Legal training for impact investing

Representatives of the Centre for Applied Legal Studies (WITS), Bowman’s and the UCT GSB Bertha Centre have been engaging in conversations about impact investing legal practice in recent months. The collective identified that that Deborah Burand (Grunin Center for Law and Social Entrepreneurship, New York University) would be Johannesburg in November and resolved to utilise the opportunity to establish a two-day convening on the subject. A group of lawyers, impact investors and regulators met to discuss South African legislation and how the legal profession can support the growth of impact investing.

Executive Summary

Legislation

Crowding in more capital & Regulation 28

  • South Africa has more potential regulatory levers for driving impact investment than available in the US where regulation has had a ‘chilling effect’ on capital commitments.
  • Draft explanatory guidance on the use of Regulation 28 in South Africa have been developed but not been formally issued. Indications are a lack of prioritisation for impact investments, as opposed to inherent complexity or a need for further policy development, is the key constraint.
  • Instead of developing policy inputs the emphasis may need to shift toward establishing and showcasing opportunities to utilise the legislation (e.g. exploring CIS vehicles) and establishing better accountability mechanisms.

Section 12J

  • Practitioners are finding ways to circumvent some of the restrictions of the Venture Capital Company (VCC) form – including workarounds for investing in real estate and the practice of spreading deals over multiple vehicles to circumvent ticket-size restrictions.
  • There are no similar tax benefited fund structures in the USA but work has been done to create specialised forms for social enterprises. However, these forms are largely based on state as opposed to federal law and have not been well tested in the courts to date.
  • There are concerns the VCC regime may not be extended past 2021 and collaboration with existing lobby groups such as SAVCA may be beneficial to assure its longevity and relevance for impact investments. The ILO also has an upcoming convening in Cape Town that will have corporate forms for social enterprise as one area of investigation

Data Protection

  • Data protection is topical in the US as impact oriented initiatives such as impact bonds have been finding it difficult to navigate data protection laws when proving their impact. There is increasing recognition that programme beneficiaries may not find contractual information on use and ownership of their personal information accessible.
  • South Africa has data protection laws in place but concerns about unauthorised transfers of personal information are still relevant. At times, it appears that inappropriate usage of data may be ignored as a minor concern relative to impact organisations’ wider social benefit mission.
  • This matter needs to be flagged as an area of concern going forward but most social enterprises in South Africa are likely not yet at a point where navigating the data protection landscape for impact reporting purposes is the pressing concern.

Securities legislation

  • French solidarity funds, which enable up to 10% of a pension-fund beneficiary’s contributions to go towards an impact mandate, are an interesting example of liberalising access to impact investments.
  • A domestic solidarity fund would be an interesting area to explore. However more work is required to gauge what the best institutional home of such an offering would be as trust in public sector bodies and major private financial institutions that host pension funds is low at present.
  • Legislation, along with legal action, sectoral mobilisation, and education on fiduciary duty, can be a lever for driving greater accountability amongst trustees and asset consultants.
  • It is also useful to research how effective self-regulation mechanisms can be established – possibly with a view towards formally incorporating them into law further down the line.

Transformation and impact investing (BBBEE)

  • There is significant competition for social impact funding in South Africa and the principles of transformation, embedded in BBBEE legislation, can be utilised as a tool to more effectively channel funding towards socially impactful investment.

Training and research

Training Programmes

  • The tools available to lawyers for impact deals are the same as for commercial transactions, however their application in evaluating risk-return is starkly different to ensure protection of the social yield

Legal clinic and partnerships

  • To be effective, clinic pedagogy must be immersive and requires substantial supervision of law students by a registered candidate attorney.
  • It is imperative for South Africa to build a legal community of practice to crowd-in expertise and promote efficient and effective lawyering around specialisations, such as impact investing.

Research Framework

  • Establishing new journals or seeding new ones can be a means of encouraging legal scholarship on impact investing.
  • NYU’s recent research has also been in areas including corporate governance arrangements, practices used to embed impact objectives in legal agreements and processes for implementing amendments to existing impact investment agreements.

Recommendations

  • Monitor upcoming changes to the legal environment and lobby regulators to accord greater urgency to issuing guidelines that facilitate the flow of institutional funds to impact investing
  • Research options and proposed amendments for widening use of the VCC form in impact investing and support initiatives lobbying to extend it past 2021
  • Research the enabling role of creating a dedicated social enterprise corporate form in South Africa.
  • Research mechanisms for driving reporting and accountability against both existing legislation (e.g. NDP, and Regulation 28) and new approaches such as self-regulating mechanisms.
  • Seek to maintain an awareness of the need to drive data protection in impact investing even as initiatives to support improved impact transparency evolve.
  • Develop collateral such as questionnaires that enables commercial lawyers to introduce impact investing lens to clients interested in investing for impact.
  • Develop mechanisms that can be used to enable social enterprises to access a greater share of enterprise development funding in the face of considerable competition from more traditional SME’s.
  • Map the wider landscape of stakeholders that may be able to provide resources (e.g. host a secretariat) or funding towards legal training initiatives e.g. Business Leadership SA, SAIFAC (at the constitutional court), DAAD or other university faculties.
  • Develop a roadmap for establishing a legal clinic involving engaged law faculties e.g. at the University of the Witwatersrand or the University of Pretoria and establishing collaborations between local and NYU legal clinics for cross border transactions.
  • Develop an impact investing legal executive education course for lawyers in partnership with existing reputable legal training providers e.g. Thomson Reuters Foundation and NYU. To be developed alongside Professor Deborah Burand.

Please contact Barry.panulo@gsb.uct.ac.za for further information on this work stream.

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Early stage finance consultation series

Executive summary

 

The Bertha Centre team is providing a secretariat for the National Task Force on Impact Investing. One of the key recommendations that are emerging is around Early Stage Finance of SMEs (not only for social enterprises but for SMEs across the board). We met with 20 practitioners across public and private sector in JHB and CT to discuss the objectives outlined below. All agreed there is a case for collaboration as long as it is focused and action orientated.

This is the first part of a consultation series we hope will culminate in the formation of a working group.

The barriers and opportunities discussed was organised around building the pipeline, designing appropriate tools and vehicles ad unlocking capital. The most pressing barriers according to the group around the table, were the lack of financial literacy and deal readiness, the lack of appropriate fund management models and the need to create blended finance instruments to crowd in non traditional capital. Thus the talk around potential solutions attempted to address those issues.

Next steps

  1. Discuss outcomes of this process with wider group of stakeholders
  2. Develop research framework to explore fund management models
  3. Engage with other researchers mentioned on their initiatives
  4. Bring a stronger fintech presence into the conversation

Barriers and problem statement

Problem statement: Efforts to support early stage, growth potential enterprises to obtain appropriate financing are not progressing as quickly and efficiently as they could be

It was noted that the problems in the survey appeared to be very sophisticated compared to the simple and yet fundamental issues that exist in the local market.

a) Building pipeline

Most of the barriers to ESF in the pipeline revolve around the capability of the entrepreneur. Attracting and training talent from school upwards is not the task of the National Task Force but a sustainable model of finances those activities could be.

Low financial literacy

  • Entrepreneurs are very revenue driven, but do not focus enough on the cash flow. Often entrepreneurs don’t even need investment but rather they need to better understand their cash flow.
  • Incubators create a reliance on an accountant within the incubator – this disempowers the entrepreneurs to do their own work. As a result, graduated entrepreneurs do not understand accounting principles and finance. Incubators need to improve their entrepreneurs’ understanding of the back and front end of the business, rather than just how to sell. They should empower independence rather than create dependency.
  • Small businesses often do not understand business modeling, and are doing hobbies than skill- and needs- based businesses.
  • There is little practical or moral incentive to pay back government loans. There is no culture around repayment which sets up bad habits and track record for future funding rounds
  • Investment readiness and prototype testing is a big gap. It is not enough to understand and present a business plan.

Entrepreneurs

  • Poor management and entrepreneurial capability, rather than entrepreneurial capability on its own. Management issues and operational issues are a concern.
  • Since businesses are small, those people are a vital component. Access to people with the right skills is critical
  • Poor management and entrepreneurial capability, rather than entrepreneurial capability on its own. Management issues and operational issues are a concern.
  • Lack of access markets (for township entrepreneurs, this is access to formal markets; for tech entrepreneurs, this is access to international markets).
  • Lack of propensity to become entrepreneurs.
  • Lack of innovative mindset and shared vision

b) Financial tools and vehicles

 Mismatch between investor and investee expectations

  • Poor communication between those in formal and informal economy. Investors have made very little effort to address financing gaps in the informal market eg Spaza shops and taxis.
  • Being within the community and having an on-the-ground presence is often necessary, to ensure that entrepreneurs are repaying loans.

Fund management models

  • Fund management structures are not inherently sustainable – fund management models are not appropriate
  • High amounts of TA required which need to be funded
  • Deal sizes are too small to raise larger funds and small funds are not sustainable
  • A lot of skill required at investor level because of the complexities in the market. Difficult to afford staff who can address this complexity successfully
  • The 2 and 20 model is outdated
  • Fund manager talent tricky to find
  • 90% of pipeline comes from networks but without adequate staffing it is difficult to expand networks – time constraints. This requires a diverse team with different networks.
  • Pipeline and fund management model are therefore interlinked

Acceleration and investment

  • There needs to be a clear link between acceleration and investment – in other words accelerators should be rated on whether the companies they support go on the raise investment and grow
  • There is a conflict of interest if accelerators are investing in their own investee companies

c) Unlocking capital

  • There is lots of money but it requires too much risk mitigation in order to be deployed.
  • Alternative credit scoring is required to reach a significant percentage of SMEs requiring finance. Most have no collateral.
  • Government funders tend to distort the market and do not have adequate recoupment processes. This encourages poor habits and false expectations. Much money has been wasted in this way.

