=4213397&amp;FID=34233669">announced</a> that $22 million in subprime loans sold in March and April of this year to a single investor went against the investor’s expressed terms. Furthermore, certain staff members, including Laplanche, were aware that the loans did not meet the investor’s criteria, and during the review process there was less than full disclosure by staff including Laplanche, which the board deemed unacceptable.

The review also revealed that, in an unrelated matter, Laplanche failed to disclose personal interests he held in a third-party fund while Lending Club was considering an investment in the same fund. Lending Club conducted the review under the supervision of a sub-committee of its board of directors with the assistance of independent outside counsel and other advisors.

Laplanche and three other senior staff resigned or were fired. The company’s stock price slid dramatically, and investors <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-jefferies-stopped-buying-lendingclub-loans-2016-05-10">Jeffries LLC and Goldman Sachs paused their purchase of loans from Lending Club</a> as they review the events. Jeffries, for example, had been looking to package roughly $150 million of Lending Club loans into bonds for investor sales in early May.

What does this mean? In the immediate aftermath of the announcement, industry players and commentators had mixed reactions. Some pointed to Lending Club’s falling stock prices and <a href="http://www.pymnts.com/news/alternative-financial-services/2016/lending-club-investigation-renaud-laplanche/">other signals</a> from marketplace lenders as evidence of industry weakness. Others are taking a more <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-05-10/is-lendingclub-a-warning-on-peer-to-peer-lending">optimistic view</a>, asserting that as an emerging asset class, marketplace lending needs greater transparency as part of the process of reaching maturity.

Lending Club for its part, has managed to sustain impressive <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/lendingclub-founder-s-surprise-exit-leaves-industry-lurch-n572066">year-on-year growth</a>. The company had $1 billion in loan originations in 2012, $7 billion in 2014, and at the end of the most recent quarter (ending March 31, 2016) it neared $18 billion. During this same quarter, Lending Club reported a  modest <a href="http://ir.lendingclub.com/file.aspx?IID=4213397&amp;FID=34233669">$4.1 million net profit</a>.

Looking to the future, marketplace lending is <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-and-jefferies-stop-buying-lendingclub-loans-following-ceos-exit-2016-5">forecasted to grow immensely</a>. Lending Club started out in consumer loans and has since begun lending to small businesses and medical offices. It’s estimated that small businesses make up 99 percent of companies in the United States as well as 54 percent of total sales and 55 percent of all jobs. However, only half of small businesses with $100,000 to $1 million in annual revenue received at least a portion of the financing they applied for from conventional banks in 2015. Business Insider estimates that the volume of potential loans that are not made reached nearly $100 billion in the fourth quarter of 2015.

But of course, this forecasted growth is only as the good as growth in borrower and investor interest, and marketplace players’ abilities to sustainably match the two. While the models first started as peer-to-peer lenders, sourcing funds from individuals, they have for several years been dominated by institutional investors. Indeed, to sustain its volume of lending outfits like Lending Club need big investors. It is notable that the issues raised in this episode raised all relate to dealings with investors, not placement of funds with borrowers, so that aspect of the business model has not been challenged.

Some investors are <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2016-05-10/is-lendingclub-a-warning-on-peer-to-peer-lending">already declaring</a> that the way Lending Club is handling the situation provides the assurance they need to continue trusting that the company’s operations, including their alternative credit-scoring methods, are sound. In a <a href="http://ir.lendingclub.com/file.aspx?IID=4213397&amp;FID=34233669">press release</a> Lending Club reported: “The Company took, and will continue to take, remediation steps to resolve the material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting identified in the first quarter of 2016 -- one related to the sales of non-conforming loans and the other to the failure to disclose the personal investment interests -- and to restore the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and procedures.”

Notably, last month Lending Club <a href="http://blog.lendingclub.com/lending-club-partners-funding-circle-prosper-launch-marketplace-lending-association/">partnered</a> with Funding Circle, Prosper and other marketplace lenders to form the Marketplace Lenders Association, which seeks to promote responsible business practices and sound public policy to benefit borrowers and investors. The Association established Marketplace Lending Operating Standards, addressing transparency for investors, responsible lending, governance and controls, and risk management.

A day after Lending Club’s news broke, the U.S. Department of Treasury <a href="https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl0452.aspx">released</a> a white paper on marketplace lending, which offers an overview of the evolving market landscape, acknowledges its risks and benefits, reviews stakeholder opinions, and provides policy recommendations.

It is hard to say at this point whether Lending Club’s scandal represents minor growing pains, significant company concerns, or issues that are widespread and threatening for the entire industry. Though regardless, it’s never a bad investment to instill strong internal controls and transparency, especially when strong – and sustainable – growth is planned.

Have you read?

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2015/09/15/insights-into-an-evolving-peer-to-peer-lending-industry-in-china/">Insights into an Evolving Peer-to-Peer Lending Industry in China</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2013/09/27/financially-included-through-crowdsourced-financing/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Financially Included Through Crowdsourced Financing?</a>

<a href="https://cfi-blog.org/2014/10/30/fueling-the-economic-engine-global-experiments-in-small-enterprise-lending/">Fueling the Economic Engine: Global Experiments in Small Enterprise Lending</a>

The Lending Club Scandal and What It Means for Marketplace Lending

Credit Provision

&gt; Posted by the Smart Campaign

For a brief moment on Monday, all eyes in Tbilisi, Georgia were on the Smart Campaign and its findings on the well-being of microfinance clients. The Campaign presented its <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1075">Client Voices</a> report in a high-profile event at the Georgian Parliament. Joining the event were 12 Members of Parliament from both majority and minority factions of the Government; leadership from the Central Bank, Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Agriculture; a multitude of microfinance practitioners; press and three television stations. This was the first time government representatives of the majority party, minority party, executive branch, industry, and Central Bank all got together to talk about how microfinance clients are treated. Needless to say, it was immensely encouraging to witness this demonstrated interest in the fair and responsible treatment of microfinance clients in Georgia.

The Client Voices project is a four-country research investigation that directly asked microfinance clients about their experiences and treatment. Along with Georgia, the studied countries are Benin, Pakistan, and Peru. Georgia was selected because its market hosts strong and representative institutions conducive to consensus building, and the industry’s decision-makers are currently working to update its regulatory and legal framework. The launch of the Client Voices report positioned the market to act on the project’s recommendations.

