[March 2015]
This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development. It was 
prepared independently by Devyani Srinivasan.
andfill this text box. 
Mid-term Evaluation of the Prepaid Solar Energy Project, 
a for-profit approach to the twin challenges of 
technology and financing in Uttar Pradesh, India 

MID-TERM EVALUATION 
OF THE PREPAID SOLAR 
ENERGY PROJECT – A 
FOR-PROFIT APPROACH 
TO THE TWIN 
CHALLENGES OF 
TECHNOLOGY AND 
FINANCING IN UTTAR 
PRADESH, INDIA 
A PREPAID METERING AND MOBILE PAYMENTS TECHNOLOGY 
PLATFORM THAT MAKES CLEAN ENERGY SIMPLE, AFFORDABLE 
AND INVESTIBLE 
[March 10, 2015] 
DISCLAIMER 
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States 
Agency for International Development or the United States Government. 

CONTENTS 
Acronyms .............................................. 7 
Executive Summary ............................. 8 
Evaluation Purpose and Evaluation 
Questions ............................................ 12 
Project Background ........................... 14 
Evaluation Methods and Limitations 15 
Findings, Conclusions and 
Recommendations ............................. 17 
Annexes ............................................... 42 
- Annex 1: Evaluation Statement of 
Work ..............................................43
- Annex II: Evaluation Methods and 
Limitations ..................................... 46 
- Annex III: Data Collection 
Instruments ................................... 48 
- Annex IV: Sources of Information
........................................................80
- Annex V: Disclosure of Any 
Conflicts of Interest ...................... 81 
ACRONYMS 
LED
UPS 
USAID
Light-emitting Diode
Uninterruptable Power Supply
U.S. Agency for International Development
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS 
Simpa Networks is a for-profit enterprise with an innovative solar-as-a-service business model. After 
demonstrating its innovative business model with 200 customers, Simpa sought support from USAID’s 
Development Innovation Ventures to scale up to 12,000 systems by the end of the program in May 
2015. Both during the USAID-supported period and beyond, Simpa will monitor the number of people 
it provides access to clean energy. However, this program also provides the opportunity to evaluate its 
impact: of the effect of increased access to clean, reliable electricity on customers’ well-being. 
The main indicators of customers’ well-being that Simpa has identified are their kerosene consumption, 
quality of health and satisfaction with energy. If after installing a Simpa system customers report that 
they have stopped or reduced their use of kerosene, and that they are consistently satisfied with their 
system, this would support Simpa’s plan to scale up. However if customers continue to use kerosene 
alongside their Simpa system, it may be that there is a demand for more energy and therefore larger 
Simpa systems. If customers report that they are not satisfied with their Simpa system, their feedback is 
expected to be used by Simpa to improve their offering. 
In addition to its impact, this evaluation is of Simpa’s cost-effectiveness for customers, and its value 
proposition to its customers and UrjaMitras. UrjaMitras are “Energy Friends”, local village level 
entrepreneurs who are independent sales agents for Simpa. The findings related to Simpa’s value 
proposition to its customers and UrjaMitras are expected to be used in its sales and operations. 
This evaluation was designed to be conducted between May 2013 and May 2015. Over this 2-year 
period, the evaluation questions are: 
1. Who are Simpa’s customers? What is the value proposition of Simpa’s solar model and energy 
services for them? 
2. What are the impacts of the program? To what extent are these impacts attributable to Simpa? 
3. What motivates UrjaMitras to sell? What is the value proposition of Simpa for them? 
4. How cost-effective are Simpa’s solar model and energy services for customers?
The mid-term evaluation focuses to a greater extent on questions 1 and 3 than 2 and 4. 
PROJECT BACKGROUND 
In India at least 400 million people are without reliable access to electricity. Without access to 
electricity, consumers and small businesses rely on traditional fuels, kerosene, candles and batteries. It 
is estimated that the off-grid segment is already spending $50+ billion per year on these sub-optimal and 
highly unsustainable energy solutions. 
There are many promising technical solutions available to customers today, ranging from small-scale 
solar lanterns, to pico-solar home systems, to larger installed solar home systems, to community scale 
solar or biomass electricity microgrids, to solar-hybrid UPS/inverter solutions for the home and 
business. The problem is that these clean energy technologies almost always involve significant up-front 
costs and therefore must be financed.Simpa Networks sets itself apart from competitors by providing in￾house customer financing. Simpa’s in-house financing mechanism helps avoid a lengthy, complicated loan 
application process with financial institutions, for both Simpa and its customers, and, most important, 
makes its solutions affordable for a wider range of customers. 