Key areas where further research efforts can be focussed in advance of presentation to National Task Force

a) Building pipeline (eg start up development, accelerators, TA providers, transaction advisors)

Use data to inform intervention design

  • Create platform or use existing platform and feed in information
  • SEFA and FinFind currently working to collate information
  • Privately driven and publicly funded
  • EDI process at DSBD currently happening and could support efforts

Match investors and investees

  • Use data to understand criteria of both parties
  • Use spectrum of financial instruments available (can tap into international research on best fit)

Improve financial literacy and investment readiness

  • Simplify and standardise using technology platform
  • Simply accounting and make bank of accountants available
  • Ensure incubators have access to platforms
  • Standardise terminology

Reduce cost of investment

  • Lower cost of BDS, lead generation, deal readiness and due diligence. Impact investment should be considered a specific sub sector in this process and treated according to it’s own characteristics.
  • Create platform where data can be shared
  • Reimagine the ways leads are generated and shared
  • Ensure incubators or those picking up enterprises afterwards are making sure companies are deal ready
  • Mentor need to be high quality and paid for them to be of value
  • Use technology eg MyBucks for due diligence
  • Risk flagging tool to be used by investors to alert others to potential bad deals

Improve acceleration models

  • Focus on the link between acceleration and investment
  • Enclude and ANDE are doing research on this topic: what is working?

b) Financial tools and vehicles (eg alternative vehicle structures (eg Holdcos) and instruments (eg mezz, royalty etc)

Create alternative fund management model

  • Research on local and international models of fund management – create 8 page document that includes: 1. Local model mapping (archetypes – VC/ED/Evergreen etc)2. International model mapping (especially in emerging markets) 3. Recommendations 4. Impact specific considerations
  • Bring LPs and GPs into the conversation and include in problem solving process. Approach with consolidated viewpoint for discussion.
  • Lobby capital providers to allow different fee structures (eg DFIs)
  • Include local pension funds, SASME, SEFA, Jobs Fund and international funders (DDGF, Shell, OM, Palladium) in the discussion
  • Innovative models could include TA sidecars, 3rd party supplementation and impact incentives
  • SAME may be commissioning research on fund management models – don’t duplicate

c) Unlocking capital (eg Angels, foundations, DFIs, ED funds, government with catalytic models eg first loss etc)

There are mixed perceptions as to how much money is available. As a percentage of GDP is much lower than similar economies. There is therefore a need to attract capital into the space.

What?

  • More blended models, more concessional finance, more first loss capital
  • Tap more foundations, pension funds, institutional investments

How?

  • International and local research: e.g. Shell Foundation, evidence of how much catalytic funding is required.
  • Demonstrating test cases that work: e.g. Social impact bond, SEFA’s direct investment vs wholesale investment
  • Real incentives to provide first loss capital – i.e. tax incentives or codes of good practice, section 30C, etc.

Actions of a collaborative

  • Identify new pools of capital – expanding past corporates
  • Foundations – only 5% of grant money currently goes to entrepreneurship with the bulk going to education and health. Blended models could be encouraged. Build test case to influence other institutional investors eg DFIs
  • Banks are unlikely to crowd in because of risk profile
  • Institutional funding – currently low risk appetite and uptake of alternative assets (PE and VC specifically)
  • Develop blended finance instruments – attract different forms of capital

 

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

RFP: Lead Consultant, Philippi Village, UCT GSB

BACKGROUND

The GSB satellite campus in the community of Philippi, Cape Town, was established in a deliberate effort to deepen our roots and relevance as an African business school that is seeking to develop more socially relevant approaches to the challenges of our context.  This commitment was taken after five years of establishing relationships and working in partnership with organizations and entrepreneurs in Philippi East, and represent an important milestone in a longer journey of engagement.

Spearheaded by the GSB MTN Solution Space and the Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship, the Philippi Campus is the first community campus to be established by UCT in its 178-year existence. While the university has been active in township communities, with field sites, mobile health services and education programmes for decades, it has not, until now, established a presence with the long-term purpose of getting all students and stakeholders to engage and interact beyond the traditional spaces of the university.

Philippi Village is a mixed use, 6 000m2 economic development zone at the epicentre of Nyanga, Gugulethu, Mitchell’s Plain and Khayelitsha. The development, was initiated more than five years ago with the vision of creating economic opportunity through the active inclusion of those who are excluded from the mainstream of development, and the GSB has been involved in these conversations from the outset. The founding sponsor of the Bertha Centre at the GSB, the Bertha Foundation, is one of two founding partners in the initiative; the other being a Cape Town-based NGO The Business Place (now Business Activator).

For the first year of activities, the focus has been on (i) developing relationships with community-based organizations and representatives while mapping the ecosystem of organizations embedded in Philippi East and surrounds; and (ii) activating our Solution Space facility with events, teaching, workshops relevant both to the GSB’s traditional stakeholders and its new stakeholders in Philippi Village.

SUMMARY OF THE ROLE

The GSB is now seeking a credible and experienced consultant with leadership qualities to drive forward its strategy in Philippi Village and guide the work of the Solution Space and Bertha Centre teams to implement the key workstreams of the strategy.

The two key themes for the GSB’s strategy in Philippi Village focus on building capacity in

(i) entrepreneurship and (ii) youth development, as intersecting areas of need, opportunity and how they relate to the core competencies of UCT and the GSB.

KEY PERFORMANCE AREAS

Strategy development and alignment  

  • Lead the evolution of the GSB’s strategy, building on existing efforts of the GSB Philippi Steering Committee
  • Quickly develop an understanding of the context as well as the university and GSB’s core competencies in order to ground the strategy for purposeful action
  • Deliver a sound, integrated, imminently implementable short to medium term strategy that speaks to a longer term vision
  • Work with team to align existing programmes and initiate implementation of new activities of strategy (including stakeholder engagement, communication and programme design & implementation as below)

 Stakeholder engagement & communication

  • Identify key role players and understand existing relationships of UCT & GSB
  • Build a relevant stakeholder base
  • Embed a stakeholder strategy as part of overall GSB strategy in Philippi
  • Design & develop convenings for partnership, for influence, for thought leadership on inclusive spaces
  • Liaise with Philippi Village management as anchor tenant to build on an inclusive vision for the ecosystem
  • Guide the communications strategy as part of the overall GSB strategy
  • Build the appropriate narrative and key messages for internal and external communications

 Programme design & implementation

  • Work with Solution Space and Bertha Centre teams to develop inclusive processes to design and implement programmes aligned to the strategy
  • Develop quarterly programme plan with the relevant teams and review progress accordingly
  • Demonstrate active leadership in programmes as relevant
  • Work with GSB faculty to further embed and make relevant GSB learning and research programmes

Leadership & mentorship

  • Demonstrate bold leadership to represent the GSB’s vision for Philippi Village in multiple settings
  • Liaise with GSB leadership and the specialized centres active in Philippi Village
  • Provide mentorship for the Solution Space and Bertha Centre teams in Philippi Village aligned with the relevant team KPA’s.

Fundraising & resource mobilization

  • Develop fundraising strategy as part of overall GSB strategy
  • Identify, initiate and develop relationships with potential funding partners

Documenting and reporting 

  • Report to Philippi Village Steering Committee on quarterly basis
  • Guide the documentation and learning cycle of Solution Space and Bertha Centre teams and programmes in order to deliver a comprehensive integrated reporting
  • Synthesise and capture insights to inform strategy (internal) and to provide opinion and voice (external and media)
Project Name GSB Philippi Village
Contact Point Katusha de Villiers <katusha.devilliers@gsb.uct.ac.za>
Start Date As soon as possible
End Date December 31, 2018
Number of days Estimated to be at 75%-80% level throughout 2018
Submission guidelines

·  1-2 page concept proposal outlining approach, drawing on relevant experiences

·  High level budget with estimated days and rates

·  Profile of individual(s) and/or organization involved

·  CV and sample of previous strategy documents

·  Deadline 26 November 2017, shortlisted candidates invited for face to face meeting for discussion

 

Posted in Early Childhood Development, Education Innovation, Healthcare Innovation, Innovative Finance, ScaleShift, social entrepreneurship, social innovation, Vacancy | Tagged , | Leave a comment

National Advisory Board becomes National Task Force

The Bertha Centre team gathered a group of high level pubic and private sector representatives in August to socialise the idea of a National Advisory Board and receive feedback on the way forward. A few clear suggestions emerged which we have incorporated in our journey towards constituting the body and starting the work.

  • The parameters of the market need to be more tightly defined (especially in relation to existing initiatives) and a common language shared
  • Even though South Africa is unique there is much international precedent to draw on. Amit Bhatia from the Global Steering Group joined via videoconference to share global experience.
  • The governance structure is to be guided by the function of the body and it was suggested that the Board structured be parked in favour of Task Force.
  • A further meeting will be held in mid October to a wider group of stakeholders as momentum builds. watch this space!

WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS OF THE MARKET?

These thoughts represent a work in progress and we would welcome your feedback.

The Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) definition applies:

  • Investor must have the intention to make a positive social or environmental impact
  • The investment is made with the expectation of generating returns on capital
  • The range of possible returns is wide and not limited to particular asset classes
  • The investor must be committed to measuring and reporting the impact created by their investment

 

  • Impact investing does not include grant funding from the government and philanthropic donors given to by non-profit providers to provide essential welfare and social services. Grant funding however can be used to leverage repayable finance.
  • This initiative is deeply cognisant of the transformation agenda in South Africa although it is not the role of this task force to drive that agenda outside of the National Government policy frameworks. The transformation imperative is captured in a number of the Sustainable Development Goals especially Goal 1 (End Poverty) and Goal 8 (Decent Work for All) although the issue of ownership requires further interrogation.
  • The Task Force cannot deliver a new economic plan for the country. With the growth of the economy will come jobs and livelihoods, that will bring us closer to achievement of the National Development Plan goals. Impact investment can enable us to pull resources into particular sectors of the economy to enable inclusive growth.
  • The Impact Investing policy space is non-partisan around the world and is so too here in South Africa. Most governments welcome the use of private capital deployed for public good.
  • Impact can be measured across a spectrum with some investments more impactful than others. International coalitions are working on standardisation of metrics so that investments are comparable.

There are a number of other local initiatives working with similar intent including the:

  • Sustainable Finance Initiative 2017 (National Treasury)
  • Responsible Investing Standing Committee (ASISA)
  • The Sustainable Finance Committee (Banking Association South Africa)
  • The CEO Initiative

Once we have concluded interviews we will define what the Task Force will do in relation to these initiatives.

If you have particular insights that you think could help shape the work of the Task Force please reach out to susan.dewitt@gsb.uct.ac.za and let’s talk.

If you’d prefer to fit out a 10 minute survey then please follow this link.

 

 

 

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bertha Centre Teaching Assistant & Innovative Finance MOOC Mentor

The Bertha Centre offers and contributes to courses on the MCOM in Development Finance, MPHIL in Inclusive Innovation, Full-time MBA, Modular MBA and EMBA as well as Executive Courses.  The Centre is in need of a teaching assistant that can help lecturers manage the curriculum, marking and student interaction for these courses.

Additionally, this September sees the Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship launching their second Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) in partnership with UCT’s Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching. MOOCs are free with no entry requirements and allow for features such as interactive online forums that can involve hundreds of students in peer-to-peer discussions, as well as access to video lectures and course materials in online format to increase the reach of quality teaching. This course will be hosted on the Coursera platform.

The 5 week course draws on the principles explored during the Innovative Finance in Africa and is available to anyone who wants to make a difference. Whether they are already familiar with the field of innovative finance or impact investing, working for an organization that wants to understand how to innovative around its impact funding, or just starting out, this course will take the students on a journey of exploring the complex problems that surround us and how to think creatively about identifying resources to address them. Each week participants will consider an essential aspect of the innovative finance process. The course needs to be monitored by a course mentor. You will engage with the students with the guidance of the CILT team.

What will you be doing?

Starting tasks

  1. Attend a meeting with Bertha Centre staff to understand which courses you will be assisting (2 hours)
  2. Reading through course material and case studies (14 hours)
  3. Take/review the MOOC and give some feedback (12 hours)
  4. Become familiar with the Coursera platform (2 hours training with a CILT team member)
  5. Inform lead educator (Aunnie Patton Power) of any discussions and comments that require their input via email.
  6. Check peer assessments queue and see if any students have not received reviews within a reasonable amount of time; do some peer assessments if need be.
  7. Escalate technical queries that students bring up to the CILT team via email (e.g. learners can’t download transcripts)
  8. Report back to CILT team on any issues with course design (e.g. a quiz question students are complaining about).
  9. Give CILT team material to put into weekly emails to students (e.g. anything interesting that has come up in the course that week).
  10. Suggest new readings to add to course (sometimes students in the course share links so it would be capturing this).
  11. Attend course review meetings as and when held.
  12. Assist with marking of final assignments.
  13. Upload material onto Vula for courses and liaise with Bertha Centre faculty regarding logistics for courses.
  14. Attend courses as necessary.

Time Requirement:

30-40 hours a month (minimum 8 hours a week). As the course will be running every 6 weeks on an auto-cohort model (a new course starts every 6 weeks with learners moving onto the next cohort if they didn’t finish).  Courses for the GSB are on the academic calendar and the schedule will be discussed up front.

Remuneration:

Masters level (completed or currently completing) R 119 per hour and PhD level (completed or currently completing) R 123 per hour.

Application deadline:

Friday, 1 September 2017

Please email Aunnie Patton Power at aunnie.pattonpower@gsb.uct.ac.za for more information and to apply.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Palladium Impact Investing Conference Oxford

Palladium hosted a one day conference on Impact Investing in Emerging Markets, Capital Allocation for Sustainable Development on 26 June 2017 at Said Business School, University of Oxford. The conference brought together more than 120 impact investing thought leaders and practitioners from across the spectrum of; impact investment funds, development finance institutions, family offices, private banks, venture capital, private equity Universities, INGOs and Advisory Firms.

Bertha Centre for Social Innovation & Entrepreneurship’s Senior Project Manager, Innovative Finance, Dr Susan De Witt facilitated a workshop on Impact Bonds and how we can iterate and improve outcomes based payment structures tailored for emerging markets? Whilst impact bonds attract a lot of attention, it was a greed they were only one tool within outcomes based payments

The following was used by the organisers to describe the day, the report of which is yet to be released.

Can Impact Investing in emerging markets successfully facilitate capital towards achieving the Sustainable Development Goals?

Although the Sustainable Development Goals represent agreed common aspirations, the
United Nations estimates that reaching the SDGs in emerging markets will cost approximately $3.9 trillion per year and that private and public sources provide just $1.4 trillion per year. As a result, asset managers, financial institutions, governments, foundations, and aid agencies are increasingly placing emphasis on new products and methods of capital allocation to achieve social, environmental and financial objectives.

Impact Investing, despite often convoluted and opaque methodologies, has emerged at the forefront of dialogue as a potential ‘silver bullet’ – promises of financial returns above investor hurdle rates while simultaneously achieving social outcomes have proven to be an enticing combination. Impact Investing now represents a subset of every major asset class including private equity, private debt, public equities, ETFs, fixed income and real estate.

As toolkits, exit strategies and investor sophistication continue to evolve in emerging markets, and entrepreneurs continue to tackle ‘wicked problems’ that are of increasing urgency, Impact Investing now seeks to align with the sustainable development agenda on a global scale.

This one day conference included debates, interactive sessions and workshops on key themes and challenges at the centre of Impact Investing in emerging markets, including the following:

Sustainable Development
• Impact investing as a tool to address social and environmental prosperity in emerging markets
• Alignment of direct and intermediated investment portfolios with appropriate SDGs
• The effects of the SDGs on investment and exit strategies

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG)
• Effective methodologies and toolkits to address ESG concerns in the context of emerging markets
• Red flags and risk management techniques, both reputational and financial
• Role of ESG on exits – do ESG screens influence success?

Impact Measurement
• Incorporating impact and ‘lens’ based frameworks into the entire investment process
• Informatics approaches to capturing, cleaning and understanding impact data
• Relevance of impact on exit opportunities and strategies

Financial Structuring
• Designing and structuring approaches to align investors with varying financial return and impact objectives
• Blended finance, tiered tranches and bond issuances as direct investment strategies in impact-focused corporates
• Valuation methodologies and effective structuring of an investment exit

Financial Returns
• Realistic expectations for limited partners in impact investing funds
• Management, performance and technical assistance fees
• Exit visibility and impact on financial returns

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Social Impact Investing National Advisory Board

Social impact investment is the use of repayable finance to achieve socio-economic impact as well as a financial return. There is an explicit intention on the part of both investor and investee to create that positive impact. This could be an investment in education, healthcare, agriculture, and access to early stage SME finance amongst others, all of which represent major challenges in South Africa. The magnitude of these challenges far outweighs the public and philanthropic resources allocated to them. In fact with current investment levels in SDG[1]-related sectors in developing countries, an average annual funding shortfall of some $2.5 trillion remains. There is thus a need to attract private investment capital to tackle social and environmental issues[2].

 

SOCIAL IMPACT INVESTING NATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD

 

The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Graduate School of Business at the University of Cape Town has partnered with the Ford Foundation in order to provide a secretariat for a Social Impact Investing National Advisory Board (NAB). The NAB will identify areas of focus and advocate for a series of public and private sector strategies in order to support the growth of the market.

 

South Africa will be the first African country to take part in the Global Social Impact Investing Steering Group (GSGII)[3], which was established in 2015 as the successor to the Social Impact Investment Taskforce, established by G8. The GSGII is continuing the work of the Taskforce in catalysing a global social impact investment market across a wider membership. As one of the hosts, Darren Walker, has put his money where his mouth is with the Ford Foundation committing $1B from their endowment to mission related investments[4] – “As a society we are facing enormous challenges and through impact investing we can create sustainable, scalable solutions for the public good. Impact investing is a win-win, generating beneficial social or environmental impacts alongside financial returns”.

 

The GSGII is promoting a unified view of impact investment, facilitating knowledge exchange and encouraging policy change in national markets. Led by Sir Ronald Cohen, it brings together leaders from the worlds of finance, business and philanthropy across the globe, as well as government officials and network organisations active in supporting the impact investment sector.

 

IMPACT AROUND THE GLOBE

 

The global trend, which the GSGII was formed to accelerate, is gaining traction and recognition. The Global Sustainable Investment Alliance (GSIA) estimates that there are presently $22.89tn worth of assets professionally managed under responsible investment mandates – representing 25% growth from 2014 alone[5]. The most common form of sustainable investment is negative/exclusionary screening, applicable to $15.02tn worth of assets. ESG integration and corporate/shareholder action are also prominent strategies and account for $10.37tn and $8.37tn in assets respectively. A joint report by JP Morgan and the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) estimated the size of the impact investing industry at $60bn in 2014[6] and a recent survey suggests respondents had grown their impact assets from $25.4bn to $35.5bn between 2013 -2016[7].

 

Some instances of initiatives that NAB efforts and outputs have contributed to globally include:

  • United States: The NAB produced a set of policy recommendations many of which have been adopted since 2014[8]. The White House set out to track the commitment of $2.5B made by 29 impact investors[9] at the time, 42% of which they confirmed had been deployed a year later.
  • United Kingdom: The UK has pioneered the market in many ways including dedicated policy making teams and the creation of multiple innovative financial instruments. The NAB pulled public and private sector resources together to build the market to over £1.5B in size[10] across 3500 individual investments.
  • Australia: The most significant actions to come out of the NAB thus far include a blueprint for a new and independent $300M financial institution, Impact Capital Australia[11] and a $500k Impact Readiness Grants Fund in partnership with the National Australia Bank[12].

 

THE NAB PROCESS

 

There is a keen awareness that any process likely to result in actionable outcomes requires strong buy-in from both public and private sector. As such a group of thought leaders across a range of sectors will be chosen by a selection committee of their peers based on demonstration of technical expertise, political influence and passion for the inclusive, sustainable economy. The NAB will be a dynamic organisation made up of a core membership of 20 with a wider group of contributing experts depending on the areas of focus.

 

The bulk of the engagement will take place over a period of 18 months starting in the latter half of 2017. The core function of the NAB will be to critically examine the social economy and economy at large and identify key pubic and private sector levers that will accelerate the growth of the social impact investment market. Members will need to rely on their own experience as well as local and international expertise to identify 5 focus areas on the demand and supply side of the market. An individual or pair will be encouraged to take responsibility for a focus area and constitute a task team and/or commission research to build the business and impact case for the policy lever. These concrete recommendations will enable policy makers and SA business to encourage more impact investing. This process will be facilitated by the secretariat.

 

The outputs from this work will be showcased on local and international platforms and leading members of the NAB will present the work at the annual GSGII summit. The summit will bring together over 500 leaders and practitioners from the global network, including representatives from National Advisory Boards in its 13 member countries. Willing and able organisations and individuals will take the output of this process forward as has been done in other participating countries.

 

Why get involved?

Building the Social Impact Investing market in South Africa will result in a more sustainable and inclusive economy for the bulk of South African citizens

 

What commitment does it involve?

Quarterly meetings that will take place over an 18-month period

Working groups are likely to be formed around the 5 focus areas and they may choose to meet in addition to scheduled meetings

 

What compensation will be paid?

Local and international travel expenses will be covered

 

Who are we looking for?

A public, private or civil society sector thought leader with one or all of the following attributes:

  • A clear desire to improve social and environmental outcomes in South Africa
  • Technical expertise in the fields of investing, social and environmental programmes or public policy
  • Person of integrity with a degree of political influence
  • A track record of getting things done

 

 

How can I get involved?