The event was co-hosted by the Business and Economic Center (BEC), a non-partisan, not-for-profit institution that works to facilitate understanding and discussion among MPs around financial, economic, and business topics. Following opening remarks by Natia Katsiashvili, Executive Director of BEC, and Giorgi Volski, MP and Chairman of the majority Georgian Dream faction (think Majority Leader in the U.S. House of Representatives), the main findings from the Client Voices project were presented. Here are a few of the key findings:


<ul>
 	<li>Georgian Clients Are Generally Happy with their Lenders: Clients were generally satisfied by how MFIs treated them. Only 5 percent said they had a “bad” or “very bad” experience with MFIs. Compared with the project countries of Pakistan and Benin, aggressive and overt client abuse is rare.</li>
 	<li>Client Understanding of Loan Terms and Conditions Is Lacking: Twenty-eight percent of clients did not know the interest rate on their loan, and another 22 percent could not recall the total amount to be paid on their loan.</li>
 	<li>Overindebtedness Is an Issue: Households with active credit report a median monthly debt-to-income ratio of 37 percent of monthly income allocated to debt repayment. Thirty-seven percent of clients have taken a loan from another source to pay a debt to an MFI, and 21 percent reported reducing food consumption to repay a debt.</li>
 	<li>Clients Are Not Well-Informed on Credit Bureaus: Clients are not aware of how CreditInfo Georgia, the only Georgian credit bureau, works. Many MFI clients fear the negative repercussions of paying late and do not have a clear idea of how credit histories are recorded and used. As a result of this fear, clients may be making extreme sacrifices to comply with tight repayment schedules.</li>
 	<li>Risky Behavior: Taking Out Loans for Others: Ten percent of loans were taken out in someone else’s name, usually by another household member or family member. A relatively higher proportion of these respondents have had a negative record with CreditInfo Georgia. They may have chosen to borrow via another formal borrower because they are unable to borrow themselves.</li>
 	<li>Complaints Mechanisms Are Lacking: Only 4 percent of respondents said that they have ever had a reason to complain to an MFI. This suggests that treatment by MFIs is generally positive. However, only 38 percent were told where to complain, and the vast majority of these were directed to a loan officer or group leader, which may deter clients from voicing concerns.</li>
</ul>
The most fervently debated topic was the dollarization of loans. MFIs in Georgia receive investments denominated in U.S. dollars, so their incentives are to give out dollarized loans. Many MFIs also issue dollar-denominated loans to hedge against currency risk. However, this risk is passed entirely to borrowers. Generally, clients don’t understand what this means and are not fully aware of the high risks associated with taking loans in U.S. dollars. They often take dollarized loans out of ignorance or pressure from the loan officer. As the currency fluctuates, they end up paying back far more than they expected. Out of those surveyed in the Client Voices project in Georgia, 30 percent of clients have a U.S. dollar-denominated loan outstanding, and 13 percent of these did not realize the risks prior to taking the loan.

Between January and October 2015, the Lari depreciated 27 percent compared with the U.S. dollar. Just recently, this practice caused widespread defaults next door in Baku, as Azerbaijan’s currency devaluation led to mass defaults. During the event discussion, the case of Azerbaijan was mentioned as a warning of what could happen if this issue wasn’t controlled in Georgia.

To respond to this problem, a focus on transparency was suggested. If clients have to bear the risk of dollarization they should know and fully understand what they are getting into and what the consequences can be. Additionally, some countries have chosen to limit dollarized loan disbursal, and some MFIs have relied on foreign-exchange swaps to enable them to lend in local currency.

Given the political divisions that exist in Georgia, it is notable that representatives came together from across Georgia’s political spectrum, including the ruling Georgian Dream faction, the Free Democrats, and the United National Movement. There were a number of people asking when Parliament is going to act on client protection, and what changes they’re going to make. A new client protection bill is long overdue.

The Client Voices report was featured on prime-time Georgian TV Monday evening with an interview of  the Smart Campaign’s Eastern Europe and Central Asia Lead, Daniel Balson, on Maestro TV, which you can watch, here: http://bit.ly/1Uv0hck

For more, including additional findings, read the <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Voices_from_Georgia.pdf">Georgia report</a> from the Client Voices project.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/18/my-turn-to-speak-voices-of-microfinance-clients-in-benin-pakistan-peru-and-georgia/">My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

“Client Voices” at the Georgian Parliament

Alexandra Rizzi

Senior Director, The Smart Campaign 

Isabelle Barrès

Vice President, Smart Campaign

Anita Gardeva

Caitlin Sanford

Carmen Paraison

Courtney Piper

Danielle Piskadlo

Hema Bansal

Jeffrey Riecke

John Owens

Patrick Traynor

Robin Brazier

Rosita Najmi

Sergio Guzmán

Australia

Benin

Cambodia

China

Colombia

Ecuador

Europe and Central Asia

Georgia

Guatemala

Haiti

India

Kenya

Malaysia

Mexico

Myanmar

Nigeria

Pakistan

Peru

Philippines

Russian Federation

Rwanda

South Asia

Tanzania

Uganda

Zambia

Aging and Older Adults

Agricultural and Rural Finance

Alternative Data

Appropriate Product Design and Delivery

Client Treatment

Credit/Debit Cards

Financial Capability

Financial Inclusion Strategy

Fintechs

Governance

Impact Investing

Insurance

Interest Rates

Microfinance

Payments

Persons With Disabilities

Product Pricing

Remittances

Responsible Investing

Risk Management

Saving

Social Impact Metrics

Social Performance

Trends

Women

Youth

Report

Kyle Burgess

&gt; Posted by Nadia van de Walle, Lead, Africa Partnerships and Programs, the Smart Campaign

<img class="alignright wp-image-21015" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/thumb_117214149e4947a6a244d87b7bbf7640.jpg" alt="" width="330" height="220" />The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) is preparing to issue a Guide to Charges for Banks and Other Financial Institutions for providers in Nigeria, which sets out rules for commissions, charges, and rates on various products and services. It has shared the draft Guide on its <a href="http://www.cbn.gov.ng/Out/2016/FPRD/GUIDE%20TO%20CHARGES%20FOR%20BANKS.pdf">website</a> for a period of public review and commentary.

As a campaign that seeks to keep the client at the center, the Smart Campaign is always happy to see provisions in such financial sector guidelines or regulations related to thoughtful transparency and disclosure requirements. We are, however, more cautious when it comes to mandated pricing limits, given the unexpected implications we have seen them bring for clients’ lives. We notice that the CBN file introduces monthly interest rate caps.

This is at odds with the suggested policies in the <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/23/dla-piper-drafts-legal-framework-to-support-financial-inclusion/">Model Legal Framework for Financial Consumer Protection</a>, which is based on the Campaign’s seven <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/about/smart-microfinance-and-the-client-protection-principles">client protection principles</a>. The Framework’s section on pricing procedures advises supervisory authorities to not set price or interest rate ceilings or floors, but rather to seek long-term solutions related to improving disclosures and facilitating market competition.

