In order to increase the demand and awareness of LPG among households, we will be launching a social marketing campaign tailored to the realities on the field. From personal demonstrations of around 10 people to big events where we expect over 200 people to attend, we will be testing different methods to stimulate demand and awareness. In the end, our goal is to be able to learn from this experience and create a social marketing model and toolkit which we will be able to implement in other developing countries and with a variety of product (whether that be bed nets or batteries).

Check in regularly for updates on our progress.

Peter Nakamura, Project Administrator

Certainly this concept is not new as non-profits flood their year-end marketing appeals with individual sponsorship programs and passionate stories of hardship and suffering. Kiva is a perfect example of the power of connecting to the individual as they market to donors with a personalized story and photo of each borrower.  So what is our debate about you ask? The question in the office is: If this type of marketing works, and research shows that it does, shouldn’t VillageReach change its message to focus more on individual stories and less about systems?

Up until now, VillageReach has presented its message and for that matter, our brand, as a social enterprise. We are capacity builders and have been recognized as one of the top non-profits for our cost effectiveness in strengthening healthcare systems.  Our work directly impacts those children who so successfully appeal to donors. Yet, this is our challenge. If we focus on the child who we are able to save through immunization, do we lose the opportunity to educate donors on the critical importance of systems building and social change? Do we lose the chance to describe the complicated and sophisticated nature of what we do?

Perhaps this is not black or white and just as any good fund development or marketing manager knows, you need different messages for different audiences. Yet, Professor Singer’s book has given us an opportunity to step back and discuss how we tell our story to current and potential donors.  And wherever we land at the end of this debate, we know either way the most important message of all is in our ability to save a life. That we all agree on. What are your thoughts?  Join us in this debate.

VidaGas was started in 2002 to support the health system improvement program developed by VillageReach and FDC.  More than 80% of Mozambique’s population is rural and depends on charcoal and wood for basic cooking and heating.  Safe and reliable propane from VidaGas enables health centers to provide critical health services including vaccinations, equipment sterilization and nighttime birthing.  Additionally, propane from VidaGas is a clean and affordable alternative to charcoal and wood for households, small businesses, and light industry clients.  VidaGas has grown over 500% since 2002 and is now the largest propane distributor in northern Mozambique.

Oasis Fund is a Luxembourg investment fund which finances innovative, growth stage, commercially viable enterprises that deliver basic goods and services that improve the lives of low-income communities.  This investment is the first investment in Africa for the Oasis Fund.  Oasis Fund is advised by Bamboo Finance, a Geneva based investment advisory firm.

VillageReach’s Social Business Director, Craig Nakagawa, will be speaking with Keely Stevenson, of Bamboo Finance, about the investment at SoCap tomorrow.

It is incredibly refreshing to be asked about more than just our overhead to program ratio- as Anne mentioned in a prior post, we’re always thinking about what metrics we should be measuring our work by and how best to share our successes with our supporters.  We’ve been working back and forth with the guys from GiveWell for the past couple of months and been thoroughly impressed with the amount of work they put into each analysis they do.  We are incredibly proud to have passed their high standards!

At VillageReach, we are evaluating different methodologies to formulate our approach to quantify and present the value of a social investment. We are considering two methods: a BACO Calculation (for best available charitable option – created by the Acumen Fund) and an SROI calculation. The BACO model enables us to perform a cost-effective analysis on philanthropic dollars by comparing two options: a charity donation vs. an investment in a business. This analysis provides us with decision-making data to assess and determine the return the greatest social impact at lowest cost. The SROI (“social return on investment”) methodology has been in development for many years, and calculated using a discounted cash flow analysis + projected socio-economic contributions (direct, demonstrable cost savings and revenue contribution that are associated with the social purpose enterprise) into a projected blended business performance. There are distinct challenges with both of these approaches as it is difficult to often find a “comparable” charity donation and quantify the context of social outcomes. However, we strive to build quantifiable metrics that will help continuously evaluate our investments and allow us to communicate our impact to an external audience. Let us know what steps you are taking or thoughts about this process as this is clearly a shared effort.

At VillageReach we focus on energy, transport/logistics and communications, the “Enabling Services” that are required to fulfill the mission of VillageReach programs. When implementing health care programs in regions with weak or nonexistent Enabling Services, NGO’s have traditionally elected to handle the provisioning of Enabling Services internally. Trucking in generators, fuel and other supplies directly supports the program objectives but it does little to provide Enabling Services to the surrounding community. It is widely recognized that a successful and sustainable program intervention creates and uses local capacity. The VillageReach model and programs to date have as a guiding principle the creation of local capacity not only for last mile health care infrastructure but also for the Enabling Services that support that infrastructure.

To sustain the improvement in health and decrease in mortality that is the core of the VillageReach mission it is necessary to create permanent health care resources in last mile communities. Sustainability requires that Enabling Services be available, be reliable and can be procured at affordable rates for the long term. In order for Enabling Services to be available for the long term the customer base must be substantially larger than just the rural health care clinic and therefore must include a vibrant market in the local community. The lack of Enabling Services in many of these rural situations clearly shows that sufficient market demand does not exist today for a viable commercial business. It’s a classic chicken and egg problem – VillageReach is moving forward as a catalyst with creating basic demand for Enabling Services as part of its programs to support last mile health care and incubating the required commercial business for the services.

So, why is social enterprise required in the VillageReach model? Because without established Enabling Services as one of the key elements in the intervention – the VillageReach programs would not achieve the required sustainability and would become yet another solution that fails to provide the long term impact when transitioned to local operation.