Please send your CV to susan.dewitt@gsb.uct.ac.za by 15 July 2017 and you will be contacted directly. Alternatively you can nominate a colleague or acquaintance to participate if you think they fit the criteria

[1] Sustainable Development Goals

[2] “Investing for social impact in developing countries” in OECD (2016), Development Co- operation Report 2016: The Sustainable Development Goals as Business Opportunities, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2016-

[3] The Social Investment Task Force has expanded from an initial 9 countries (G8 and Australia) to include the G20 countries and more.

[4] Ford Foundation (2017)

[5] GSIA (2016) 

[6] JP Morgan (2015) 

[7] GIIN (2016) 

[8] Case Foundation (2016) Institutional Investor (2015)

[9] Duke Fuqua School of Business (2016)

[10] Big Society Capital (2016)

[11] Impact Investing Australia (2015)

[12] Impact Investment Ready (2017)

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Impact Bond Auditor Request for Proposals

1.     About the Bertha Centre

 

The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship (BC) is the first academic centre in Africa dedicated to advancing social innovation and entrepreneurship. It was established as a specialised unit at the UCT Graduate School of Business in late 2011, in partnership with the Bertha Foundation, a family foundation that works with inspiring leaders who are catalysts for social and economic change. Today the Centre is a dynamic space, with several programme areas in Advancing Social Innovation, Education Innovation, Inclusive Health Innovation, Innovative Finance and ScaleShift, with a strong focus on South Africa and Africa.

 

The core approach of the Bertha Centre has been to uncover, pioneer and connect social innovations and social entrepreneurs that work to generate inclusive opportunities and advance social justice in our country and continent. Since inception, our team has uncovered over 300 innovative models, programmes and solutions; convened over 5,000 citizens and practitioners across sectors; tested the feasibility of pioneering social solutions ranging from social impact bonds, social franchising, and social innovation hubs; and produced numerous knowledge outputs and publications and awarded over R4m in Bertha Scholarships to over 40 African students. Social Innovation & Entrepreneurship is now one of the school’s three strategic themes in its 5-year strategy.

 

In the last three years, our team has played a leading role in integrating outcomes-based principles into public and private sector contracts and financial instruments. We have worked with national, provincial and local governments to determine the potential for setting up Impact Bonds or other Payment by Results instruments for Early Childhood Development, workforce development, job creation, tertiary student support and HIV prevention.

 

1.1 The Impact Bond Innovation Fund

 

Background

The Impact Bond Innovation Fund (IBIF) encompasses two, distinct Early Childhood Development (ECD) Social impact Bonds being piloted by the Western Cape Department of Health (DOH) and Department of Social Development (DSD.) The Departments have procured their respective implementing partners separately. The DOH will be funding home visiting to mothers and children in the first 1000 days whereas the DSD will be funding home and community based services for children in the 2 years before school. This funding will be disbursed through an outcomes-based contract and financed through the impact bond mechanism.

Impact Bonds are a way of financing outcomes based contracts. Private investors provide upfront financing to Service Providers for interventions that aim to improve social outcomes. Typically, public sector entities or private donors make outcomes payments to the investors based on whether the social outcomes are delivered. If the programme is not successful, and depending on the terms of the agreement, the public sector may not pay anything.

 

Implementation

The two impact bonds share a single intermediary team and investment syndicate but have unique aspects in terms of stakeholders, target beneficiaries, metrics, reporting dates and other salient elements that the prospective auditor needs to be familiar with for the purposes of this RFQ.

For the purposes of this RFQ the term “Implementer” refers to a partnership between a service provider (NPO), intermediary and social investor.

Table 1: Implementation details for the two impact bonds

 

Element

 

DoH Impact Bond

 

DSD Impact Bond

Additional Stakeholders

Implementer: Philani

Intermediaries: D.Capital & mothers2mothers

Private Funder: Discovery Trust

Implementer: Western Cape Foundation for Community Work

Intermediaries: D.Capital & mothers2mothers

Private Funder: ApexHi Charitable Trust

Contract Term 3.5 Years 2.5 Years
Target Cohort

Cohort: Pregnant women, Children aged 0-2 years

Geography: Khayelitsha

Cohort Size: 1000 per annum

Cohort: Children Aged 3-5 years

Geography: Delft and Atlantis

Cohort Size: 1000 per annum

Outcomes

·       Recruitment

·       Improved access to quality antenatal care

·       Prevention of mother to child HIV transmission

·       Reduction in maternal alcohol consumption

·       Healthy birthweight

·       Improved exclusive breastfeeding rates

·       Improved immunization rates

·       Improved TB referral rates for exposed children

·       Correct weight for age

·       Correct height for age

·       Improved parenting skill

·       Recruitment & Retention

·       Attendance

·       Development Assessment – Early Learning Outcome Measure

2.     Objectives of the Auditor Role

 

  • Assure that the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system and processes are sufficient to accurately capture outcomes as defined in the departmental specifications and summarised in Appendices 1 and 2 (There is a possibility that this particular objective will be carried out alongside a representative from the DoH – more information will be made available at the briefing)
  • Audit outcomes reported by Implementer (with Technical Assistance from the Implementer and the DoH) in order to verify accuracy
  • Report audit findings to Implementers and Departments
  • Submit supporting documentation as part of the report (e.g. detailed exclusion reports, and syntax errors detected)
  • Resolve technical queries with respect to the audit process, outcomes and factors influencing the audit decision rendered as they may occur

 

3.     Activities

 

3.1 Quality assurance: The auditor will work to assess and promote the integrity of the monitoring and evaluation function performed by the Implementer (with Technical Assistance from the Implementer) at several points.

 

    • M&E Design: the auditor will provide input to the specifications of the M&E framework and accompanying operational procedures proposed by the Implementer to ensure that key quality criteria are incorporated into the M&E system at the outset of the contract.
    • M&E Operationalisation: the auditor will engage with the Implementer during the first few months in which the M&E system is operational to ensure that the system designed is being executed in the manner agreed.
    • Ongoing Quality Assessment: the auditor will, at an appropriate frequency of their own determination, engage with the Implementer to ensure that the M&E processes continue to be conducted with an acceptable degree of fidelity.
    • Assuring Analytic Processes: the auditor will review and comment on the process of analysis utilised to process data collected by the Implementer M&E function and create performance reports.

 

3.2 Verification: The auditor will, in the case of agreed-upon indicators, seek to provide independent verification of reported performance by crosschecking data inputs utilised by the Implementer to generate periodic reports with data independently accessed from the same source. This role will proceed as follows:

 

  • Conducting sample checks on source data – ensuring Implementer’s inputs correspond to the available source records. Service providers will need to determine fit for purpose sample sizes.

 

  • Replicating analysis – assuring the integrity of analysis and related conclusions on the level of performance achieved during the reporting period.

 

Verification can be done using a full replication of analysis or by using appropriate sampling based approaches.

 

Prospective auditors will need to outline their plans to verify performance for indicators with reference to the indicator descriptions included in the appendices to this document. Prospective auditors will need to provide due consideration for the verification techniques to be utilised and their suitability for making reliable conclusions.

 

3.3 Reporting: The auditor is responsible for producing a regular report communicating audit findings and detailed supporting documentation (e.g. detailed exclusion reports) to Implementers and high level audit findings to Departments as well as making recommendations as to whether outcomes payments should or should not be made on the basis of the performance reported.

 

The auditor will render formal reports in line with the key reporting dates outlined in Section 2.3. of this document. Reports will be shared electronically with the nominated representatives of the Implementer and the Departments no later than 14 working days after each reporting date.

 

The auditor may also be required to respond to adhoc requests for information from contract stakeholders in between reporting dates to the extent that such requests do not introduce an undue burden on auditor resources.

4.     Scope

 

4.1: Summary of Activities and Timelines

The contract term for the auditor engagement is 1 June 2017 – 31 November 2020.

Table 2 below outlines some key dates and linked activities to be completed for the purposes of this fund. Where specific outcomes indicators are specified the precise operational defiinitions of these indicators is outlined in the two appendices to this document: Appendix 1 – DOH and Appendix 2 – DSD.

Note that Quality Assurance functions extend past the initial engagement to inform the design and roll-out of M&E systems and bidders will need to outline what level of ongoing Quality Assurance is required throughout the remainder of the contract term.

Table 2: Activities and timeline (these have been amended and available on request)

 

 

Dates

 

Activity

 

Impact Bond

 

Activities

1 May – 31 August 2017 Quality Assurance DOH & DSD Consult to the Implementer on their proposed M&E system and recommend design improvements where appropriate.
1 September – 31 October 2017 Quality Assurance DOH & DSD Consult on and quality assure the roll-out process of the final M&E design.
31 December 2017 Reporting DSD

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment & Retention

Attendance

31 January 2018 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

30 June 2018 Reporting DSD

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment & Retention

31 July 2018 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

31 December 2018 Reporting DSD

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Attendance (Both Cohorts)

Development Assessment (Pre-Grade R)

31 January 2019 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

30 June 2019 Reporting DSD

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment & Retention

31 July 2019 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

Outcomes[1]

31 December 2019 Reporting DSD

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Attendance (Both Cohorts)

Development Assessment (Pre-Grade R)

31 January 2020 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

31 July 2020 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Recruitment

             Outcomes

31 October 2020 Reporting DOH

Receive performance information and audit the following indicators:

Outcomes

 

4.2 Accessing data

The auditor will need to access information from a number of sources to fulfil the function. The Implementer will submit performance reports shortly after the reporting dates outlined in Section 4.1 for auditing. However, the auditor will also need to liase with the designated Implementer contact in respect of the quality assurance function and obtain access to operational information relevant to this aspect of the audit at various times during the contract.

The auditor will have access to health database reports through the DoH’s Public Data Centre for the purposes of the DoH impact bond. The Data Centre will provide access to anonymised reports on matching success of the following indicators:

  • Recruitment (match identifying features of beneficiary to facility record of beneficiary)
  • First Antenatal Care visit prior to 14 weeks
  • Birthweight
  • Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission of HIV
  • Tuberculosis: Screening and Referral

The auditor will need to cross check reported data against souce data of the following indicators:

  • Immunisation
  • Weight for Age
  • Height for Age

Facility based or home-based verification can be conducted on a sampling basis provided that the reliability of conclusions is adequately motivated.

4.3 Data Verification

We require sampling and data verification plans aligned to the auditor scope of work be submitted for the purposes of this proposal. These recommendations will be agreed by Implementer and Departments for use during the contract period.