The Central Bank of Nigeria is certainly not alone in considering such caps. Interest rate ceilings are typically introduced as a government response to concerns about predatory lending, when consumers are struggling to afford high-priced loans, and particularly in markets where disclosure and transparency are poor and financial literacy is low. In Africa alone, at least <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/CGAP/2011-subsaharan-africa-regional-snapshot-12100792">twenty other countries have</a> at one point or another introduced caps, including the <a href="http://www.boz.zm/Publishing/66/66_Monetary%20Policy%20Statement%20Jul-Dec%202012.pdf">Bank of Zambia in January 2013</a> (on effective interest rates charged by NBFIs) and the West Africa Economic and Monetary Union (which recently lowered the interest rate ceiling by 3 percent).

While well-intentioned, such caps have not been proven to help customers and in some cases could do more harm than good to their financial lives and level of service access. The first problem is lack of transparency. In an attempt to cover costs, sometimes institutions opt not to comply with these ceilings and instead mask their true prices with fees. Too-low caps may cause institutions’ growth to slow. Further, as summarized <a href="http://www.cgap.org/sites/default/files/CGAP-Donor-Brief-The-Impact-of-Interest-Rate-Ceilings-on-Microfinance-May-2004.pdf">in a recent CGAP brief</a>, such caps could distort the market and prevent financial institutions from offering loans to customers near the base of the economic pyramid who have no alternative access to credit. Evidence suggests that with caps, FIs face alternatives such as withdrawing from the market, <a href="http://www.microfinancegateway.org/sites/default/files/publication_files/sos-15-zm43-uk-nu-final.pdf">reducing their work in rural and other costly markets</a>, increasing their loan sizes, and going up market. In sum, efforts to cap the cost of credit end up reducing access to credit.

When stringent caps have been tried elsewhere, there have been negative results including dropout of small MFIs, flat or negative portfolio growth, and the movement of poor clients to informal, dangerous markets. When <a href="http://www.syminvest.com/news/ecuador-interest-rate-caps-forcing-microlenders-to-increase-loan-amounts/2010/5/6/2364">Ecuador introduced caps</a> in 2007 and again in 2010, MFIs went up market in reaction. India in 2011 <a href="http://www.livemint.com/Industry/nAptDws1eOrnHgqeyMdP1H/RBI-eases-lending-norms-for-microfinance-institutions.html">enacted a margin cap</a>, which led to slower borrowing and lower formal financial access. Based on the Campaign’s own market experiences, we suspect that many Nigerian institutions would not be able to meet these regulatory standards and may similarly exit the market.

Thinking through these measures is particularly relevant in the African region, which has been found to have extremely high operating expense ratios and pricing, and often suffers from missing or poorly functioning credit bureaus (e.g. see research from MFTransparency on <a href="http://www.mftransparency.org/microfinance-pricing/Uganda/">Uganda</a> and <a href="http://www.mftransparency.org/microfinance-pricing/Ghana/">Ghana</a> and from the Smart Campaign on <a href="http://www.smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1030">Uganda</a> and <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1076">Benin</a>). When such ceilings have been tried before in Africa, it has been found that low income populations’ access to microfinance is lowered, transparency falls, and equity impact investors leave.

These are hard questions without easy answers. The Campaign continues to explore and advocate for alternative measures regulators and supervisors could consider to improve the health of the sector and protect clients.

We suggest focusing on <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/03/16/towards-authentic-transparency-a-radical-rethinking-of-disclosure-in-financial-inclusion/">transparency</a>, including the publishing and advertising of lending rates, creating credit bureaus with mandatory financial institution participation, supporting product innovation that improves cost-efficiency, consumer protection supervision, investments in financial literacy, and consumer awareness/empowerment efforts.

The Model Legal Framework suggests considering guidelines on product risk management, and affordability and suitability assessments. Others, such as DFID, <a href="http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs/EPS/Interest_rate_caps_and_their_impact_on_financial_inclusion.pdf">remind</a> regulators to “let the market determine the interest rate,” by promoting competition, which compels lenders to increase efficiency and reduce costs and profit margins. In an IDB survey of financial institution managers in Latin America and the Caribbean, competition was cited as the largest factor determining the interest rate they charged. The macro evidence supports this view. Latin American countries with the most competitive microfinance industries, such as Bolivia and Peru, generally have the lowest interest rates.

There is <a href="http://www.cgap.org/sites/default/files/CGAP-Donor-Brief-The-Impact-of-Interest-Rate-Ceilings-on-Microfinance-May-2004.pdf">evidence</a> that market competition can cause interest rates in Africa to decline, despite increasing financial expenses, credit losses, and inflation. Further, in addition to ethical concerns, <a href="http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/pdf/outputs/EPS/Interest_rate_caps_and_their_impact_on_financial_inclusion.pdf">some studies indicate</a> that usurious lending practices are not commercially sustainable due to demand elasticity, so the government does not need to prioritize capping interest rates, as they will fall on their own over time.

The Guidelines in Nigeria may be modified to account for such pricing cap findings or stakeholder push-back. Regardless, the weight of experience and research reminds us once again of the importance in considering the implications of well-intentioned rules on clients.

You can comment on Nigeria’s Guidelines on charges of financial providers, <a href="http://cbn.gov.ng/Out/2016/FPRD/GUIDE%20TO%20CHARGES%20FOR%20BANKS.pdf">here</a>.

Image credit: Accion

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/23/dla-piper-drafts-legal-framework-to-support-financial-inclusion/">DLA Piper Drafts Legal Framework to Support Financial Inclusion</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/26/disability-inclusion-progress-in-india-ecuador-nigeria-and-elsewhere/">Disability Inclusion Progress - in India, Ecuador, Nigeria, and Elsewhere</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/08/13/the-hold-up-with-mobile-money-in-nigeria/">The Hold-Up with Mobile Money in Nigeria</a>

Interest Rate Caps in Nigeria May Not Be Good for Clients

&gt; Posted by Caitlin Sanford, Bankable Frontier Associates, and Alexandra Rizzi, the Smart Campaign

<a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1075"><img class="alignright wp-image-20644" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/cv-cover.png" alt="" width="300" height="389" /></a>“Sandra” from Lima described her experience talking to a loan officer:

“You don’t understand anything [the microfinance staff members] says, because of how fast he talks.  It is almost as if his tongue is twisted. You end up not understanding in the end. [He says] ‘But ma’am I’ve explained it to you, why can’t you understand? I’ve been very clear.’” 

New <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1075">Client Voices</a> research from the Smart Campaign and Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA) finds that although microfinance providers may be complying with disclosure regulations, clients are not adequately absorbing information about their financial products.  A regulatory compliance-based approach to consumer protection in which providers focus on meeting minimum disclosure requirements risks losing sight of the main objective of transparency— that clients understand what they are signing up for. With clients inadequately informed about many aspects of microfinance, even in countries with strong transparency regulations like Peru and Georgia, the Client Voices findings demand a radical rethinking of transparency.  Namely, emphasis should widen from what information is provided to how much clients understand.