Simpa’s Theory of Change is as follows: 
Inputs Processes Outputs Outcomes Impact
People
Product – solar
Capital
Product 
integration
Product 
development
Training
Risk assessment
Sales
After-sales 
service
Research
Systems installed Systems used / 
energy paid for 
and consumed
Improvements in 
well-being of 
consumer 
households
There are two hypotheses behind its theory of change that Simpa seeks to refine. The first is its value 
hypothesis. This is a hypothesis of why people choose to “buy”. For Simpa, “buying” refers not only to 
installing a system but also continuing to pay for and consume the energy it generates. The second is its 
growth hypothesis. This is a hypothesis of how to find new customers. The evaluation of this project 
will be concerned with Simpa’s value hypothesis. However, because the evaluation will track the same 
customers over the grant period, it will not be able to significantly test Simpa’s growth hypothesis. 
EVALUATION QUESTIONS, DESIGN, METHODS AND LIMITATIONS 
In order to address the evaluation questions, the evaluation consists of two parts: an evaluation of 
Simpa’s customers, and of its UrjaMitras. For the evaluation of Simpa’s customers it was important to 
establish causality. Since random selection and assignment to customer and non-customer groups was 
not possible, a quasi-experimental design was chosen in which the two groups were matched. The 
evaluation of UrjaMitras is through a pretest-posttest design. 
This report presents the results of the customer (midline) and UrjaMitra (baseline) surveys that began 
on the 13th of September, 2014. The evaluation was designed so that non-customers are included in the 
baseline and end-term evaluations, but not the midline evaluation. The chart below shows the 
relationship between the evaluation questions and methods used in the midline evaluation of Simpa 
customers, and baseline evaluation of UrjaMitras. It also includes the sample sizes for the treatment 
groups of customers and UrjaMitras. 
Evaluation Question Method Data 
Source
Treatment 
Group 
Sample 
Size
Who are Simpa’s customers? What is the value 
proposition of Simpa’s solar model and energy services 
for them?
Quantitative Survey 215
What are the impacts of the program? To what extent 
are these impacts attributable to Simpa?
Quantitative Survey 215
What motivates UrjaMitras to sell? What is the value 
proposition of Simpa for them? 
Qualitative 
and 
Interview 
and 
323
Quantitative Survey
How cost-effective are Simpa’s solar model and energy 
services for customers?
Quantitative Survey 215
Based on these sample sizes, the margin of error for the customer survey is 6.62% and is 5.07% for the 
UrjaMitra survey (95% significance). 
There are limitations to how conclusive the evidence from the midline survey is, due to the methods 
themselves, data quality issues and bias. It is suspected that inaccuracies in respondents’ answers and 
data falsification made quality issues the most serious of the limitations of the midline evaluation. From 
a non-random sample of surveys, 11% of the midline data is estimated to be false (although not proven). 
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 
The questions that the midline evaluation addresses, that will improve Simpa’s implementation, are on its 
value proposition for UrjaMitras and customers. The questions that this evaluation addresses that will 
improve Simpa’s impact, are on customers’ reports of their satisfaction with and the quality of light from 
solar and non-solar sources, and their quality of health. While the evaluation of UrjaMitras does not 
address impact directly, as Simpa’s chosen distribution channel the ability to sell through UrjaMitras is a 
prerequisite in order for Simpa to create impact. The evaluation of UrjaMitras is of the value 
proposition of Simpa to them, and of their sales potential. 
Being an UrjaMitra is valued most for the financial benefits, but these are insufficient for it to be seen as 
a full-time activity. Instead, selling Simpa systems is viewed as a way to improve income and 
relationships with existing customers. This is evident from the responses to the questions on the 
benefits of being an UrjaMitra. For 27.6% of UrjaMitras commissions and prizes were the most 
important benefit. 
In addition to the benefits that they derive from being UrjaMitras, respondents’ current work patterns 
and their perceptions of customer demand are factors that may influence sales performance in the 
future. The element of respondents’ work patterns that Simpa was most interested in was the extent to 
which UrjaMitras are mobile. It was found that UrjaMitras are largely not mobile, as 70% of respondents 
spend most of their working hours at a fixed location. Given that 61.7% of respondents also identified 
“increasing the goodwill that they enjoy with existing customers” as a benefit of being an UrjaMitra, this
suggests that the majority of UrjaMitras may spend their working hours at a shop or other place of 
business. Consequently, they may expect that they will sell Simpa systems largely to their existing 
customers. Sales to households who are not existing customers of UrjaMitras may therefore depend on 
either word of mouth or marketing support by Simpa. While the data on UrjaMitras’ perceptions of 
customer demand seems contradictory, it may be that their responses capture a general sense of 
optimism on their part rather than specific market insights. 
