Sunday, February 11, 2018

Kiva.org


Kiva.org
Charity Navigator Score: 4/4 stars

Amidst a famine in the 1970’s,  Dr. Muhammad Yunus, professor of economics at the University of Chittagong in Bangladesh, travelled around rural villages trying to find an answer to the widespread poverty. In a small village called Jorba, he came across a group of 42 women who earned their living weaving bamboo stools and selling them to local traders. Despite their work, the women lived in extreme poverty. The women lacked access to traditional bank loans, so in order to purchase the raw materials they needed to make stools, they relied on loans from the local traders, who lent them money on the agreement that the women would sell them the finished stools for a price barely higher than the cost of the raw materials. The traders got cheap stools, and the women got a predatory deal that kept them in a cycle of perpetual debt.
Dr. Yunus was surprised to learn that the cost of the materials needed by all 42 women was a mere $27. He promptly lent the women the money they needed to buy their raw materials himself. Free from the control of the predatory traders, the woman were able to sell their stools for a fair price, ending the cycle of debt they were chained in.
This was the beginning of the microlending model - small loans, often backed by non-profit lenders, granted to impoverished entrepreneurs to whom traditional banks refuse to lend money. This Nobel Prize-winning model is the mode of change embraced by Kiva, a San Francisco based nonprofit that believes in empowering individuals to create a better future for themselves. Kiva’s method of providing accessible loans goes beyond where a simple one-time donation would; instead of creating a dependence with handouts, microloans provide a path to self-sufficiency while allowing both actors to maintain their dignity.
Here's how it works. A borrower in need of capital to start up their business approaches one of Kiva’s Field Partners (local non-profit groups, microfinance institutions, or social organizations) in their community and applies for a loan. Once the loan is approved, the Field Partner credits the borrower the funds, (so they can begin work immediately) then posts their story to the Kiva website. From the website, the loan is crowd-funded by individual lenders, who are then repaid once the borrower repays the loan. (If the loan doesn’t reach the crowdfunding goal, the Field Partner uses their own resources to cover the loan.) Once repaid, the individual lenders are given the option to either reinvest the money into another loan on the Kiva website, withdraw it, or donate it to Kiva for their operating costs. (I should note that, while I use the word “invest”, Kiva charges 0% interest on its loans, so neither Kiva nor the individual lenders make any money off of the loans. The best an individual lender can do is break even, meaning their “investment” is not one made intending to make a profit).
In addition to dispersing loans, many of Kiva's Field Partners provide financial services to borrowers, such as savings accounts and financial literacy training, as well as health services to the clients and their families. All of this further facilitates Kiva's goal of producing sustainable economic self-sufficiency.
Kiva charges 0% interest on the money dispersed from its platform, and 100% of the money lent through the site is received by the borrower. This means that the only source of income for Kiva is through money donated for its operating costs, most of which comes from individual lenders choosing to donate the money. These operating costs totaled $16,895,877 in 2016 (the most recent year for which data is available). The costs can be broken down into $13,104,819 for program expenses, $2,531,884 for administrative expenses, and $1,259,174 for fundraising. Their total revenue that year was $17,219,880, meaning that for every $1 spent on fundraising, $13 were raised for the organization. This efficiency is a contributing factor to Kiva's 4/4 star rating by Charity Navigator. Even more impressive is the fact that on this budget of $16,895,877, Kiva facilitated $143,065,750 in loans! That's 11 cents for every dollar of loans. To their credit, Kiva has made their expense reports, along with a breakdown of all other financial information, easily accessible from their website, helping them achieve GuideStar's Platinum Seal of Transparency.
Kiva’s model has produced staggering results. Since its founding in 2005, over $1 billion in loans have been funded through Kiva. That money has reached 83 different countries and 2.7 million individual borrowers. These borrowers have used their loans to establish goat farms, weaving businesses, and empanada shops -- creating jobs and steady incomes for themselves and people in their communities. Most impressive of all, Kiva’s borrowers have a 96.9% repayment rate, meaning of those 2.7 million people who took out loans, 2.6 million successfully repaid. Also significant is the fact that 81% of borrowers were women. In many communities around the world, obtaining a business loan is even more difficult or even impossible for women. Kiva’s efforts have helped empower many of these women to create opportunity for themselves that they otherwise would not have had.    
What Kiva provides is a permanent, sustainable path to alleviating poverty. It is estimated that between 1.5 and 2.5 billion people lack access to basic financial services. Kiva’s work helps address this systemic failure, providing individuals with the tools they need to create their own change for themselves and their communities.

2 comments:

  1. Hi Gabe,
    I have actually heard of Kiva before; from a class I took last semester. When I first heard of Kiva I thought it was really neat. It's a great idea that this non-profit can help people create opportunities for themselves. But after doing some research, I have some reservations about Kiva.