In the Client Voices project we solicited input from clients about what they consider good and bad treatment in their interactions with microfinance service providers, and assessed the prevalence of consumer protection problems in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia.  We found that clients in all four countries have an inadequate understanding of the basic attributes of their microfinance products.  Although most clients do receive some information about their loan products, overall they report low levels of understanding of their loan terms and conditions, regardless of education level.  In Benin, Pakistan, and Peru, 50 percent, 49 percent, and 43 percent of respondents respectively report that they understood loan terms only somewhat or not at all at the time of taking out the loan. Self-reported understanding of loan terms and conditions is highest in Georgia, where 79 percent reported understanding the terms and conditions.

[caption id="attachment_20901" align="alignright" width="330"]<img class="wp-image-20901" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/photo-1.jpg" alt="" width="330" height="246" /> Photograph taken by client in Benin[/caption]

The lack of understanding is more alarming with respect to insurance that is often bundled with microfinance loans: 24 percent of clients in Peru did not know whether or not they had insurance with their loan. Among clients who had insurance accompanying a microfinance loan in Pakistan, only 13 percent reported that they knew how insurance works.

“But the problem with these [microfinance providers] is that there are some false charges called “insurance” in addition. Finally the amount to borrow becomes insignificant after such costs are deducted.”

-Female, Cotonou, Benin

In Georgia, many MFIs issue loans in U.S. dollars rather than Georgian lari to protect themselves against devaluation. As a result of exchange rate fluctuations in the past year, the monthly repayment of a client who took a dollar-denominated loan in January 2015 would be more than 25 percent larger by October of that same year.  Our research found that 13 percent of respondents with dollar-denominated loans claimed they were not aware of this risk when they took out the loan, and 52 percent felt the information provided on exchange rates was somewhat to not clear at all.

[caption id="attachment_20902" align="alignright" width="330"]<img class="wp-image-20902" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/photo-2.png" alt="" width="330" height="253" /> Photo taken by client in Georgia[/caption]

“[I took the picture of the] empty wallet to signify monthly expenditures, the increase of dollar rate…”

-Male, Kutasi, Georgia

Whether it is currency fluctuations in Georgia or an unknown fee in Peru, clients are often surprised during transactions with MFIs. Regardless of whether these surprises are due to client misunderstanding or staff malfeasance, they damage client trust. We believe that disclosure practices must widen to encompass both what information is shared with the client as well as ways to check client understanding.

Here is some food for thought on ways to rethink transparency and disclosure:
<ul>
	<li>Prior to disbursement, providers could ask clients to describe their understanding of their product, with staff correcting any misunderstandings. Institutions could even apply a short and easy quiz after presenting information to verify that clients have understood key details, such as the term, how often payments should be made, late penalties, the currency of the loan, etc.</li>
	<li>Providers could present information in innovative ways. For example, Georgian clients report that they really like the short videos that Georgian microfinance providers show. Other ideas include calendars for literate populations, songs, and simple infographics. We call for rigorous research to test which types of disclosure mechanisms actually work.</li>
	<li>Client protection standards could define best practices in transparency as not just disclosure but checks (and even monitoring) of client understanding of terms and conditions. SMS and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_voice_response">interactive voice response technology</a> could be low-cost methods for implementation.</li>
	<li>Regulators may wish to build verification of client understanding into supervision. This could involve surprise mystery shopping visits to institutions, or questioning clients about high-stakes information. Regulators may consider issuing fines to microfinance institutions if a certain percentage of clients do not know critical information.</li>
	<li>Insurance bundled with loans may deserve more attention from regulators, as client understanding of insurance—even whether they have a policy or not— is especially low.</li>
</ul>
Because transparency efforts have focused on complying with disclosure requirements rather than making sure users understand their rights and responsibilities, information that microfinance institutions provide tends to be copious, technical, and complicated.  Current disclosure methods are not resulting in sufficient client understanding.  We look forward to hearing from the industry on how to shift away from “tongue twisted speeches” used to explain financial products.

For more, check out the <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1075">Client Voices project</a>.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/18/my-turn-to-speak-voices-of-microfinance-clients-in-benin-pakistan-peru-and-georgia/">My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/22/borrowing-blind-in-peru-findings-from-the-client-voices-project/">Borrowing Blind in Peru: Findings from the Client Voices Project</a>

Towards Authentic Transparency: A Radical Rethinking of Disclosure in Financial Inclusion

&gt; Posted by the Smart Campaign

<a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Voices_from_Peru.pdf"><img class="alignright wp-image-20804" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/03/peru-cover.png?w=490" alt="" width="270" height="353" /></a>What do microfinance clients in Peru think about their experiences with financial services? A few weeks ago the Smart Campaign released its <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1089">Client Voices</a> reports, a four-country research investigation that directly asked microfinance clients about their experiences. After previously spotlighting Benin, Georgia, and Pakistan on this blog, today we’ll take a look at findings from the fourth country in the project, <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1087">Peru</a>.

The research was carried out by Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA) and IPM Research. A qualitative research phase was first conducted, which included focus group discussions, individual interviews, and a photography exercise to allow clients to visually describe how they view good and bad treatment. The quantitative survey that followed included a sample of 1,000 current and former microfinance clients.

What did the clients say? In Peru, a well-regulated market, a different set of problems emerged from those we found in less-protected Benin and Pakistan. While severe abuses have been curtailed, emerging problems in Peru tended to arise from aggressive competition for customers.

Overall, clients in Peru are satisfied with their providers, suggesting that they’re benefitting from the industry’s well-regulated, competitive market and effective credit reporting system. Less than 10 percent of respondents rated their experiences with microfinance providers as either “bad” or “very bad”. In an exercise where respondents ranked various formal institutions in terms of how they treat clients, microfinance providers scored above commercial banks.

Heavy debt burdens were found to be a cause for concern. The average household dedicates 26 percent of monthly income to debt payments. In rural areas, this figure rises to 35 percent. Thirty-four percent of clients have made at least one late payment, and 9 percent have defaulted or failed to pay a loan at least once. Despite existing debt, clients report receiving many offers for new credit products, with 10 percent reporting feeling pressured to take out a loan. Aggressive sales tactics contribute to the perception that providers are in some cases trying to take advantage of clients. Clients also have loans from a number of different sources, both informal and formal.

“[The woman from the bank] kept following me everywhere. I was working, and she kept coming to my house offering me a credit card that I didn’t want. She kept asking for my number for activating the credit card. At the end, I was very tempted because my daughter was turning 15, and I wanted to [throw a party].” - Female, Peri-Urban Lima

Some clients view credit lines as a benefit to be shared. A combined 18 percent of clients have either taken out a loan for someone else or used a loan that was in another person’s name. Having a loan in another person’s name is associated with increased late payments, suggesting this behavior is risky for clients and institutions alike. Providers cannot control what clients do with the money they borrow, but it is important that financial institutions and regulators are aware of this behavior, as it may have implications for the credit reporting system. This concerning trend was also prevalent in <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/29/client-protection-in-georgia-a-responsible-market-with-opportunities-for-improvement/">Georgia</a>.

