SEF is a non-profit NGO based in the Northern province of Southa Africa. Of its 7200 clients, 95% are women. It has two programs, the Microcredit Program (MCP) and the Tshomisano Credit Program (TCP).  When SEF first started with its MCP program with small loans it realized that mere loan size was not enough in ensuing that the poorest were served. It then developed the Participatory Wealth Ranking (PWR) as a specific targeting tool to bring in the poorest. This was done through a new program, the Tshomisano Credit Program (TCP). TCP strictly targets women who live below half the poverty line.  

Mission: The aim of SEF is to work towards the elimination of poverty and unemployment by creating a supportive environment, where credit and savings services foster sustainable income generation, job creation and social empowerment

Targeting Tool: The TCP uses participatory wealth ranking (PWR) to select its clients. Community members generate the criterion for ranking and classifying its clients into different poverty groups. Those in the poorest group are selected for membership into the program.

Results of the Poverty Assessment of Clients: The figure below shows the poverty level of clients relative to the population they are in (non-clients). The population (non-clients) is divided into three equal terciles — the poorest third, the less poor, and the better off. There is a striking contrast between the poverty profiles of the MCP and TCP programs. The clients in the poverty targeted program, i.e., in TCP, fall overwhelmingly in the poorest category, while the majority of clients in the non poverty targeted scheme are found in the better off category. The majority of TCP clients (52 %) are located in the poorest category, as opposed to 9% in the better off category. The remaining 39% are in the less poor category. In comparison, 15% of MCP clients fell in the poorest category, and 35% are in the less poor group with 50% in the better off group.

The TCP poverty profiles indicate that SEF is reaching the poorest people and point to the success of the targeting mechanism (PWR) in encouraging poorer people to join the program. MCP in contrast appears to be reaching people who are better off.

Percentage of clients within the three poverty groups