The successful auditor will be required to prepare and maintain adequate documentation in respect of these processes and audit outcomes to enable the Implementer to review analysis behind the audit opinion rendered in case of any dispute.

4.4 Generating and submitting reports

The structure of reporting will be discussed and agreed between the Departments, the Implementer and the successful auditor at time of contracting. At minimum this will take the form of a narrative report detailing the process followed for the audit, descriptive statistics relevant to the performance assessed and, in the absence of rigorous quantitative verification, rendition of a well-substantiated judgement call. The auditor will also be required to issue a technical report with detail of case exclusions and syntax errors detected.

5.     Accountabilities and Responsibilities

 

5.1 Contractional Relationships

 

The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship is managing this RFP process on behalf of the Departments and Implementers of the Impact Bond Innovation Fund and will not be a formal party to any contractual arrangements with the auditor.

 

The auditor will contract with the Special Purpose Vehicle representing the Implementers and an MOU with the two Departments.

 

6.2. Roles and Responsibilities

 

The responsibilities of the Auditor are as follows:

  • Designate a Project Lead to serve as the primary liaison officer for the duration of the audit agreement
  • Perform the quality assurance function in respect of M&E including reporting and provide feedback to the Implementer to strengthen these processes.
  • Cross-check specified indicators to verify accurate documentation and calculation of performance.
  • Provide formal and ad-hoc reports to nominated representatives of the Departments and Implementers as appropriate.
  • Present invoices for each periodic audit event (in arrears) over the course of the contract to the SPV for payment.

 

The responsibilities of the Departments are as follows:

  • Designate an Officer to serve as the primary contact for reports and other correspondence related to each impact bond.
  • Facilitate access to DoH data sources at facilities or through their data collection resources e.g. the Public Data Centre as necessary.

 

The responsibilities of the Implementer are as follows

 

  • Designate a single liason officer to engage with the external auditor with respect to the DoH and the DSD impact bond.
  • Provide access to data, as required, to the Project Lead nominated by the auditor in order to complete the audit
  • Provide timely electronic performance reports to the Project Lead nominated by the auditor for assessment.
  • Provide auditor with information regarding records, and operations as necessary for the auditor to fully perform their contracted duties.

 

6.3 Auditor Compensation

 

The auditor will be paid a fee in accordance with the terms of the audit agreement negotiated with and agreed to by the relevant commissioners and investors. Audit fees will be rendered in arrears upon presentation of an invoice for each periodic audit event over the course of the contract.

 

The audit fee will be paid directly to the auditor by the SPV representing the Implementer in accordance with the terms negotiated at the initiation of the audit agreement

 

6.     Application Procedure

 

Interested Project Partners should respond with proposals including technical and financial items.

 

The technical items should include:

  • Organisational profile and details
  • Details of previous experience developing and implementing projects as well as running M&E systems in a Public Health context, with specific reference to implementing RDQAs and extra-ordinary data quality audits, highlighting relevant topic or context (social investment, NGO, social enterprise) and 1 or 2 sample reports of some relevance to the nature of the present role.
  • Explanation of proposed approach and methodology drawing on activities outlined in the Scope;
  • CV(s) of proposed consultants/analysts that will be assigned to the project including nominated Project Lead.
  • MOU between partnering organisations if applicable

 

The financial items should include:

  • Breakdown of costs according to budget template supplied.
  • Explanation of cost assumptions
  • Costs to be supplied in ZAR
  • A fixed overall quotation up to a maximum of R500, 000

The proposals will be assessed based on previous experience, best value, i.e. best quality and cost-efficiency of the proposed offers. Only quotations that include both technical and financial proposals will be considered.

 

Date and time Event
11h00-12h30 11 May 2017 Briefing at Solution Space UCT Graduate School of Business
12h00 30 May 2017 Application submission
1 June 2017 Shortlist interview

 

There will be a 1.5 hour briefing session at the Solution Space and the Graduate School of Business, UCT on 11 May at 11h00. The Q&A from the briefing will be emailed to all interested bidders. If you cannot attend and have questions they can be emailed to BC in advance.

 

Shortlisted candidates will be contacted after the 30 May 2017 and asked to attend a 1 hour interview on 1 June 2017 during which time they will have the opportunity to discuss the proposal. This could be conducted telephonically.

 

Quotations and questions should be submitted and directed to Dr Susan de Witt at susan.dewitt@gsb.uct.ac.za by or before 12h00 on 30 May 2017.

 

We look forward to receiving quotes from interested parties.

 

 

 

 

7.     Appendices

 

Appendix 1: Department of Health Outcomes and Targets

 

A. Mother Child Unit

1. Improved quality of Antenatal Care (ANC)

 

35% of payment for Mother Child Unit

 

Definition: Pregnant women to have complied with all items on a checklist by the time of birth. The list comprises of:

(1) First facility based ANC visit prior within first 14 weeks of pregnancy

(2) Testing for HIV/AIDS, TB and Syphilis

(3) Commencement of treatment if positive for any disease above

(4) Mental health screening and referral (no proof of uptake of referral required)

(5) Reception of infant feeding counselling

 

Rationale: The WHO credits accessing antenatal care during pregnancy with lowered incidence of perinatal and maternal complications[2].

National policy guidelines[3] provide for a basic antenatal care schedule of up to 5 antenatal visits. An early booking visit (preferably prior to 12 weeks) is recommended followed by return visits at 20, 26-28, 32-34 and 38 weeks with an additional visit at 41 weeks if a client is still pregnant. Prescribed activities over the course of antenatal care include administration of a physical examination, MUAC assessment, gestational age, screening including HIV and syphilis along with ongoing monitoring and follow up tests.

The 2015/2016 Western Cape DoH Annual Performance Plan[4] sets targets for the proportion of women conducting their initial booking visit prior to 20 weeks. This policy has subsequently been revised to reflect the DoH desire to attract women earlier in their pregnancy.

The DoH is looking to promote agency amongst pregnant women attending ANC at facilities. In other words, CHWs will not only help identify pregnancies and encourage women to attend ANC visits but also educate and empower women to insist on a checklist of tests that should happen over 4-5 visits. The number of visits is not specified in this contracting round.

 

Baseline: This has been determined using sub-district[5] baseline where the service provider is situated. The number of women accessing ANC <14 weeks pregnant will be used as the numerator and number of babies born as the denominator. This baseline will be applied to all 5 elements. Baselines are derived using data from the most recent full calendar year of 2015

 

Sub district Baseline
CT Eastern Sub-district 41.32%
CT Khayelitsha Sub-district 38.84%
CT Klipfontein Sub-district 33.19%
CT Mitch Plain Sub-district 32.49%
CT Northern Sub-district 36.53%
CT Southern Sub-district 33.33%
CT Tygerberg Sub-district 44.73%
CT Western Sub-district 29.23%

 

 

Targets and payment: The payment will be split equally between each of the 5 elements on this list meaning they will attract 20% of the payment each. The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of the baseline with the maximum payment triggered by a 10% improvement from the baseline for each element.

 

Sub district Target
CT Eastern Sub-district 45.45%
CT Khayelitsha Sub-district 42.72%
CT Klipfontein Sub-district 36.51%
CT Mitch Plain Sub-district 35.74%
CT Northern Sub-district 40.18%
CT Southern Sub-district 36.66%
CT Tygerberg Sub-district 49.20%
CT Western Sub-district 32.15%

 

 

Minimum intervention time: 3 months

 

Cohort: All pregnant women recruited onto the programme for the minimum intervention time

 

Collection of data: Checklist signed and stamped by facility

 

 

2. Prevention mother to child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV at 6-10 weeks

 

25% of payment for Mother Child Unit

 

Definition: Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission (PMTCT) of HIV measured between 6 and 10 weeks post partum. The target applies to HIV exposed[6] infants as confirmed in the antenatal period.

 

Rationale: Administration of a Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) HIV test to HIV exposed infants provides a crucial means of early detection of infant infection and intervention. In the absence of suitable intervention approximately 33% of infected infants do not survive their 1st year of life and a majority succumb to the virus before the age of 2[7].

The 2015 National Consolidated Guidelines for PMTCT[8] mandate the use of PCR at birth for all HIV exposed infants repeated at 10 weeks. In addition they require immediate initiation on ART for infants with positive PCR whilst awaiting confirmatory testing and also provides for repetition of PCR at 18 weeks for those on extended 12 week NVP.

The 2015/2016 Western Cape DoH Annual Performance Plan sets targets for the proportion of infants testing positive for HIV on 6 week PCR. The target level for 2016/2017 is 1.4% and the 2017/2018 target is 1.3%. The WHO expects a 2% transmission rate on Option B+ therapeutic regime.

 

Target and payment: This target applies to HIV exposed infants. Full payment will be triggered if transmission rates are maintained[9] at an absolute value of less than or equal to 2%. There are no minimum payment triggers for this outcome.

 

Minimum intervention time: 6 months

 

Cohort: All infants whose mothers have tested positive for HIV during pregnancy at least 3.5 months before they are born

 

Data collection: PCR

3. Maternal Alcohol Consumption

 

15% of payment for Mother Child Unit

 

Definition: Identification of at-risk women and subsequent exposure to a CHW led intervention or referral to appropriate state programme. CHWs do not have to prove that women have accessed state programmes even if they have been referred. In addition, service providers are required to carry out a modified ASSIST test at baseline survey and 3 months after pregnant women are recruited onto the programme. This indicator is an output and not an outcome as there is insufficient data to develop an outcome target.

 

Rationale: Maternal alcohol consumption is linked to low birth weight and developmental delays[10]. The onset of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) in infants has also been linked to reduced child development in South Africa in particular and there are suggestions that the developmental gap widens over time[11]. The increased demand for remedial health services related to child FASD diagnoses is estimated to amount to USD 1039 per child annually within the Western Cape Province[12]. Historic policy guidance is for all pregnant women to avoid consumption[13]. Enquiries about potential substance abuse form part of the antenatal risk assessment process.

 

Targets and payment: The minimum payment will be triggered by 90% achievement of the indicator as described above with the maximum payment triggered by a 100% achievement of the indicator.

 

Minimum intervention time: 3 months

 

Cohort: All pregnant women recruited onto the programme for the minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: Modified ASSIST test at start and 3 months after recruitment

4. Birth weight > 2500grams

 

25% of payment for Mother Child Unit

 

Definition: Birth weight >2500g at time of birth

 

Rationale: Low birth weight is a risk factor for higher rates of subnormal growth, morbidity and neurodevelopmental problems including deficits in cognition, attention and neuromotor function. Long term studies suggest that deficits linked to low birth weight endure into adolescence and cognitive deficits may widen over time[14]. The WHO estimates that 15 to 20 percent of births worldwide are below 2500g and targets a 30 percent reduction in the metric by 2025[15].