“My sister-in-law needed money. I borrowed it for her, but I did not enjoy that money…I gave all the money to my sister-in-law thinking that she would pay back, but she didn’t. One day I went to the bank, and my brother told me that I was bad on their system.” - Female, Urban Juliaca

Centralized credit reporting to credit bureaus creates a strong incentive for repayment, and clients reported only minimal client protection problems in collections. In contrast, client mistreatment during collections is a big issue in <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">Benin</a> and <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">Pakistan</a>. Before the installation of the credit bureaus in Peru, intimidating collection practices were common, but today they have all but disappeared, thanks partly to reliance on credit reporting, which ensures that clients will repay if they possibly can, in order to avoid a black mark against them with all lenders. However, clients still do not have a good understanding of how the credit bureau works. They don’t seem aware that credit bureaus keep positive information in addition to negative, nor do they seem to understand fully the consequences of having a negative record, or the path to rehabilitation.

Researcher: “For how long [does one’s negative record stay in the credit registries]?

Respondent: “Five years, I think… 10 years… For life… Once you have paid, you must wait a lot of time to be trustworthy again.” - Male, Urban Cajamarca

As we found in all of the studied countries, transparency in Peru could be improved. Although 65 percent of current clients reported that they understood their loan terms well, they also report low levels of understanding in the case of bundled products, especially those that include insurance. And 23 percent of current clients reported that providers did not explain the terms and conditions of the loan before signing. As in the other Client Voices countries, only 25 percent of clients knew the interest rate on their current loans.

“Often you go to them [the staff] and don’t understand anything they say, because of how fast they talk. It is almost as if they have their tongues twisted. You end up not understanding in the end. [Then they say] ‘But ma’am I’ve explained it to you, how come you don’t understand? I’ve been very clear.’” - Female, Peri-Urban Lima

Microfinance clients in Peru have many options for recourse, but, like the clients in other countries in the Client Voices project, the majority don’t know about these channels. Seventy-one percent report that their providers did not inform them where to complain. Among those who wanted to complain, many did not do so, either because they did not know how, or because they thought the response would be slow.

“To whom are you going to complain? There is a book for complaints. You fill yours along with your [national ID card] you sign, but they never call you. They make that book vanish!” - Female, Lima Peri-Urban

For more details and additional findings, read the <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Voices_from_Peru.pdf">Peru report</a> from the Client Voices project.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/29/client-protection-in-georgia-a-responsible-market-with-opportunities-for-improvement/">Client Protection in Georgia: A Responsible Market with Opportunities for Improvement</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

Progress and Evolving Risks in Peru’s Advanced Consumer Protection Environment

<a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Voices_from_Georgia.pdf"><img class="alignright wp-image-20758" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/georgia-cv.png?w=490" alt="" width="275" height="355" /></a>&gt; Posted by the Smart Campaign

What’s the state of client protection in Georgia? A few weeks ago we launched our <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/tools-a-resources/1075">Clients Voices</a> project, a four-country research investigation that directly asked clients about their experiences with financial providers and their thoughts on what constitutes good and bad treatment. The four countries studied in the project are Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia. After previously spotlighting <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">Benin</a> and <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">Pakistan</a> on this blog, today we’ll take a look at some of the research findings specific to Georgia.

The research was carried out by Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA) and IPM Research. In the qualitative research phase, they used focus group discussions, individual interviews, and a photography exercise to understand what constitutes good and bad treatment by MFIs from the clients’ perspective. The quantitative survey that followed included a sample of 800 current microfinance clients and 200 former clients.

What were the results?

Overwhelmingly, microfinance clients in Georgia are satisfied with their MFIs. The large majority of respondents rated their experiences as “good” or “very good,” with only 5 percent of all respondents expressing a “bad” or “very bad” experience. In Georgia, clients appear to value maintaining a long-term relationship with MFIs. Sixty-six percent are happy with their institutions and stay with them for a long time. In the quantitative survey, approximately 60 percent of respondents had taken multiple loans with the same MFI over time. This is in contrast with findings in Pakistan showing that clients maintain short-term relationships. Microfinance institutions’ service and treatment was ranked as matching or exceeding that of commercial banks. Clients repeatedly ranked microfinance organizations as among the institutions (both financial and non-financial) that treated them best.

As we found in every country, client understanding of loan terms and conditions is lacking. Only 4 percent of respondents claim that MFIs did not provide them information on loan features such as the total amount to be repaid, penalties, or other consequences of late repayments. However, 28 percent of clients did not know the interest rate on their loan, and another 22 percent could not recall the total amount to be paid on their loan. Other clients appear confused by terms such as interest rate, fees and commissions, or insurance, and many lack sufficient confidence to ask clarifying questions. This lack of understanding may facilitate greater client dissatisfaction which can lead to feeling cheated or frustrated. Survey data shows that better informed clients are happier clients.

“The contract is written in such a way that it’s hard to understand what it means. You should have special education to understand this terminology.” - Male, Urban Kutaisi

In particular, many clients did not sufficiently understand the high risks associated with taking loans in U.S. dollars. About 30 percent of clients have a USD loan outstanding, and 13 percent of these did not realize this prior to taking the loan. A relatively large percentage of those with USD loans (18 percent) did not think they would pay more. Unfortunately, between January and October 2015, the Lari depreciated 27 percent compared with the U.S. dollar, causing monthly payments to jump by a similar amount – eating deeply into the available income of many borrowers.

“Those who have borrowed in Lari will have fewer problems. Lari [loans] are also expensive but [borrowing in] dollars cause more losses.” - Female, Urban Tbilisi

Households that currently have a line of MFI credit report a median ratio of 37 percent of monthly income allocated to debt repayment. Thirty-seven percent of clients have also had to take a loan from another source to pay a debt to an MFI, and 21 percent also reported reducing food consumption to repay a debt. In addition to servicing MFI credit, nearly half of all respondents owe money for installment purchases, 22 percent of clients owe money to pawn shops, and 21 percent are borrowing from commercial banks. In the quantitative sample, the average number of credit sources per household is two, and 15 percent of households have four or more different types of credit instruments. MFI marketing practices – such as frequent credit offers via text messages and pre-approved cards - may tempt clients to borrow more.

“Now we are finishing repayment of a [MFI] loan, so they are calling and offering us to take a new loan, but currently we do not have need.” - Female, Rural Telavi

Clients are not aware of how CreditInfo Georgia, the only Georgian credit bureau, works. Many MFI clients are preoccupied with the negative consequences of what they refer to as the “blacklist”. As a result of this fear, clients may be making sacrifices to comply with tight repayment schedules. One of the positive consequences of having a credit reporting system in place is that the MFIs do not need to resort to harsher methods to convince clients to repay on time.

