Search

Displaying 1 - 7 of 7

Lesson
Need to proactively monitor facility utilization. The need for effective monitoring was stressed in the RRP, but it was not carried our satisfactorily. Monitoring facility utilization was necessary to guide restructuring, realignment, and modifications, and, where required, to cancel allocations so ADB capital could be deployed more efficiently. ADB originally expected that over time, the PCG facility would allow PFIs to become familiar with SME risks and provide guarantees for a wider range of instruments, which would have prompted more PFIs to participate.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Better due diligence of financial intermediaries is required. ADB did not adequately assess the risk rating process of SBC or do enough work to understand its processes and procedures. A better understanding of SBC would have enabled ADB to assume more decision-making responsibility on the implementation of the facility. In addition, ADB should have undertaken due diligence of other potential PFIs at appraisal.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Underestimating the impact of staff changes. PSOD preferred to assume financial intermediary risk rather than risk associated with SMEs, which contributed to the delay in raising the credit limit to URC and the selection of new PFIs. ADB staff changes at the project officer level confused SBC and contributed to the lack of continuity and consistency of efforts by ADB.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
There has neither been a follow-up project in the Philippines, nor has ADB financed a similar project elsewhere in the Asia Pacific region. The issue of taking on SME risk against that of the financial intermediary needs resolution before its further application. The PCG facility could potentially be adopted in a number of ADB’s developing member countries, but further work is required to adequately measure and assess the risk-return benefits of the instrument for stakeholders.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Pricing needs to reflect market demand. The formal price change from ADB came too late to make a difference, since by then the price waivers had been granted. Likewise the first loss provision outlined in the RRP was dropped from the guarantee agreement between ADB and SBC.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
An adequate pipeline is needed. More care is needed in establishing a pipeline of PFIs. Due diligence was weak, preventing the participation of more banks before approval or immediately afterwards. Given more participants, the volume of guarantees would have increased and a wider variety of SMEs could have taken part. More exhaustive due diligence is needed in the future, especially in identifying and assessing PFIs. Poor monitoring and supervision of the project by ADB contributed to the low utilization of the facility.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date:
Lesson
Carefully assess effective demand for new instruments. For projects where similar models do not exist in the local market, more exhaustive studies and analyses of the demand and willingness to pay for guarantees covering SME exposure should take place.

Project Number: 36419-013
Project Name: Small and Medium Enterprise Development Support Project
Report Date: