When: Thursday, February 26, 2009; 6pm – 8pm
Where: Slate, 54 West 21st Street (btw 5th & 6th Avenue) http://www.slate-ny.com/
The Microfinance Club of New York, Microfinance Working Group at Columbia University and New York University Microfinance Initiative invite you to our 1st Joint Happy Hour! Come network, exchange ideas and learn about upcoming events at MCFNY! $4 local beers, $6 martinis and some light appetizers will be served.
RSVP: Please RSVP with keyword “Happy Hour in NYC” to mfclubny@gmail.com to confirm your attendance.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
January 29, 2009: Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) panel held by NY Women Social Entrepreneurs & Columbia University Multicultural Business Assn
Diverse non-commercial capital sources for social enterprises in New York City were introduced at the SRI panel last week by panelists from the NYC Venture Philanthropy Fund, the Fast Forward Fund, Givology, the Acumen Fund, and Microlumbia. SRI takes the form of grants, loans, or equity investment and is the latest wave of financing for social enterprises today. Regardless of the form, SRI is characterized by its focus on the double bottom line (financial as well as social impact) and accountability for results – not only output or services rendered, but also the impact of these products or services upon individual lives and communities – an even higher standard than commercial enterprises must meet. As traditional financial investors show an increasing acceptance of social as well as financial returns, the non-profit sector is innovating new mechanisms to invest in social enterprises with financially sustainable business models that offer payback to investors (e.g. through loans or equity investment with a limited return).
Olga Serhiyevich (an Associate and member of the Microfinance Forum Steering Committee at Morgan Stanley and board member of the Microfinance Club of New York moderated the event with provocative questions and analysis.
The NYC Venture Philanthropy Fund's chair, Heather Rees, explained the fund’s goal to make philanthropy accessible to all individuals by opening membership to individuals who commit to contribute $1 per day, i.e. $365 per year. The fund, run by volunteers, pools individual contributions to make a larger grant and technical contribution to a New York City social enterprise in a democratic selection process.
Diana Ayton-Shenker is developing a youth philanthropic or social investor movement as President and CEO of the Fast Forward Fund. The fund, to launch in several weeks, will empower youth, normally taught to wait until adulthood to have a financial impact upon society, to invest in other youth social enterprises to create global change.
Givology is another new organization in the field of microphilanthropy which enables individuals to contribute to the education of youth in the developing world, a key driver of economic development. Launched by its President Jennifer Chen, Givology recipients provide evidence of the impact of the investment in their education to their investors through their own reporting on this experience.
Molly Alexander, Business Development Manager at the Acumen Fund, described how the fund invests in enterprises in the developing world that solve critical issues in health, water, housing, and energy through its philanthropic and investment funds. An outstanding leader in the field of social venture capital, Acumen supports sustainable business models with capital and management assistance to produce financial and social returns and broad scale social impact.
Microlumbia, represented by Danielle Noto, is a non-profit that enables Columbia Business School students to provide consulting services to microfinance institutions (MFIs) in the developing world, to conduct due diligence on MFIs for investment, and provide education and marketing services. Sustainable due to its volunteer student staff, it is preparing for potential debt investment into selected MFIs.
The panel was unanimous in affirming that SRI is a fast growing field with new opportunities for funding appearing constantly.
Hosted by:
New York Women Social Entrepreneurs
Columbia University Multicultural Business Association
Olga Serhiyevich (an Associate and member of the Microfinance Forum Steering Committee at Morgan Stanley and board member of the Microfinance Club of New York moderated the event with provocative questions and analysis.
The NYC Venture Philanthropy Fund's chair, Heather Rees, explained the fund’s goal to make philanthropy accessible to all individuals by opening membership to individuals who commit to contribute $1 per day, i.e. $365 per year. The fund, run by volunteers, pools individual contributions to make a larger grant and technical contribution to a New York City social enterprise in a democratic selection process.
Diana Ayton-Shenker is developing a youth philanthropic or social investor movement as President and CEO of the Fast Forward Fund. The fund, to launch in several weeks, will empower youth, normally taught to wait until adulthood to have a financial impact upon society, to invest in other youth social enterprises to create global change.
Givology is another new organization in the field of microphilanthropy which enables individuals to contribute to the education of youth in the developing world, a key driver of economic development. Launched by its President Jennifer Chen, Givology recipients provide evidence of the impact of the investment in their education to their investors through their own reporting on this experience.
Molly Alexander, Business Development Manager at the Acumen Fund, described how the fund invests in enterprises in the developing world that solve critical issues in health, water, housing, and energy through its philanthropic and investment funds. An outstanding leader in the field of social venture capital, Acumen supports sustainable business models with capital and management assistance to produce financial and social returns and broad scale social impact.
Microlumbia, represented by Danielle Noto, is a non-profit that enables Columbia Business School students to provide consulting services to microfinance institutions (MFIs) in the developing world, to conduct due diligence on MFIs for investment, and provide education and marketing services. Sustainable due to its volunteer student staff, it is preparing for potential debt investment into selected MFIs.
The panel was unanimous in affirming that SRI is a fast growing field with new opportunities for funding appearing constantly.
Hosted by:
New York Women Social Entrepreneurs
Columbia University Multicultural Business Association
Monday, February 2, 2009
Microfinance East
My personal favorite moment from Day One of the Microfinance East Conference was a reprise of Damian von Stauffenberg's spirited critique of mainstream rating agencies S&P, Fitch and Moodys. (He took a similar tack at a November MFCNY Ratings event.) The MICRORATE founder joined Emmanuelle Javoy of PlaNet Rating, and Gary Kochubka of S&P on the panel and made some important (perhaps somewhat contradictory) points. He rightly pointed out that the mainstream raters have relatively little involvement in the industry. S&P, von Stauffenberg pointed out, has rated approximately 20 MFIs in all (compared to the over 400 ratings done by MICRORATE). And certainly, for those familiar with the industry, MFIs are far more likely to engage MICRORATE, Microfinanza, PlaNet Rating or other specialized microfinance raters over the mainstream agencies. And this, for von Stauffenberg, is a wasted opportunity. If mainstream raters were to enter in earnest it would provide an enormous boost of investment into the sector.
His second point was that the mainstream raters simply don't know how to rate MFIs. Microfinance is different and complicated. It requires a deep evaluation of assets, in the field, at the branch-level, with a good look at overindebtedness in the particular market, and not simply a desk review using mathematical models. (Moreover, he stated, given their role in the financial crisis, perhaps the mainstream raters don't know how to rate anything properly.)
Kochubka defended himself stating that S&P did not do "quickie" ratings, as von Stauffenberg called them, nor were the ratings model-driven. But aside from this denial, von Stauffenberg's remarks were not substantively responded to.
Von Stauffenberg also touched on the very important issue of conflict of interest. There is a fundamental conflict built into the current microfinance rating business model in that MFIs pay for their own rating. Its unclear what a different model would look like and the issue was avoided by Javoy and Kochubka. Another troubling potential conflict is the fact that some raters are affiliated with investment managers (the PlaNet group, for instance) and more should have been spoken about how those conflicts are managed.
His second point was that the mainstream raters simply don't know how to rate MFIs. Microfinance is different and complicated. It requires a deep evaluation of assets, in the field, at the branch-level, with a good look at overindebtedness in the particular market, and not simply a desk review using mathematical models. (Moreover, he stated, given their role in the financial crisis, perhaps the mainstream raters don't know how to rate anything properly.)
Kochubka defended himself stating that S&P did not do "quickie" ratings, as von Stauffenberg called them, nor were the ratings model-driven. But aside from this denial, von Stauffenberg's remarks were not substantively responded to.
Von Stauffenberg also touched on the very important issue of conflict of interest. There is a fundamental conflict built into the current microfinance rating business model in that MFIs pay for their own rating. Its unclear what a different model would look like and the issue was avoided by Javoy and Kochubka. Another troubling potential conflict is the fact that some raters are affiliated with investment managers (the PlaNet group, for instance) and more should have been spoken about how those conflicts are managed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