“No matter whether you don’t pay once or 10 times, if you violate [the repayment terms] once they will make you finalize that loan and will never issue a loan again.” - Male, Rural Gurjaani

Clients’ willingness to take out loans for others may present risks to clients and providers. Ten percent of loans were taken out in someone else’s name, usually by another household member or family member. While clients may view this type of behavior as a favor, a relatively higher proportion of these respondents have a negative record with CreditInfo Georgia. This suggests that they may be borrowing via another formal borrower because they are unable to borrow themselves. Clients may not be aware of the risk of borrowing for others. Providing more information to clients about the risks of sharing loans would help to reduce the practice of borrowing in others’ names.

Most clients do not need to complain, but if they do, channels are lacking. Only 4 percent of respondents said that they have ever had a reason to complain to an MFI. This suggests that treatment by MFIs is generally positive. However, only 38 percent were told where to complain, and almost all of these were directed to a loan officer or group leader, rather than to a specialized complaints channel. Additionally, some clients feel that their voice would not be heard if they were to file a complaint.

Respondent: “As for complaining… I can’t complain and sue such a big company.”

Moderator: “Why? Won’t your claim be satisfied?”

Respondent: “I think I can’t win against them… they are able to hire an expensive lawyer and we are not.” - Male, Telavi

For more details and additional findings, read the <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/storage/documents/Voices_from_Georgia.pdf">Georgia report</a> from the Client Voices project.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/18/my-turn-to-speak-voices-of-microfinance-clients-in-benin-pakistan-peru-and-georgia/">My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

Client Protection in Georgia: A Responsible Market with Opportunities for Improvement

[caption id="attachment_20716" align="alignright" width="275"]<img class="wp-image-20716" style="border: 0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/cs-cv.jpg" alt="Caitlin Sanford presenting at the Client Voices launch event last week." width="275" height="315" /> Caitlin Sanford presenting at the Client Voices launch event last week[/caption]

Mariana is a 42 year old single mother living in the outskirts of Lima. Microfinance loans have helped her to start a business, put herself through school as an adult, and even leave her philandering husband. When we met her, Mariana’s main financial goal was to pay tuition for her daughter, “Yessica”. (Names have been changed to protect identity.)

However, Mariana had fallen behind in her microfinance payments after the family was a victim of an extortion scheme that caused the loss of most of the family’s savings. Mariana felt that her microfinance provider (MFP) was indifferent to her plight, and was surprised to learn that she would have to pay late penalties associated with her loan. She said, “They did not inform me very well… the girls [MFP employees] that call you for the loan say, yes, we will give you this loan, and this and that, and they don’t explain in much detail… They give you the payment schedule, but then [if you have a problem] you will be surprised.” As Mariana describes it, she took out these loans “blind” because she did not understand the interest rate or fees.

Although she struggles with her existing credit payments, Mariana is constantly tempted by offers for new loans. She says that representatives from MFPs, banks, and retail stores often stop her in the street or call her cell phone offering loans. Recently, Mariana bought anti-theft insurance on the street because the salesperson was persuasive, but Mariana does not know how she would make a claim if she were to be robbed.

Mariana’s story highlights three central themes discussed in the report, “My Turn to Speak”, and the four accompanying country-specific reports from Benin, Georgia, Pakistan and Peru. These reports summarize research under the <a href="http://www.smartcampaign.org/client-voice">Client Voices</a> project, which was carried out by Bankable Frontier Associates on behalf of the Smart Campaign. The project began with qualitative work to hear directly from clients about the kinds of problems they experience when using microfinance services. It followed with quantitative work to provide information about the frequency of the kinds of problems clients reported.
<blockquote>“I was blind... I took out the loans blind.” – “Mariana”, microfinance client in Peru</blockquote>
Mariana’s story shows first that even when MFPs are complying with disclosure requirements, clients often do not understand key features of their products, such as late penalties. The Client Voices research found that clients have an inadequate understanding of the basic attributes of their microfinance products, even though they receive some information about their loan products from MFPs. Overall clients report low levels of understanding of their loan terms and conditions, regardless of education level. In Benin, Pakistan, and Peru, 50 percent, 49 percent, and 43 percent of respondents respectively report that they understood loan terms only somewhat or not at all at the time of taking out the loan. Self-reported understanding of loan terms and conditions is highest in Georgia, where 79 percent reported understanding the terms and conditions. Providers should care that clients do not understand their products, because such misunderstandings lead clients to feel cheated and lose trust.

Second, like other respondents in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia, Mariana wanted her microfinance bank to treat her with empathy and offer flexibility following a family emergency. A few months before we met her, Mariana’s daughter Yessica received a call from a fraudster saying they had kidnapped her mother. The fake kidnapper knew personal information about Mariana, and since she could not reach her mother, Yessica deposited nearly all of the family’s savings, including the money designated for microfinance repayment, in the scammer’s account. This misfortune set the family back financially and led Mariana to miss two loan payments and incur fees. Mariana expected her lender to be more understanding of her plight. Across all four Client Voices countries clients are demanding more flexible products and requesting compassion in the face of the emergencies and crises that punctuate life at the bottom of the pyramid.

A basic demand from clients is for respectful and humane treatment. In Pakistan and Benin clients complain that MFP staff lack human decency in dealing with clients who have problems paying their loans. In these countries, clients view the public shaming that is used to force repayment extremely unfavorably.

Finally, Mariana struggles to say no to special offers on credit products. In Peru and Georgia, the Client Voices research detected possible aggressive selling practices. In Peru, about half of clients complained about regularly receiving calls and visits from MFPs offering credit, with 10 percent reporting that they have felt pressured by MFPs to take out a loan. Having the ability to identify the “good” clients through the credit reporting system may contribute to aggressive sales tactics. In Georgia, clients report receiving prepaid cards that they can use to activate a new loan. Similarly, in Peru clients spoke about receiving checks in the mail with an automatic approval for a new loan that they could cash at any bank branch, increasing the temptation to take out a loan, despite not needing one at that moment.