 

Baseline: This will be determined using sub district model[16] calculation where weights have been tracked from all facilities back to sub district. Baselines are derived using data from the most recent full calendar year being 2015

 

Sub district Baseline
CT Eastern Sub-district 80.56%
CT Khayelitsha Sub-district 90.37%
CT Klipfontein Sub-district 84.70%
CT Mitch Plain Sub-district 87.98%
CT Northern Sub-district 80.63%
CT Southern Sub-district 85.32%
CT Tygerberg Sub-district 87.37%
CT Western Sub-district 87.41%

 

 

Targets and payment: The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of the baseline with the maximum payment triggered by a 1-5% improvement from the baseline. The target has been calculated using the following equation: (100 – Baseline)*0.2 + Baseline.

 

Sub district Target
CT Eastern Sub-district 84.45%
CT Khayelitsha Sub-district 92.30%
CT Klipfontein Sub-district 87.76%
CT Mitch Plain Sub-district 90.38%
CT Northern Sub-district 84.50%
CT Southern Sub-district 88.26%
CT Tygerberg Sub-district 89.90%
CT Western Sub-district 89.93%

 

 

Minimum intervention time: 5 months

 

Cohort: All babies born to women who have been on the programme for at least 5 months

 

Data collection: Road to Health Card

 

 

B. Child 0-1 years

1. Exclusive Breast Feeding (EBF) for 3 months

 

25% of payment for Child 0-1 years

 

Definition: Exclusive breastfeeding until 3 months of age. The child is fed on breast milk only and receives no water, milk, formula, juice, tea or solid food.

 

Rationale: Exclusive breastfeeding is associated with protective effects. The WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding 6 months. This reduces the risk of gastrointestinal infections for the baby but not the risk of other infections or allergic diseases[17]. There is also a possibility that longer duration of exclusive breastfeeding improves length and head circumference at 12 months[18]. National guidelines on maternity care[19] recommend exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months for both HIV positive and negative mothers with a course of ART to prevent HIV transmission where applicable.

Provincial policy is to recommend 6 months of exclusive breastfeeding with complementary feeding introduced thereafter unless the child is HIV positive – in which case rapid weaning is recommended[20]. The DoH has chosen a 3 month period of EBF to test the indicator before increasing targets.

 

Baseline: Exclusive breast feeding incidence data is collected at 14-week immunisation based on 24-hour recall of what the infant has ingested. The metric is however new and the DoH does not yet trust the accuracy of the baselines. Although the national SANHANES data indicates an incidence of 9% in the Western Cape DHIS results indicate an annual increase for the last 3 years reaching 27% last year. National targets are set at 55%.

 

Targets and payment: Outcomes are self reported based on 24-hour recall of infant feeding. They are to be checked at 2 and 3 months. The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of 10% incidence of EBF with the maximum payment triggered by a 30% incidence in EBF.

 

Minimum intervention time: 3 months

 

Cohort: All women who have given birth whilst on the programme

 

Data collection: Road to Health Card

 

2. Weight for Age

 

30% of payment for Child 0-1 years

 

Definition: Weight for age >(-1) standard deviation of WHO Child Growth Standards adjusted for birth weight as per individualised growth trajectory.

The result will need to be within target limits when measured 6 months into programme and again 2 months later indicating a good growth trend rather than an absolute value at a single point in time. Rehabilitation would be regarded as being achieved when the child has returned to their birth growth trajectory pattern and maintains the growth pattern for two consecutive months

 

Note: Birth growth trajectory can be calculated using the Road to Health card. The growth chart allows adjustment according to birth weight as it correlates to age. In other words if children are born underweight their growth trajectory will initially track that of a child prematurely born. The calculation of the curve will need to include the catch up growth required to reach individualised growth trajectory. Follow DoH guidelines for curve adjustment.

 

Rationale: Low weight for age is associated with short to medium term malnutrition. Malnutrition is linked to increased child mortality due to the impact of infectious diseases including diarrhoea[21]. The WHO suggests that underweight is a contributing factor in 60% of child deaths in developing countries[22]. Prolonged malnutrition may lead to stunting in future which is associated with significant developmental deficits in affected individuals.

The United Nations is committed to eliminating underweight by 2030 as part of the recent transition to Sustainable Development Goals[23].

 

Baseline: The baseline will be calculated using cohort data ie the weight for age of the children recruited onto the programme. All children weighing >(-1) standard deviation of WHO median adjusted for birth weight as per individualised growth trajectory will be considered normal. All children weighing <(-1) standard deviation of WHO median adjusted for birth weight as per individualised growth trajectory will be considered underweight.

 

Targets and payment: The aim is to get children to >(-1) standard deviation from the WHO median weight for age adjusted for birth weight as per individualised growth trajectory. The minimum payment will be triggered by the sum of the baseline plus 10% of those considered underweight and the maximum payment will be triggered by the sum of the baseline plus 35% of those considered underweight. Baselines can be based on those calculated in the first year or they can be adjusted on an annual basis to reflect changing baselines if significant fluctuation is expected.

 

Example: If there is a cohort of 100 and 70% are considered normal when recruited, then the minimum payment trigger is 73% (70% + 0.1(30%)) and the maximum payment trigger is 80% (70% + 0.35(30%)).

 

Minimum intervention time: 8 months

 

Cohort: All children recruited on the programme that are between the ages of 3-6 months in order for the baseline measurement to be taken and for 8 months thereafter.

 

Data collection: Road to Health Card

 

3. Fully immunized at 12 months

 

15% of payment for Child 0-1 years

 

Definition: Received all Immunisations as per EPI schedule by the age of 14 months. The vaccinations should be given within the first year of life but the cut off has been extended to accommodate those struggling to access facility services. The vaccinations include OPV, BCG, RV,Hexavelent (DTaP-IPV-HB-Hib), PCV and Measles.

 

Rationale: Immunization is associated with benefits including avoidance of treatment costs from reduced disease prevalence, reductions in mortality, and reductions in morbidity and improved quality of life[24]. Cost benefit analyses for immunization have been generally supportive of the significance of such effects and the benefit cost ratio of investing in routine childhood immunization is placed at between 3.0 and 10.1[25].

Herd immunity is required to prevent outbreaks of communicable diseases levels in excess of 85%[26] may be required to prevent wide-scale outbreaks. The Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI)[27] in South Africa covers 11 antigens and the National Department of Health also employs the Reach Every Community (REC) strategy to improve coverage[28]. The National Department of health targets a 96% coverage rate based on the number of children fully immunized at 1 year.

 

Baseline: Currently 9-month vaccination rates vary little between sub districts.

 

Targets and payments: The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of 75% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by a 90% achievement level.

 

Minimum intervention time: 6 months

 

Cohort: All children recruited onto programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: Road to health Card

 

2. PMTCT at 9 months

 

20% of payment for Child 1-2 years

 

Definition: Prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV measured at 9 months. The target applies to HIV exposed[29] infants who test negative for HIV at 6-10 weeks.

 

Baseline: Baselines are unreliable as only a portion of exposed infants are tested at this age.

 

Target and payment: This target applies to HIV exposed infants. Full payment will be triggered if transmission rates are maintained[30] at an absolute value of less than or equal to 4%. There are no minimum payment trigger for this outcome.

 

Minimum intervention time: 6 months

 

Cohort: All children who tested negative for HIV at 6-10 weeks whose mothers are HIV positive who have been on programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: Rapid HIV antibody screening test and if positive confirm with PCR.

 

4. TB Referral

 

10% of payment for Child 0-1 years

 

Definition: Identification, testing and adherence to medication of children exposed to TB. Adherence refers to both prophylactic and treatment regimes.

 

Rationale: Infant TB exposure is a significant concern. Infant TB is more difficult to diagnose and children at much higher risk of progression to active TB than adults who have more resilient immune systems. In the absence of preventative measures approximately 50% of infants, even those delivered at term, develop active TB after infection. Children are also not just more likely to develop active TB but are also at increased risk of mortality and morbidity. Prior to TB treatment mortality ranged from 55% in children under 6 months of age to approximately 30% in children aged 1-2 years[31].

The Department of Health recommends screening for TB in cases of documented exposure. Testing is recommended for cases demonstrating symptoms of TB using a skin test. Where children are presently asymptomatic but are under the age of 5 or HIV+ prescription of TB prophylaxis is recommended daily for a 6 month period during which children are routinely screened for symptoms of the disease[32].

 

Targets and payment: The payment will be split equally between “identification and testing” and “adherence”.

Identification and testing: The minimum payment will be triggered 70% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by a 90% achievement.

Adherence to prophylactic or therapeutic regime: The minimum payment will be triggered 30% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by a 60% achievement.

 

Minimum intervention time: 2 months for testing and 6 months for adherence

 

Cohort:

Identification and Testing: All children who are tested as a result of being exposed to TB and have been on programme for minimum intervention time

Adherence to prophylactic or therapeutic medication: All children who are medicated prophylactically or therapeutically after the test and have been on programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: TB test results and drug prescription data

 

 

C. Child 1-2 years

 

1. Height for Age

 

30% of payment for Child 1-2 years

 

Definition: Height for age >(-2) standard deviations of WHO Child Growth Standards to be measured after 12 months on the programme

 

Rationale: Stunting is associated with a number of adverse long-term effects on cognitive development, school achievement, economic productivity and maternal reproductive outcomes in future[33]. In the short term stunting is linked to increased mortality and morbidity from infection – especially pneumonia and diarrhoea. In the medium term cognitive and behavioural difficulties manifest in stunted children with clear signs of decreased adult height and economic attainment in adulthood[34]. Cost benefit analysis for stunting suggests prevention is associated with benefit cost ratios of between 4.9 and 65.4 in developing country contexts[35].

 

Baseline: The baseline will be calculated using cohort data ie the height for age of the children recruited onto the programme. All children >(-2) standard deviations of WHO median will be considered normal. All children >(-2) standard deviations of WHO median will be considered stunted.

 

Targets: The aim is to get children >(-2) standard deviations from the WHO median height for age.

The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of the baseline and the maximum payment will be triggered by the sum of the baseline and 20% of those considered stunted. Baselines can be based on those calculated in the first year or they can be adjusted on an annual basis to reflect changing baselines if significant fluctuation is expected.

 

Example: If there is a cohort of 100 and 80% are considered normal and 20% are considered stunted when recruited, then the minimum payment trigger is 70% and the maximum payment trigger is 74% (70% + 0.2(20%)).

