Hopefully now you've heard the cases speak about their designs,

you can start to see how yours will take shape.

For a bit more clarity,

lets look at each design and talk about

the components in the course that the case is drew in.

Ashburton saw the need for funding for SMEs in South Africa.

They were addressing large social problems.

They realized that part of the problem for these social SMEs

were they were seen as higher risk than traditional SMEs.

So, they were struggling even more to find funding to grow.

Heather and Dean knew that to get traditional investors on board as funders

for their debt fund they need to address the perceived risk around these social SMEs.

As these SMEs are addressing social issues that are important to the government,

Heather and Dean designed a guarantee mechanism where the government

guarantees a portion of the fund in case the SMEs fail to repay their debt.

This provided investors into the fund with an extra assurance their capital will be safe,

and allowed Heather and Dean to raise

a larger fund and to lend to the SMEs at a lower rate.

By using the guarantee,

Heather and Dean lowered the risk of

the fund thus lowering the investor's required financial return.

By designing around the investor's perceived risk and

the government's desire for demonstrated social outcomes,

Heather and Dean were able to create

a larger more attractive pool funding for social SMEs.

Zoona was created to address the needs of

Zambians wanting to send money cheaply and easily.

The founders saw that the current options for

money transfer did not fit the needs of the customers.

Without reliable, accessible and expensive options for moving money,

many poor Zambians were spending large amounts of resources

including time and money on getting their money where it needed to go.

Zoona saw that there was developmental impact potential to addressing these needs.

They used grant and debt and equity resources,

as well as building an open relationship with their end users and their tellers.

They are continually using design thinking principles to engage with

their end users in a way that allows the end users to drive the process.

In the creation of their savings product,

they listened to their end users saying that

they wanted to be able to save before they could borrow.

In order to support their tellers expansion,

they used crowdfunded loans from Kiva to

loan the tellers additional capital at a very low cost.

At the Western Cape Government,

Tracey was determined to find a way to link in

more private funding and also a way to

understand how much it costs for specific outcomes to be met.

She knew that the department was dealing with

high stunting rates or chronic malnutrition.

And, despite hard work around antiretrovirals,

there was still a persistent number of children born with HIV/AIDS.

She knew that she had her own resources but she also had those in

NGOs and corporates in the space that were addressing these issues.

Finally, she had help from us at the Bertha Center for

Social Innovation who are willing to help her develop a new type of funding structure.

In the end, the government created

an outcomes-based contract that had impact investors investing upfront in

interventions by nonprofits which were

directed at lowering stunting in mother-child HIV transmission.

If the interventions achieve the outcomes,

the government and a corporate donor will together pay the investors back.

Now, SDI and innovation edge are still in the midst of

their design phases and are continually

adapting their approaches based off of what they are finding.

SDI was created to amplify the voices of the urban poor.

They are committed to land rights and access to basic services in informal settlements.

Everything about the organisation is built from the bottom-up,

from their board to their operating structure.

The residents in informal settlements that form savings groups or

federations do so for more than just financial inclusion.

For them it is a way to organize and be able to demand their rights.

Thus, SDI is able to take the lead from these federations

to understand what is important and what is possible.

The secretariat has access to global funders,

government officials, and technically skilled individuals.

By bringing together these resources,

they have run hundreds if not thousands of

successful projects over the past 20 plus years.

The opportunity for them now is to use

business model innovation and find new types of partners to find ways

to make the projects and the federations more

sustainable as pure donor funding will not always be available.

This has been a long and will continue to be a long road for the board,

the country offices and the federations.

As a rights-based organization,

the transition to having some market influence is

daunting and potentially against their mission but the organization is

determined to continue to find ways to create

sustainable options and is opening up conversations with

social enterprises around revenue sharing and looking at how

to potentially use the data collected from millions of savings transactions.

In the case of the sewer project in Uganda,

across subsidization model where residents pay more than others might be possible.

It's important to remember that for nonprofits looking towards sustainability

innovative financing is a journey not a destination.

Finally, Innovation Edge.

Innovation Edge was founded by forward thinking

funders to pull new ideas into the early childhood space.

From a social perspective,

the return on investment in investing in

early childhood is much higher than investing in education later in life.

Studies have shown that the impact you can have on a two-year old by making sure

they have proper nutrition and stimulation can carry through the rest of their life.

There are many challenges around early childhood care and education in emerging markets.

Poverty, lack of access to nutrition and poor education of parents are some of them.

From an innovation perspective,

there is a lack of innovators and social enterprises

focused on this space because business models are more

difficult and early childhood has traditionally been

a space for grant funding for very traditional NGO programs.

Working with the resources from their funders,

their team and access to innovators and thinkers in other sectors,

Innovation Edge has pulled in human capital and ideas in to trap early childhood.

The opportunities that they have identified have been around business model innovation,

multi-stakeholder partnerships and cross-pollination of ideas.

They realize to be able to support these innovators throughout

the innovation life cycle they would need to start using different types of capital.

Thus, they are shifting themselves from a purely grant organization to

a venture philanthropy style funder planning to use grants alongside quasi-equity,

debt with social milestones,

revenue participation and other types of funding that are required by their investees.

Hopefully all of the case journeys have been helpful to you to frame your own journey.

We truly appreciate in being willing to share

their progress and their frustrations in such an honest manner.

We're sure you'll have your share of

frustrations as well as progress for your cases as well.

Case Studies Wrap-Up

Innovative Finance: Hacking finance to change the world

Meet the Instructors