Implications 

A few ideas for financial service providers resulting from the Client Voices research include:
<ul>
 	<li>Simple, elegant products that can be described in one or two sentences may more effectively grasp clients’ attention.</li>
 	<li>Providers should present information in innovative ways, as Georgian microfinance banks have tried to do with videos. Other ideas include calendars for literate populations, songs, and simple infographics.</li>
 	<li>Providers should ask clients to describe their understanding of their product, with staff correcting any misunderstandings. Institutions could even apply a short quiz after presenting information to verify that clients have understood key details, such as the term, how often payments should be made, late penalties, or the currency of the loan, with the goal of ensuring understanding.</li>
 	<li>Respectful treatment and empathy are important to clients. Products that build in grace periods for a small number of repayments would satisfy clients’ demand for more flexibility and understanding of emergencies that inevitably come up. Variable repayment amounts could also be helpful for clients with irregular income sources.</li>
</ul>
The Client Voices findings compile hundreds of stories like Mariana's through qualitative and quantitative research. You can learn more about the findings, read the reports, and explore the data from the Client Voices research <a href="http://www.smartcampaign.org/client-voice">here</a>.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/18/my-turn-to-speak-voices-of-microfinance-clients-in-benin-pakistan-peru-and-georgia/">My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

Borrowing Blind in Peru: Findings from the Client Voices Project

&gt; Posted by the Smart Campaign

<img class="alignright wp-image-20644" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/cv-cover.png" alt="" width="275" height="356" />What are microfinance clients’ thoughts on fair treatment from financial services providers?

Today the Smart Campaign is proud to present the results from the Client Voices project, a four-country research investigation that directly asked clients about their experiences with financial providers and their thoughts on what constitutes good and bad treatment.

Today’s release includes the main synthesis report as well as country reports from Georgia and Peru. The Campaign has already released comprehensive country reports for the other two countries in which research took place, Benin and Pakistan.

The Campaign commissioned Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA), as research partner on the project, to talk with thousands of lower-income microfinance clients face-to-face in the four diverse country markets. The intent was to hear from clients in an open-ended way, without pre-judging their concerns, and then to follow-up this qualitative work with quantitative surveys to determine how representative the concerns expressed were. The intensive research captures, first-hand, clients’ interactions with the institutions that lend them money and keep their savings, and are therefore instrumental in their lives.

Through the project, the Campaign sought to learn whether assumptions made about what constitutes problematic treatment of poor clients (such as those embodied in the <a href="http://smartcampaign.org/about/smart-microfinance-and-the-client-protection-principles">Client Protection Principles</a>) rightly reflected what clients themselves worry about. The research was conducted so that it might serve as a catalyst for improvement in client protection by financial service providers, regulators, industry associations, consumer advocacy groups, and others – not only in these four countries, but as guidelines for the protection of lower-income clients around the world.

Here is some of what we found.

The research in all four countries found that clients are generally satisfied with their financial institutions. Many respondents described the important and beneficial role microfinance plays in their lives. However, some troubling themes arose that damage client trust, such as inadequate explanations of loan terms, lack of redress mechanisms and opportunities, and disrespectful treatment.

Transparency. As you might have read in our <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/12/the-client-voices-project-launches-next-week/">post</a> last week, clients in all four countries have an inadequate understanding of the basic attributes of their microfinance products. In Benin, Pakistan, and Peru, for example, 50 percent, 49 percent, and 43 percent of respondents reported that they understood loan terms only somewhat or not at all at the time of taking the loan. This lack of understanding exists even when institutions follow mandated disclosure rules. Because transparency efforts have focused on complying with disclosure requirements, rather than making sure users understand, information provided tends to be copious, technical, and complicated.

“[Microfinance providers] don´t inform you, they should give you complete information [about the loan charges]… There is an easier way: we should be able to understand, to see what our options are and what is best for us, to find the [product] that suits us best.” -Woman, Juliaca, Peru

Low levels of client understanding of compulsory savings in Benin and loans issued in U.S. dollars in Georgia reveal the high stakes of a failure to communicate basic information to clients. In Benin, 9 percent of current clients and 17 percent of former borrowers reported being unable to withdraw all of their savings. In Georgia, 13 percent of clients were surprised to learn that they had borrowed in U.S. dollars instead of Georgian Lari, a misunderstanding with considerable financial repercussions following a major devaluation.

Respectful treatment. A basic demand from clients is for respectful and humane treatment. Clients view the public shaming that is used in Benin and Pakistan extremely unfavorably. It causes long-lasting social stress for the clients who experience it, and damages the reputation of financial service providers. Poor treatment is most often experienced when consumers are late with loan payments. In Pakistan and Benin for instance, clients told us of the social and psychological pain they suffered from being publicly shamed for late payments. While extreme incidents were rare, the rigidity in loan collections can create a problematic and stressful cycle for clients, even those who pay on time.

“My son was suffering from cancer. He died. They did not leave. They said they just want their money. They insulted me so much. They did not even understand that one brother of five sisters had died — everyone depended on him! They had no sympathies. Then what’s the use of this bank? They take money from us and on the top of that they insult us so badly.” -Male, Karachi, Pakistan

The reports offer broad-reaching recommendations for improving client protection in the areas of transparency and respectful treatment. These range from a radical reframing of transparency and disclosure requirements and practices, to the abolishment of practices that could incentivize collections agents to shame clients. The reports also counsel that financial products should build in grace periods for a small number of repayments, which would satisfy clients’ demand for more flexibility and understanding in the event of emergencies.

Credit bureaus play an increasing and valuable role in protecting clients, helping to leverage their desires for continued access to credit to induce repayment. Credit reporting can reduce the need to rely on social shaming to force clients to repay, which clients find objectionable in Benin and Pakistan. Indeed, problems of shaming clients in collections that we found in Benin and Pakistan are almost entirely absent in Peru and Georgia, countries with strong credit bureaus and regulation.

However, clients lack information about how credit bureaus work, and seem unaware that they can build a positive as well as negative credit history. In Peru and Georgia, for example, clients report confusion about the consequences of having a negative record in the credit bureau, and how to clear one’s name.

Researcher: “What happens if you miss a payment?

Respondent: “They notify you at home. They write in the walls ‘delinquent,’ the bank tells you that you should pay. They put you in INFOCORP. And that is it, you don´t get out of there! Sometimes I would like to know how much time does it takes for you to get out of there, and nobody tells you anything.” -Woman, Urban Juliaca, Peru

Complaints. Most clients don’t know how and where to complain, and given the poor quality of recourse they experience with all kinds of formal institutions (schools, clinics, etc.), they do not think their complaints will be resolved by financial service providers. Across all countries, less than one-fourth of those who reported having a reason to complain actually filed a complaint. The ‘complaints book’ in Peru is one example of a complaints mechanism that clients view as largely symbolic and ineffective.

Where recourse channels exist, clients are not sufficiently informed about them. In Benin, only 14 percent of respondents recall being told by financial institutions who to consult in case a problem arose. Even in Peru and Georgia, with strong microfinance and consumer protection regulatory environments, only 25 percent and 38 percent of clients recall being told where or how to address concerns.

“If you go to complain to [the financial institution] office, or elsewhere, you won’t get another loan.” -Male Respondent, Parakou, Benin

The reports suggest a broad array of actions that actors in the financial inclusion sector should take to address these challenges. Stay tuned in the coming weeks for more posts on the project, including deep-dives into the results from specific countries.