Approximately a year after they had had a system installed, the greatest number of customers (32%) 
chose “affordable installments” as the aspect that they were most satisfied with. 102 customers also 
said that they would recommend Simpa to others because it is affordable. The other aspects of the 
Simpa system that respondents said that they were most satisfied with were “no need to travel for 
purchase or service” and “free warranty and service”. These were chosen by 13% and 11.3% of 
respondents respectively. However, 13% said that they were not satisfied with any aspect of their Simpa 
system. When customers were asked specifically about the product and its installation, no major issues 
emerged. Overall, 68% of customers are willing to recommend Simpa to others. 
The two aspects of the Simpa offering that respondents were least satisfied with were customer service, 
and that the system cannot be used to run other appliances. However, overall, respondents were much 
more dissatisfied that the system cannot be used to run other appliances than they were with customer 
service. 45.2% of respondents said that the aspect of the Simpa offering that they were least satisfied 
with was that it cannot be used to run other appliances. (In contrast, only 7.6% of respondents chose, 
“customer service is not responsive” as the aspect of the Simpa offering that they were least satisfied 
with). 
Customers continue to use other options for lighting alongside their Simpa systems, often for the same 
activities. However, the use of “unclean” options (specifically candles / wax and kerosene lamps) 
dropped substantially. Correspondingly, the overall quality of health score improved substantially. On a 
scale of 0 to 6, respondents’ quality of health improved from 2.5 in the baseline survey to 5.3 in the 
midline. This difference is significant (T-test, p < 0.001). The score of 5.3 was also disaggregated for 
respondents who were classified as kerosene users (for lighting) at the time of the midline survey and 
those who were not. The quality of health score was 4.9 for kerosene users and 5.6 for non-users. 
This difference is also significant (T-test, p < 0.001). 
The other benefits that customers report as a result of their Simpa systems are greater satisfaction with 
and better quality light. On average customers rated their satisfaction with and the quality of light from 
their Simpa systems as higher than for most other solutions, for the same activities. However the 
average scores for satisfaction with and the quality of light from the Simpa system were on par with or 
lower than that from the inverter (again for the same activities). Customers’ preferences for their 
Simpa systems could also be because they were receiving fewer hours of electricity from the grid at the 
time of the midline survey than the baseline. 
The main findings of the midline survey of customers relate to how they value the Simpa offering and 
benefit from it, both in isolation and in relation to their experiences with other energy options. The 
main findings of the survey of UrjaMitras relate to how they value the Simpa offering, although they also 
contribute to a better understanding of the comparison between Simpa systems and other energy 
options. While the end term survey will further investigate what makes the Simpa offering affordable to 
customers, as long as payment in installments is a contributing factor it will be critical to make it easy for 
them to recharge and to make these commissions attractive for UrjaMitras. Accommodating the 
demand for systems that can run more appliances may lead to a trade-off with affordability for 
customers in the future. Similarly UrjaMitras who want to earn greater rewards will have to increase 
their investments of time and effort proportionately, which may eventually lead to a trade-off with their 
existing activities. 
The value customers’ perceive from the Simpa offering, and therefore the ability of UrjaMitras to sell to 
them, is also shaped by other energy options. While UrjaMitras believe that inverters are the main 
competitors to Simpa systems it would seem that the former are still too expensive for many customers 
to own. However, in considering Simpa’s value proposition to customers, the cost comparison to 
inverters would seem like an additional factor that it is important to include. 
EVALUATION PURPOSE & 
EVALUATION QUESTIONS 
EVALUATION PURPOSE 
Simpa Networks is a for-profit enterprise with an innovative solar-as-a-service business model. Simpa 
customers take home a solar energy system by making a small initial down payment, then purchase 
prepaid energy credits using a mobile phone in amounts they choose – mimicking the highly successful 
pricing model for prepaid mobile airtime. Simpa’s cloud-based software tracks and processes payments, 
delivering proof of payment to the customer via SMS. 
