Rutherford
wanted to test out his idea that the poor would welcome an MFI that
offered them savings and loans for everyday money management, rather
than just loans for microbusinesses. His experience with MFIs (see the
panel on the left) made him sceptical of the usefulness of groups and
of joint liability, both to the clients and to the institution. He
believed that frequency, reliability & flexibility of services
mattered more.
SafeSave
therefore did not organise clients into groups, so there were no
compulsory meetings and no joint liability. Each client received a
daily visit from a bank worker (known as a Collector, and a
slum-dweller herself). At each visit, the client could make a saving,
withdraw money from savings, or make a repayment on a loan, in any
amount he or she preferred - including nothing at all on days when they
were short of cash. The loans had no fixed term and no fixed repayment
schedule, as it was believed that clients would match their behaviour
to their individual circumstances.
The SafeSave experiment was controversial. However, ten years on, we can see that the poor welcomed the services enough for SafeSave to grow and become profitable. For details, please turn to its own website, www.safesave.org |
|