For the report, My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru and Georgia, <a href="http://www.smartcampaign.org/my-turn-to-speak">click here</a>, and for the four individual country reports, available in English and in their national language, head to the Client Voices page on the Smart Campaign website: <a href="http://www.smartcampaign.org/client-voice">www.smartcampaign.org/client-voice</a>.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2016/02/12/the-client-voices-project-launches-next-week/">The Client Voices Project Launches Next Week</a>

My Turn to Speak: Voices of Microfinance Clients in Benin, Pakistan, Peru, and Georgia

<img class="alignright wp-image-20644" style="border:0 solid #000000" src="https://centerforfinancialinclusionblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/cv-cover.png" alt="" width="275" height="356" />&gt; Posted by the Smart Campaign

Next Thursday we’re launching the Client Voices project, our four-country research investigation that went to the source and directly asked clients about their experiences with financial providers and their thoughts on what constitutes good and bad treatment.

The four studied countries are Benin, Georgia, Pakistan, and Peru. You might have seen our spotlighting the release of the <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">Benin</a> and <a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">Pakistan</a> country reports here on the blog in the fall. On Thursday, we’re sharing those for Georgia and Peru, as well as a “synthesis report” that summarizes and analyses the key findings, takeaways, and recommendations across the four comprehensive country reports.

We have a few launch event opportunities for you to participate in. But first, we wanted to give you a glimpse into what’ll be released on Thursday…

Transparency. One of the overarching findings across the studied countries was that clients have an inadequate understanding of the basic aspects of their microfinance products. For example, in Benin, Pakistan, and Peru, 50 percent, 49 percent, and 43 percent of respondents indicated that they either somewhat or didn’t at all understand loan terms at the time of taking out their loan. Even when institutions are following mandated disclosure rules, this lack of understanding persists.

Here are a few soundbites of what clients shared during one-on-one interviews with researchers:
“A ciegas lo hacía… Hacía mis préstamos a ciegas.”
(“I was blind… I took out the loans blind.”)
--Mariana, Lima, Peru
“Quite honestly, I can’t tell you if [my loan] rate is 4 percent or 5 percent. Honestly, I can’t tell you… I can calculate the difference to be able to say that if I borrowed 400,000 CFA (US$827), [I pay] 435,000 CFA ($899) or 425,000 CFA ($878), but I don’t calculate the percentage.”
--Male with a Master’s in law, Cotonou, Benin
Researcher: “So did the MFP explain the interest rate to you?”
Respondent: “They explain, but when they see you are illiterate, they get you to sign papers which mean that you’ll repay more than you should.”
--Male, Parakou, Benin
“They provide different explanations in the beginning, but none of the creditors investigate the depth, because the interest rate is never what they tell you in the beginning. It is always more in the end… some is commissions, some life insurance, etc.”
--Male, Rural Telavi, Georgia
What to do about this? You’ll just have to wait until the release of the reports next week, which include broad-reaching recommendations across stakeholder groups for improving client protection.

As for the launch events, at the World Bank offices in Washington, D.C. on Thursday the Smart Campaign and Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA), which served as research partner on the project, will present key findings and discuss their implications for the industry. BFA will present the research results, with the Smart Campaign to follow with a response and sharing of key takeaways, and afterwards inclusion leaders and representatives from the study’s country markets will discuss how the project should impact industry efforts going forward.

Event speakers will include Caitlin Sanford, Director at BFA, Kim Wilson, Lecturer at the Fletcher School, Elisabeth Rhyne, Managing Director of the Center for Financial Inclusion, Xavier Gine, Lead Economist in the Development Research Group at the World Bank, Isabelle Barrès, Director of the Smart Campaign, and other financial inclusion leaders. For more details and to RSVP, <a href="http://whoozin.com/6JJ-MJA-R6GY">click here</a>.

And if you can’t make the D.C. event, at a later date we’ll host a webcast to discuss the project. Stay tuned for forthcoming details.

Have you read?

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/10/22/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-benin/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Benin</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2015/11/09/what-do-clients-care-about-results-from-research-in-pakistan/">What Do Clients Care About? Results from Research in Pakistan</a>

<a href="http://cfi-blog.org/2013/06/14/a-call-for-client-voice-in-the-boardroom/">A Call for Client Voice in the Boardroom</a>

The Client Voices Project Launches Next Week

Peru’s Client Voice research included the perspectives of 1,000 current and former microfinance clients to identify consumer protection challenges and opportunities in the country. The Smart Campaign selected Peru as the market in Latin America for the Client Voices project because of its strong consumer protection regulations, recourse mechanism, and well-functioning credit reporting system.
<blockquote>The top concerns that emerged for clients in Peru are prevention of over-indebtedness, transparency, and fair and respectful treatment of clients.</blockquote>
Between January and July 2015, Bankable Frontier Associates (BFA) and Datum International, a local research firm, conducted qualitative and quantitative research. Peruvian clients of savings and loan institutions, cooperatives, and NGOs offering group loans participated in the qualitative research. The quantitative research included 550 current clients and 450 former clients.

Peru has a favorable environment for financial services, in recent years earning the top spot in the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Global Microscope rankings. Although a strong government consumer complaints institution (INDECOPI) exists, over-indebtedness, transparency, and fair and respectful treatment emerge as the most prevalent concerns for clients in Peru. Addressing these concerns requires a market-level approach that takes into consideration the unique role that regulators, the microfinance industry, and clients themselves each must play.

Client Voices: Peru Country Report

Bankable Frontier Associates

Georgia Client Voice research included the perspectives of 1,000 current and former microfinance clients to identify the consumer protection impediments that persist in the country. The Smart Campaign selected Georgia as the market in Eastern Europe and Central Asia for the Client Voices project for several reasons, primarily because of the current regulatory reform at the national level. As the Consumer Protection Division becomes its own entity, operating outside of the regime of the National Bank of Georgia, this research will enrich the discussion and inform the next steps in the country’s consumer protection arena. The building blocks for a thriving industry are already set, including a credit bureau, CreditInfo. Regulators, local partners, and microfinance institutions all have a role to play to raise awareness among clients and cement customer protection in the industry.
<blockquote>Top concerns among microfinance clients in Georgia are: over-indebtedness, appropriate product design and delivery, and transparency.</blockquote>
Various research methods were implemented in the qualitative phase, including focus group discussions, individual in-depth interviews, and a photography exercise to gain a deeper and contextualized understanding of clients’ views of good and bad treatment. The quantitative sample consisted of 800 currently clients and 200 former clients, 59 percent of whom were women.

The research finds that the majority of clients, around 66 percent, are happy with their institutions and thus stay with their institutions for a long time. Primarily, microfinance institutions’ service and treatment was ranked as matching or exceeding commercial banks. However, clients’ understanding of terms and conditions is still lacking, especially around the high risks associated with taking loans in U.S. Dollars.

Client Voices: Georgia Country Report