 

Minimum intervention time: 12 months

 

Cohort: All children recruited from the age of 10 months who have been on the programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: Road to health Card

 

2. PMTCT at 18 months or 6 weeks post-breastfeeding

 

20% of payment for Child 1-2 years

 

Definition: Prevention of mother to child transmission (PMTCT) of HIV measured at 18 months or 6 weeks post breast feeding. The target applies to HIV exposed[36] infants who test negative for HIV at 9 months.

 

Baseline: Only 40% of exposed infants are tested at this age. Baselines are unreliable.

 

Target and payment: This target applies to HIV exposed infants. Full payment will be triggered if transmission rates are maintained[37] at an absolute value of less than or equal to 5%. There are no minimum payment triggers for this outcome.

 

Minimum intervention time: 6 months

 

Cohort: All children who tested negative for HIV at 9 months whose mothers are HIV positive

 

Data collection: PCR

 

3. Fully immunised at 18 months

 

10% of payment for Child 1-2 years

 

Definition: Received all immunisations as per EPI Schedule by 20 months. All immunisations should be given by 18 months but the cut off has been extended to accommodate those struggling to access facility services. The vaccinations include full courses of OPV, BCG, RV,Hexavelent (DTaP-IPV-HB-Hib), PCV and Measles.

 

Baseline: National targets sit at 90%[38]. Provincial targets are lower at 77.5%[39] for 2015/2016. Currently 18-month vaccination rates vary between sub districts.

 

Targets and payments: The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of 65% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by an 80% achievement level.

 

Minimum intervention time: 1 month

 

Cohort: All children recruited onto programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: Road to Health Card

 

4. TB Referral (10%)

 

Definition: Identification, testing and adherence to medication of children exposed to TB. Adherence refers to both prophylactic and treatment regimes.

 

Targets and payment: The payment will be split equally between “identification and testing” and “adherence”.

Identification and testing: The minimum payment will be triggered 70% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by a 90% achievement.

Adherence to prophylactic or therapeutic regime: The minimum payment will be triggered 30% achievement with the maximum payment triggered by a 60% achievement.

 

Minimum intervention time: 2 months for testing and 6 months for adherence

 

Cohort:

Identification and Testing: All children who are tested as a result of being exposed to TB and have been on programme for minimum intervention time

Adherence to prophylactic or therapeutic medication: All children who are medicated prophylactically or therapeutically after the test and have been on programme for minimum intervention time

 

Data collection: TB test results and drug prescription data

5. Parenting

 

30% of payment for Child 1-2 years

 

Definition: Parenting interaction with children strengthened in 4 domains on assessment including affection, responsiveness, encouragement and teaching.

 

Rationale: Parenting programmes provide an avenue of improving parental efficacy and are a means of capacitating parents to effect improvements in child outcomes. Effective parenting practices are targeted towards achieving improvements in child behaviour, cognitive development and physical health in addition to reducing incidences of child maltreatment[40]. There is evidence that parenting programmes have significant effects on conduct problems[41], significant effects on maternal wellbeing including indicators of depression, anxiety/stress[42], parental mental health, harsh parenting practices and positive parenting skills[43]. Cost benefit ratios for parenting programmes range from 8-17.

 

Experimental design:

 

A quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest design with a control group will be used to assess impact at final payment. Using this design, there will be a separate control community with control parents or primary caregivers. Both the intervention and control group of parents or primary caregivers would be assessed twice, once at baseline and once at the end of the intervention. The design would test for a significantly greater change on the PICCOLO between baseline and follow-up in the intervention sites, relative to the control sites. The required sample size to detect this would be about 150 parenting assessments in the intervention group, and 150 parenting assessments in the control group.

 

The advantages of the design are that DoH are able to detect an impact of the intervention on the target audience over and above a natural maturation (or improvement) in parenting ability that has been observed on the PICCOLO as children age over a 12-month period. In other words, older children tend to elicit a stronger parenting response from parents than younger children, and simply measuring the same parents at baseline and endpoint might wrongly attribute apparent improvements in their parenting ability to the intervention, and not this natural maturation effect. As one would expect the control parents to exhibit this same effect, such a design that takes the difference between the difference in baseline and follow-up would therefore have the advantage of being able to plausibly make a call as to not only whether PICCOLO scores have increased by 10% relative to the control, but also whether the DoH parenting interventions have caused these changes in the PICCOLO score.

Assessments are to be carried out by a small, trained cohort of CHWs within the service provider or intermediary organisation.

 

Targets and payment:

 

There will be 2 equal payments for this indicator. These payments will be made on a cohort basis as only a sample of parents or primary caregivers will be tested.

 

The first payment will be made at the end of the second year. The minimum payment will be triggered by achievement of 5% positive change in the average PICCOLO score from the baseline (pre-test) with the maximum payment triggered by a 10% positive change score from the baseline. The payment will be calculated on a pro-rata basis depending on the degree of improvement.  If the service provider fails to achieve the maximum outcome at the end of the second year the payment will be recalculated at the end of the contract period and payment topped up if results improve.

 

The second payment will be made at the end of the third year. The minimum payment will be triggered by a 5% greater improvement from baseline scores than a control group with maximum payment triggered by a 10% greater improvement from baseline scores than the control group. The payment will be made on a pro-rata basis depending on the degree of improvement.

 

 

Minimum intervention time: 12 months

 

Cohort: 150 Parents or primary caregivers that have been on the programme since their child was born and 150 parents or primary caregivers who have received no intervention. The first assessment is to be carried out on the parent or primary caregiver when the child reaches between 10-12 months and the second assessment 1 year later. Recruitment can happen over the 3 years

 

Data collection: Assessment sheets

 

Appendix 2: Department of Social Development Outcomes

Recruitment and retention of children onto programme: Children will be recruited during the first half of the calendar year and will continue to be part of the programme at the time this indictor is measured as per Table 2.

Attendance of children on programme: Only children attending greater than 50% of the programme will be eligible for a payment.

Development Assessment of PreGrade R children using Early Learning Outcome Measure in years 2 and 3 of the contract.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] Refers to all indicators outlined in Appendix 1 besides the Recruitment Indicator

[2]

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/effective_antenatal_care.pdf

[3] http://www.health-e.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Maternal-Care-Guidelines-2015_FINAL-21.7.15.pdf

[4] https://www.westerncape.gov.za/sites/www.westerncape.gov.za/files/department-of-health-annual-performance-plan-2015-2016.pdf

[5] 95% of babies are born at Maternity obstetric units or primary healthcare facilities. The remaining 5% are born at one of 3 tertiary facilities in the province including Red Cross Children’s Hospital, Groote Schuur Hospital and Tygerberg Hospital.

[6] The pregnant woman tests positive for HIV using PCR

[7] http://www.who.int/hiv/paediatric/EarlydiagnostictestingforHIVVer_Final_May07.pdf

[8] http://www.sahivsoc.org/upload/documents/ART%20Guidelines%2015052015.pdf

[9] Provincial transmission rates range average <2%.

[10] https://depts.washington.edu/fasdpn/pdfs/ulleland.pdf

[11] https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/2055368

[12] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21131141

[13] https://www.westerncape.gov.za/text/2003/humangenetics.pdf

[14] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7543353

[15] http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/globaltargets2025_policybrief_lbw/en/

[16] The province groups primary healthcare facilities depending on geographic area and population type. 95% of babies are born at Maternity obstretric units or primary healthcare facilties. The remaining 5% are born at one of 3 tertiary facilties in the province including Red Cross Children’s Hospital, Groote Schuur Hospital and Tygerberg Hospital.

[17] http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2011/breastfeeding_20110115/en/

[18] http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/78/2/291.full

[19] http://www.health-e.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Maternal-Care-Guidelines-2015_FINAL-21.7.15.pdf

[20] https://www.westerncape.gov.za/general-publication/exclusive-breastfeeding

[21] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2486780/pdf/bullwho00408-0029.pdf

[22] http://www.who.int/whr/2002/overview/en/index1.html

[23] http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sdgoverview/post-2015-development-agenda/goal-2.html

[24] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2395923/pdf/bullwho00426-0146.pdf

[25] http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2014/02/25/peds.2013-0698

[26] http://op12no2.me/stuff/herdhis.pdf

[27] http://www.afro.who.int/en/south-africa/country-programmes/4245-expanded-program-on-immunization-epi.html

[28] http://www.afro.who.int/en/south-africa/country-programmes/4245-expanded-program-on-immunization-epi.html

[29] The pregnant woman tests positive for HIV using PCR

[30] Provincial transmission rates range average <2%.

[31] http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jir/2013/781320/

[32] http://www.sahivsoc.org/upload/documents/National-Childhood-TB-Guidelines-2013.pdf

[33] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21929633

[34] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232245/

[35]http://www.copenhagenconsensus.com/sites/default/files/food_security_and_nutrition_perspective_-_horton_hoddinott_0.pdf

[36] The pregnant woman tests positive for HIV using PCR

[37] Provincial transmission rates range average <2%.

[38] http://www.health-e.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/SA-DoH-Annual-Performance-Plan-2014-to-2017.pdf

[39] https://www.westerncape.gov.za/sites/www.westerncape.gov.za/files/department-of-health-annual-performance-plan-2015-2016.pdf

[40] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10802-007-9201-9#/page-1

[41] http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1753-2000-3-7/fulltext.html

[42] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1314244/pdf/12030667.pdf

[43] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ebch.1905/full

Posted in Innovative Finance | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Job Opportunity: Research Assistant – Bertha Centre African Investing for Impact Barometer

The African Investing for Impact (AIFI) Barometer is an annual publication produced by the Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship. It strives to objectively depict the spectrum of investments in Africa which seek to combine financial returns and positive impact on society and the environment.

Position Summary

This role is an opportunity for a talented graduate student interested to join the Bertha Centre team on ad-hoc basis. The candidate must be professional, able to work independently and driven. It essential to have excellent research, writing and organisational skills. The successful applicant should have previous knowledge of the investment management industry. Previous knowledge of responsible investment and impact investment would also be an advantage. The successful applicant would be required to spend up to 20 hours a week and a stipend will be disbursed based on the number of days and level of effort.