    In addition to the information you found about all the positive things Kiva does, I came across some criticisms that I think are important to consider. I found this article (1) that includes some of the criticisms of Kiva and some editors notes linking to Kivas response to the article. It seems that one criticism, which you touched on in your post, is that funders are not directly financing borrowers; rather, funders are financing banks. Another criticism was that while Kiva and Kiva lenders do not receive interest, the Field Partners do. An article I found (2) stated that interest rates are, on average, 35% and could be as much as 100%; although they are ultimately unsure because Kiva cannot or will not say. I went on Kivas website and found an FAQ (3) that explains that interest rates are high since the field partners operational costs are high.

    While researching Kiva I came across a similar organization called Zidisha (4), which allows people to lend money directly to borrowers. They are able to offer no interest rates; just a 5% service fee for each loan raised because they do not have field partners. The disadvantage of this approach though, is that the only people who can apply for loans on Zidisha are people who have access to computers and are computer-literate.

    As you put it, micro-financing can be a sustainable path to alleviating poverty. But from your post and from researching, it seems that there are good and bad aspects about micro-financing that we should consider. For example, Kiva can reach more rural areas and people without access to internet but at the cost of high interest rates. Zidisha can offer lower interest rates but at the cost of not being as accessible to people in rural areas. If we can acknowledge and accept the positive and negative aspects of micro-financing, then perhaps it is fine to lend money through Kiva.

    (1) https://nextbillion.net/nexthought-monday-the-kiva-fairytale/
    (2)https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2014/2/11/1276681/-The-joys-of-pretending-to-help-the-poor-The-Kiva-Story
    (3) http://blog.kiva.org/faqs/interest-rates-qa#where are interest rates highest
    (4) https://nextbillion.net/zidisha-crowdfunding-loans-part-one/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I completely understand your hesitancy, I had similar reservations when I first started researching the organization too. My biggest concern was based around the fact that the money loaned people in foreign countries goes through micro-finance banks. Through researching, however, I decided that this system is currently the most efficient way to distribute the loans for a number of reasons. For one thing, the Field Partners perform services for borrowers that Kive couldn't. They vet potential borrowers, process their applications, submit their stories to the Kiva website, distribute their cash loans, and often provide financial and health services to borrowers, as I mentioned. If Kiva were to do all of this themselves, they would need permanent facilities in hundreds of locations around the world, as well as hundreds of full time employees working at these stations. This would be incredibly expensive and inefficient, raising their operating costs to the point where it wouldn't make sense for them to continue doing what they do. As you pointed out, many of these Field Partners charge interest rates to borrowers, even though Kiva doesn't. This fact put me off at first. Through researching I learned two things however that ultimately swayed me to accept this. 1) The interest rates are necessary, because they cover the costs that the Field Partners need to continue to provide their services. Like any institution, these institutions cost money to run, and not all of them are charities that receive donations to fund their existence. And 2) I looked into the criteria for becoming a Field Partner for Kiva, and the organization has strict guidelines for partnership to ensure that the borrowers are actually benefiting from the Field Partners' services. Kiva requires that interest rates offered are in line with the market rate, so borrowers aren't getting gouged. Potential field partners also have to demonstrate that their service will provide a real benefit to the community, for instance by providing accessible loans to a community where other banks have deemed to risky to provide funds. Kiva takes their own guidelines very seriously, and has in the past severed ties with organizations that they have found to be corrupt, dishonest, or otherwise not followed their guidelines of serving the disadvantaged.
      Lastly, the purpose of providing funds from lenders through Kiva to Field Partners is this: by funding the loans given out by local micro-lending institutions, Kiva is allowing these institutions to make loans that otherwise would be too risky, but are at the same time the loans that do the most good. It is risky for these small banks to loan money to poor entrepreneurs and farmers, who have no credit history or assets to give them credibility. By taking on this risk themselves, Kiva lenders are enabling them to make these riskier loans, thereby enabling the otherwise financially ostracized to receive the financial assistance they need to boost themselves out of poverty. A concrete example would be this situation, which is outlined on the Kiva website -- traditionally, micro-lenders would be hesitant to lend to farmers to buy seeds for crops, because the farmers wouldn't receive a return on their investment until months later, in the harvesting season. By funding these loans, Kiva enables micro-lenders to give farmers loans with repayment dates far in the future, after the harvest.
      One last thing, Kiva has started a new model of lending in the US, where people in the US can apply for 0% interest loans directly from the Kiva website. These are truly 0% interest loans, and don't go through any 3rd party. Kiva released this program recently, and has been testing a similar program in Kenya, meaning they are researching its viability on a larger scale. So while they rely on the Field Partner system currently, they are looking forward towards a direct loan program at some point in the future.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.