Lifting the Poor: A Microfinance NGO Approach in the Philippines

UPLiFT, a microfinance NGO in the Philippines that provided microfinance and social services for the urban poor, was deciding whether to try to attain fast growth (tripling its clients in just a few years) or concentrate on serving the community in the philanthropic way it always had. The case presents UPLiFT's mission and operations, as well as the opportunities and challenges it faced in 2014. Excerpt UVA-GEM-0148 Jan. 31, 2018 Lifting the Poor: A Microfinance NGO Approach in the Philippines In September 2014 Edmon Sison, in his seventh year as executive director of UPLiFT (Urban Program for Livelihood Finance and Training), was anxious. UPLiFT, a nongovernmental organization (NGO) formed in 1993 by the French humanitarian organization Inter Aide, specialized in microfinance and social services for the urban poor in the Philippines. When Sison was brought on board in 2007, the NGO had just gone through three executive directors in a year, was regularly writing off 10% to 15% of its loan portfolio, and had expenses that in some periods were almost twice as large as its revenues. Under Sison's leadership, UPLiFT had achieved operational self-sufficiency, a substantial improvement from a decade earlier when it required regular cash infusions from its French benefactor. Sison was gratified by the achievements, but he knew UPLiFT could reach even more disadvantaged Filipino families, and he wished that UPLiFT, through financial access and social assistance, could reach the scale necessary to have a meaningful impact on poverty alleviation. The rallying cry at UPLiFT was “75 by 25”—75,000 clients by 2018, its 25th anniversary. With only 26,000 clients, it was far from its goal. Sison was struggling with many conflicting questions. Was the goal too ambitious? Could UPLiFT switch gears and grow that fast? Should the target be even higher—perhaps 200,000 clients? Or should UPLiFT just concentrate on serving the community in the philanthropic way it always had? . . .