Main Duties and Responsibilities

The research assistant is required to support the lead researcher (Mr. Xolisa Dhlamini) and the head of publication, (Associate Professor Stephanie Giamporcaro) in the following ways:

  • Assisting with research on investing for impact in Africa;
  • Assisting with identifying fund managers, contacting them and organising the data collected;
  • Assisting with analysing the data collected and drafting research findings;

Requirements

  • Own computer
  • Proficient with use of MS suite, particularly Excel
  • Attention to detail in data gathering, analysis and reporting
  • Understanding of investment/fund management principles
  • Ability to gather and analyse large amounts of data
  • A team player who can work independently

How to Apply

Please send a brief CV and one-page cover letter explaining why you meet the criteria to: Mr. Xolisa Dhlamini (dhlxol001@gsb.uct.ac.za) stating “Barometer Research Assistant” in the subject line. Applications will close on the 21st of April, 2017.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Request for Proposals: Girls Outcomes Fund

1.     Organisational background

 The Bertha Centre for Social Innovation and Entrepreneurship (BC) is the first academic centre in Africa dedicated to advancing social innovation and entrepreneurship. It was established as a specialised unit at the UCT Graduate School of Business in late 2011, in partnership with the Bertha Foundation, a family foundation that works with inspiring leaders who are catalysts for social and economic change. Today the Centre is a dynamic space, with several programme areas in Advancing Social Innovation, Education Innovation, Inclusive Health Innovation, Innovative Finance and ScaleShift, with a strong focus on South Africa and Africa.

The core approach of the Bertha Centre has been to uncover, pioneer and connect social innovations and social entrepreneurs that work to generate inclusive opportunities and advance social justice in our country and continent. Since inception, our team has uncovered over 300 innovative models, programmes and solutions; convened over 5,000 citizens and practitioners across sectors; tested the feasibility of pioneering social solutions ranging from social impact bonds, social franchising, and social innovation hubs; and produced numerous knowledge outputs and publications and awarded over R4m in Bertha Scholarships to over 40 African students. Social Innovation & Entrepreneurship is now one of the school’s three strategic themes in its 5-year strategy.

In the last three years, our team has played a leading role in integrating outcomes-based principles into public and private sector contracts and financial instruments. We have worked with national, provincial and local governments to determine the potential for setting up Impact Bonds or other Payment by Results instruments for Early Childhood Development, workforce development, job creation, tertiary student support and HIV prevention.

2.     Purpose and objectives

  • Design and implementation of Outcomes Fund
  • Increase educational and economic activity in young girls and women in order to reduce their risk of contracting HIV

The BC has been working with Johnson & Johnson (J&J) for the last 6 months to identify an innovative finance project that the Global Public Health (GPH) team can pilot and potentially scale. The innovative finance instrument is not an end in itself but rather a tool that GPH can use to further the work being done in three key areas being the prevention of HIV in adolescent girls, drug resistant TB and maternal and child deaths in low income communities.

The purpose of this project will be to create an Outcomes Fund that will help to promote educational and economic activity in adolescent girls and young women in Gauteng and/or Kwazulu Natal thereby reducing the risk of their contracting HIV.

The output- or outcomes-based contracting and financing model is purported to drive innovation and efficiency of delivery through incentive effects. A funder and service provider agree on results and payment is based on achievement of those results. There is thus a financial incentive for delivery, which in turn incentivises ongoing data collection and programmatic improvements.

Operating from the assumption that young girls are increasingly entering romantic relationships or transactional sex work in search of financial security, GPH is aiming to incentivise them to stay in school and attain either further formal training or employment. This will increase their ability to provide for themselves financially which will decrease the prevalence of risky behaviour thereby lowering HIV infection rates.

3.     Activities 

  1. Perform scoping study to identify target focus of fund: To assess the high-level potential for an innovative finance instrument, including considerations such as the scope for a clearly defined issue, target beneficiary group, demand from stakeholders, intervention model and payment trigger metrics.
  2. Perform feasibility study; build business case and design fund in particular focus area: To design an Outcomes Fund that will finance a range of innovative finance instruments, including their overall structure, detailed operational and financial models and proposition for key stakeholders.
  3. Implement fund design by identifying and supporting implementing organisations: To develop a pilot/s and build systems to support J&J in the management of the fund as well as collect data that will inform the next objective.
  4. Refine and develop fund design: To adjust the design depending on what is working and attract additional funders in order to initiate second round of outcomes payments from the fund.

4.     Scope

There are three phases to this project the first of which is covered by these Terms of Reference. The Project Partner will have the opportunity to bid for Phase 2 and 3 of this project towards the end of the first phase.

The process of designing and implementing an Outcomes Fund is non linear and iterative. The activities contained in this scope are thus guidelines based on previous experience but the Project Partner will be required to be flexible, if research suggests an alternative approach.

The Project Partner role can be performed by a single organisation or split between organisations depending on their expertise. It can also be taken on by a single organisation that subcontracts experts to carry out certain tasks.

The writing up of legal contracts will be done by J&J thus falling outside of the scope of this bid. The legal team will however need to be briefed on the parameters of those contracts by the Project Partner.

Phase 1: <R850, 000

This phase will involve scoping, feasibility, fund design and implementation of first round of fund disbursement.

1 Scoping study
Define social issue
Identify target beneficiaries
Select outcome metrics
Analyse possible intervention models
Map outcome funder landscape
Map investor funder landscape
Engage stakeholders
2 Feasibility and design

Develop Outcome Fund structure options

Design contracting methodology

Establish pricing methodology

Build payment mechanism and financial model

Build M&E framework

Design technical assistance framework
Engage stakeholders
3 Implementation and capacity building

Design and run procurement process

Support implementers to prepare bid and raise investment

Develop performance management system

Engage stakeholders

Disseminate learnings

Phase 2: TBD

This phase will involve some pre-contracting and all ongoing support required by the implementer in order to deliver on outcomes –based contract.

4 Performance management
Structure investment
Strengthen M&E systems
Provide performance management support

 Phase 3: TBD

This phase will involve refining the initial fund design, raising additional funding and running a second procurement round.

5 Refine and develop
Refine fund design
Conduct second procurement process
Support implementers to prepare bid and raise investment
Disseminate learnings
6 Implementation and capacity building
Design and run procurement process
Due diligence
Support implementers to prepare bid and raise investment
Develop performance management system
Engage stakeholders
Disseminate learnings

5.     Accountabilities and Responsibilities

The BC has completed the design of several outcome-based contracting projects and would like to support the Project Partner in building this expertise. We will thus work alongside the winning bidder in an advisory, symbiotic and oversight capacity in order to achieve the objectives below.

The responsibilities of each party will be formalised during the planning phase. In summary we will co-design the fund but the Project Partner will do the bulk of the research, interviews and report writing.

Shortlisted bidders will be given the opportunity to discuss and refine bids during an hour-long interview. The collaboration will officially kick off with a workshop where project plans and milestones will be agreed. The ongoing communication will likely be in the form of weekly meetings with an increase in frequency at the start of each particular phase as well as workshops, site visits and stakeholder meetings.

The BC will assign a Project Manager to represent the centre during the project. The Project Manager will be responsible for:

  • Overall responsibility and accountability for the project.
  • Guidance throughout all phases of execution.
  • Approval of all deliverables.

The Project Partner is responsible for:

  • Conducting the scoping, feasibility, design and implementation of the Outcomes Fund;
  • Day–to–day management of operations;
  • Regular progress reporting to BC’s Project Manager;
  • Production of deliverables in accordance with contractual requirements.

6.     Deliverables & Timings

This engagement is intended to run over a 10 month time period from April 2017 to 30 January 2018.

A draft work plan will be drawn up in conjunction with BC in the week before the contract is signed.

Phase 1

  1. Scoping study

7 April 2017 to 1 June 2017

Output: Scoping study document and presentation assessing high level potential for Outcomes Fund including consideration of social issue, target beneficiaries and outcome metrics, with a view to informing discussions with potential outcomes funders, such as government and donor agencies, and feasibility of the fund in the second phase

  1. Feasibility and design

1 June 2017 to 1 September 2017

Output: Feasibility study document and revised presentation with outline of the design of the outcomes fund, including the overall structure, detailed operational and financial model and proposition for key stakeholders. Includes list of possible operational and funding partners

  1. Implementation and capacity building

1 October 2017 to 1 January 2018

Output: Fund design document and implementation plan with stakeholder buy-in. Contract/s signed with implementers/s. Performance management plan. Learning document on start of implementation phase.

These deliverables are to be:

  • Submitted electronically via e-mail and/or on a flash-drive.
  • Submitted in hard copy format (2). All reports are to be submitted to Project Manager

Phase 2 

  1. Performance management

1 January 2018 for 1-3 years

Phase 3

  1. Refine and develop

1 January 2018 to 1 April 2018

  1. Implementation and capacity building

1 April 2018 to 30 September 2018

Output: Fund design document and stakeholder buy in. Implementation plan for second procurement round. Additional outcomes funders engaged and recruited. Learning document to be generated after fund has been refined.

7.     Project Partner qualifications

The Project Partner is expected to be:

  • A reliable and effective consultant with extensive experience in developing and implementing multi-stakeholder projects
  • Proven track record in conducting similar projects
  • Understanding and knowledge of the target areas

8.     Application Procedure

Interested Project Partners should respond with proposals including technical and financial items.

The technical items should include:

  • Organisational profile and details
  • Details of previous experience developing and implementing projects, highlighting relevant topic or context (social investment, NGO, social enterprise, outcomes in young women and girls) and 1 or 2 sample reports;
  • Explanation of proposed approach and methodology drawing on activities outlined in the Scope;
  • CV(s) of proposed consultants/analysts that will be assigned to the project including nominated Project Leader.
  • MOU between partnering organisations if applicable

The financial items should include:

  • Breakdown of costs according to budget template supplied.
  • Explanation of cost assumptions
  • Costs to be supplied in ZAR
  • A fixed overall quotation up to a maximum of R850, 000

The proposals will be assessed based on previous experience, best value, i.e. best quality and cost-effectiveness of the proposed offers. Only quotations that include both technical and financial proposals will be considered.

Date and time Event
14h00 on 14 March 2017 Briefing
17h00 on 24 March 2017 Application submission
3 April 2017 Shortlist interview

There will be a 1 hour briefing session at the Solution Space and the Graduate School of Business, UCT on 14 March at 14h00. The Q&A from the briefing will be emailed to all interested bidders. If you cannot attend and have questions they can be emailed to BC in advance.

Shortlisted candidates will be contacted after the 24 March and asked to attend a 1 hour interview on 3 April during which time they will have the opportunity to discuss the proposal.

Quotations and questions should be submitted and directed to Dr Susan de Witt at susan.dewitt@gsb.uct.ac.za by or before 17h00 on 24 March 2017.

We look forward to receiving quotes from interested parties.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment