The development objective of the Micro, Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise (MSME) Guarantee Facility Project for OECS Countries is to facilitate additional financial intermediation for MSMEs by supporting the establishment of a regional partial guarantee corporation.
... See More + It has two project components. First component, Capitalize the Partial Credit Guarantee Fund will support the capitalization of the Credit Guarantee Fund (CGF) for the provision of Partial Credit Guarantee Scheme (PCGs) to participating lenders (PLs). Second component, Project Management, Operating Costs, and Lender Training will support the Eastern Caribbean Partial Credit Guarantee Corporation (ECPCGC), which is responsible for the coordination, implementation, and supervision of the project. The project will finance, among others: (a) the recruitment and training of the ECPCGC team members; (b) training of loan officers at the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) supervised lenders; (c) the acquisition of goods such as equipment, software, and furniture for the ECPCGC; (d) monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities; (e) the financing of operating costs; and (f) the carrying out of minor works for the installation of any necessary computer hardware and minor refurbishing works of office facilities. The funds under this component will also be used to cover the annual audits of the firm’s activities, which are required by the ECPCGC Agreement. It will be important to review the contractual arrangements for the audit, including the terms of reference.
See Less -
The development objective of the Regional Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project is to improve the integration of disaster vulnerability reduction and climate resilience in national development strategies and management of public infrastructure; and to reduce the risk of loss of human life due to natural hazard induced structural failure of critical public infrastructure.
... See More + Some of the negative impacts and mitigation measures are include: (i) relocation or loss of shelter; (ii) loss of assets or access to assets; (iii) loss of income sources or means of livelihood, whether or not the affected person must move to another location; (iv) the involuntary restriction of access to legally designated parks and protected areas resulting in adverse impacts on the livelihoods of the displaced persons; (v) temporary relocation of mobile vending stall; and (vi) temporary land acquisition through lease of 1,200 square feet of land for the duration of the sub-project.Some of the mitigation measures include: (i) to facilitate the temporary installation of the footpath bridge for the duration of the project; (ii) Project affected peoples (PAP) can return to location previously used by PAP to vend; (iii) compensation equivalent to market value for temporary lease of the property; (iv) temporary relocation of stall business for an initial six months to facilitate construction of bridge; and (v) temporary acquisition of a family plot of land agreed to by all (sister and brothers) by way of lease for the purpose of constructing a temporary public footpath bridge for pedestrian crossing over the river.
See Less -
Some of the negative impacts and mitigation measures include: technical support especially through an entity established in the KT to monitor, oversee and support possible MSME participation in the PCG scheme; overall capacity development ranging from training in financial literacy, entrepreneurship and various business related fields to management training to be provided prior to and during any likely MSME accessing of the PCG scheme; and applicants only had to repay the principal borrowed yet the program failed.
... See More + By comparison, the same institution had a low interest rate programs implemented around the same time as that of the interest free loan program and that program was a success, with high repayment rates. What did the institution running both programs at the same time learned that mainly accounted for the failure of the interest free program in terms of repayment and the success of the low interest program in terms of repayment? The method of loan payment was the major difference and determining factor between the failure of the interest free loan program and the low interest loan program. The institution indicated that where the borrowers were required to come in to pay over the counter, they were lax and did not show discipline and commitment in making their payments. It was easier not to come in to pay and or to make excuses for not exercising discipline in making their over the counter payments. By comparison, payments for the low interest program were made from direct debit of accounts of borrowers who signed payment orders to the financial institution so their payments were deducted by the financial institution from sales and other deposits made directly to the bank from customers of the borrowers. In such a scenario, factors other than interest rate such as discipline and commitment is a greater determinant of repayment than the interest rate or not, ceteris paribus. Further, it is likely that the screening process when there was an interest rate was probably better as the lending institution had an incentive to better screen for potential applicants.
See Less -