After demonstrating its innovative business model with 200 customers, Simpa sought support from 
USAID’s Development Innovation Ventures to scale up to 12,000 systems by the end of the program in 
May 2015. Both during the USAID-supported period and beyond, Simpa will monitor the number of 
people it provides access to clean energy. However, this program also provides the opportunity to 
evaluate its impact: of the effect of increased access to clean, reliable electricity on customers’ well￾being. 
The main indicators of customers’ well-being that Simpa has identified are their kerosene consumption, 
quality of health and satisfaction with energy. If after installing a Simpa system customers report that 
they have stopped or reduced their use of kerosene, and that they are consistently satisfied with their 
system, this would support Simpa’s plan to scale up. However if customers continue to use kerosene 
alongside their Simpa system, it may be that there is a demand for more energy and therefore larger 
Simpa systems. If customers report that they are not satisfied with their Simpa system, their feedback is 
expected to be used by Simpato improve their offering. 
In addition to its impact, this evaluation is of Simpa’s cost-effectiveness for customers, and its value 
proposition to its customers and UrjaMitras. UrjaMitras are “Energy Friends”, local village level 
entrepreneurs who are independent sales agents for Simpa. The findings related to Simpa’s value 
proposition to its customers and UrjaMitras are expected to be used in its sales and operations. The 
specific decisions that the evaluation is directed towards informing are, “Which potential customers 
should we target? How should we sell to them? Who should we target to recruit as UrjaMitras? Once 
recruited, how do we retain them?”
The main audiences for this evaluation report are Simpa’s leadership team, and USAID. However, once 
the end term evaluation is complete communication products based on the results will be disseminated 
to rural households and SMEs, UrjaMitras, and participants in “energy access” forums. 
The means of dissemination will depend on the stakeholder. To UrjaMitras, there is an opportunity to 
disseminate the relevant evaluation results through Simpa’s sales training, which is becoming increasingly 
more rigorous, and its active management of the field force. The evaluator will identify the main 
messages from the evaluation that are relevant to UrjaMitras, and engage in a discussion with Simpa on 
the potential for incorporating them into existing sales and operations processes. If this is not possible, 
the evaluator will create 2 dissemination products for UrjaMitras. The evaluation results will be 
disseminated through UrjaMitras to rural households and SMEs. 
A presentation will be created shortly after the end term evaluation to disseminate the results to 
participants in “energy access” forums. This presentation will be accompanied by an executive summary 
of the evaluation report, to provide participants further information. In addition, two articles will be 
written that draw on both the baseline and mid-term evaluation data, and that can be published in 
relevant forums. One article will be for an audience familiar with energy access issues, and the other 
will be for a general audience. 
EVALUATION QUESTIONS 
This evaluation was designed to be conducted between May 2013 and May 2015. Over this 2-year 
period, the evaluation questions are: 
1. Who are Simpa’s customers? What is the value proposition of Simpa’s solar model and energy 
services for them? 
2. What are the impacts of the program? To what extent are these impacts attributable to Simpa? 
3. What motivates UrjaMitras to sell? What is the value proposition of Simpa for them? 
4. How cost-effective are Simpa’s solar model and energy services for customers?
The mid-term evaluation focuses to a greater extent on questions 1 and 3 than 2 and 4. 
PROJECT BACKGROUND 
In India at least 400 million people are without reliable access to electricity. Without access to 
electricity, consumers and small businesses rely on traditional fuels, kerosene, candles and batteries. It 
is estimated that the off-grid segment is already spending $50+ billion per year on these sub-optimal and 
highly unsustainable energy solutions. 
There are many promising technical solutions available to customers today, ranging from small-scale 
solar lanterns, to pico-solar home systems, to larger installed solar home systems, to community scale 
solar or biomass electricity micro-grids, to solar-hybrid UPS/inverter solutions for the home and 
business. The problem is that these clean energy technologies almost always involve significant up-front 
costs and therefore must be financed. 
Simpa Networks sets itself apart from competitors by providing in-house customer financing. Payment 
can be spread out over a period of 28 months. Simpa’s solar home systems incorporate proprietary 
prepaid metering technology, which regulates the amount of energy that is supplied to a customer based 
on whether he has purchased prepaid energy. In the payment process, customers make cash payments 
to Simpa branded agents in their home region. Then, the agent sends an SMS to Simpa’s server informing 
it of the payment. A special code is then sent via SMS from the server to the customer, who enters the 
code into the meter. This code unlocks the meter for a certain amount of energy consumption. This 
process is repeated until the customer has paid for the system in full, at which point the system is 
permanently unlocked. Simpa’s in-house financing mechanism helps avoid a lengthy, complicated loan 
application process with financial institutions, for both Simpa and its customers, and, most important, 
makes its solutions affordable for a wider range of customers. 
During the 1st year after installation (or 1st 2 years if the payment period is 2 years), free doorstep 
maintenance is provided, including 1 routine visit and 2 unplanned visits. After that, customers have the 
option of purchasing a low-cost annual maintenance contract, with the same level of service. This after￾sales service offer is extremely convenient for customers and also ensures that the systems are well￾maintained, which, in turn, minimizes the risk of customer non-payment. 
Simpa’s results chain is as follows:
Inputs Processes Outputs Outcomes Impact
People
Product – solar
Capital
Product 
integration
Product 
development
Training
Risk assessment
Sales
After-sales 
service
Research
Systems installed Systems used / 
energy paid for 
and consumed
Improvements in 
well-being of 
consumer 
households
EVALUATION METHODS & 
LIMITATIONS 
In order to address the evaluation questions, the evaluation consists of two parts: an evaluation of 
Simpa’s customers, and of its UrjaMitras. For the evaluation of Simpa’s customers it was important to 
establish causality.BecauseSimpa is a for-profit social enterprise that sells solar systems, it was not 
possible to choose an experimental design in which customers and non-customers would be randomly 
assigned. A quasi-experimental design was chosen for the evaluation of Simpa’s customers, in which 
they were matched with non-customers. 
The baseline evaluation of customers was intended to measure their usage of, and satisfaction with, 
other energy solutions prior to installing a Simpa system. Simpa’s installation process did not support 
the creation of a sampling frame of approved customers, from whom a random sample could be 
selected. A rolling baseline of customers was designed, with a sample that would consist of the first 400 
customers acquired in Uttar Pradesh state. 
The evaluation of UrjaMitras is through a pretest-posttest design. The comparisons that Simpa is most 
interested in drawing in this part of the evaluation are amongst UrjaMitras rather than with a group not 
associated with Simpa. Therefore, there is no comparison group against which UrjaMitras will be 
measured. Structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of UrjaMitrasto develop the 
baseline survey of UrjaMitras. A stratified sampling technique was chosen to identify the UrjaMitras to 
be surveyed. 
This report presents the results of the customer (midline) and UrjaMitra (baseline) surveys that began 
on the 13th of September, 2014. The evaluation was designed so that non-customers are included in the 
baseline and end-term evaluations, but not the midline evaluation. The chart below shows the 
relationship between the evaluation questions and methods used in the midline evaluation of Simpa 
customers, and baseline evaluation of UrjaMitras. It also includes the sample sizes for the treatment 
groups of customers and UrjaMitras. 
Evaluation 
Question
Method Data Source Treatment 
Group Sample 
Size
Comparison 
Group Sample 
Size
Who are Simpa’s 
customers? What 
is the value 
proposition of 
Simpa’s solar 
model and energy 
services for them?
Quantitative Survey 215 N/A
What are the 
impacts of the 
program? To 
what extent are 
these impacts 
attributable to 
Quantitative Survey 215 N/A
Simpa?
What motivates 
UrjaMitras to sell? 
What is the value 
proposition of 
Simpa for them? 
Qualitative and 
Quantitative
Interview and 
Survey
323 N/A
How cost-effective 
are Simpa’s solar 
model and energy 
services for 
customers?
Quantitative Survey 215 N/A
Based on these sample sizes, the margin of error for the customer survey is 6.62% and is 5.07% for the 
UrjaMitra survey (95% significance). 
There are limitations to how conclusive the evidence from the midline survey is, due to the methods 
themselves, data quality issues and bias. It is suspected that inaccuracies in respondents’ answers and 
data falsification made quality issues the most serious of the limitations of the midline evaluation. From 
a non-random sample of surveys, 11% of the midline data is estimated to be false (although not proven). 
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & 
RECOMMENDATIONS 
FINDINGS 
The questions that this evaluation addresses, that will improve Simpa’s implementation, are on its value proposition for UrjaMitras and 
customers. The questions that this evaluation addresses that will improve Simpa’s impact, are on customers’ reports of their satisfaction with 
and the quality of light from solar and non-solar sources, and their quality of health. While the evaluation of UrjaMitras does not address impact 
directly, as Simpa’s chosen distribution channel the ability to sell through UrjaMitras is a prerequisite in order for Simpa to create impact. The 
evaluation of UrjaMitras is of the value proposition of Simpa to them, and of their sales potential. 
The evaluation asked UrjaMitras about their propensity to adopt new energy products, as the hypothesis was that a substantial percentage of 
UrjaMitras would be innovators (the segment of the target market that will adopt because they want to be among the first to have a new 
product). One of the most frequently used Domain Specific Innovativeness-scales was included in the survey to categorize each respondent as 
an innovator, early adopter, the early majority, the late majority or a laggard. However, contrary to expectations the greatest number of 
UrjaMitras fell into the laggard category. 45.5% of UrjaMitras were found to be laggards, and the percentage in each category decreased 
continuously culminating in only 1.2% of UrjaMitras in the innovator category.
Adoption Category Count %
Innovator 4 1.2%
Early Adopter 49 15.2%
The Early Majority 58 18.0%
The Late Majority 65 20.1%
Laggard 147 45.5%
Total 323 100.0%
This finding on technology adoption may be corroborated by the fact that only 2.9% of respondents said that the statement, “I have brought 
something new to my customers” describes the most important benefit that they derive from being UrjaMitras. However, it is possible that the 
statement “I have brought something new to my customers” did not describe the most important benefit to UrjaMitras because solar 
technology is not new to their catchment areas. While the survey included questions on the extent to which solar technology was new for 
UrjaMitras and their customers, the responses were ambiguous. 
For 27.6% of UrjaMitras commissions and prizes were the most important benefit. “Producing a good impression” was chosen by 13% of 
respondents as the most important benefit. It is related to commissions and prizes in that both are benefits that accrue to the individual, but are 
distinct in that they emphasize the financial and social aspects respectively. While only 7% of respondents chose the opportunity for social 
development or service as the most important benefit, for 42% it was an additional one. This suggests that UrjaMitras do recognize that selling 
Simpa systems results in benefits that accrue to the village community, but that they consider these secondary to the individual benefits that 
accrue to them. 
Being an UrjaMitra is valued most for the financial benefits, but these are insufficient for it to be seen as a full-time activity. Instead, selling Simpa 
systems is viewed as a way to improve income and relationships with existing customers. This is evident from the responses to the questions on 
the benefits of being an UrjaMitra. 16.9% of respondents said that the statement, “When I provide my customers with an additional product it 
increases the goodwill they have for me” describes the most important benefit that they derive from being UrjaMitras. That selling systems can 
be done alongside other activities was chosen as an additional benefit by 76%. 
Most Important Direct Benefit Count Percentage 
Rewards through commissions and prizes 85 27.6%
Increase goodwill with additional product 52 16.9%
Produce a good impression 40 13.0%
More work = more rewards 29 9.4%
Productive use of my time 28 9.1%
Increase in village reputation 21 6.8%
Serving the society 21 6.8%
Sell Simpa with my other activities 19 6.2%
New product to customers 9 2.9%
Any other 2 0.6%
No advantage 2 0.6%
Total 308 100.0%
Benefits Count
Sell Simpa with my other activities 245
Increase goodwill with additional product 198
Rewards through commissions and prizes 130
More work - more rewards 107
Serving the society 136
Produce good impression 138
Productive use of my time 94
Increase in village reputation 38
New product to customers 17
Any other 0
No Advantage 24
Total 1103
Note: Multi-choice multi response question
Respondents were asked about both the direct and indirect advantages of being UrjaMitras, as well as whether they felt that there were any 
disadvantages associated with the opportunity. 75% of UrjaMitras said that they valued their role in the company because they believe it is the 
first step towards other opportunities with Simpa. It is possible that the “other opportunities” that UrjaMitras are interested in are those that 
would provide a fixed income. This is suggested by the fact that only 9.4% of UrjaMitras said that they value performance based payment, and 
27% saw the lack of a fixed income as a disadvantage. However, the majority of respondents (78%) saw no disadvantage to being an UrjaMitra. 
Advantages to Associating with Simpa Count 
1st step towards other opportunities 240
Attend Simpa events 171
Receive visitors from Simpa 100
No advantages 38
Other 21
Recognition by Simpa’s senior management for 
performance 8
Total Unique Count 318
Note: Multi-choice multi response question
Disadvantages of Being an UrjaMitra Count 
No disadvantage 248
No fixed income 86
Dissatisfied customers affect my reputation 75
Due to some changes made by Simpa, I have 
not received the prizes that I believed that I 
would 40
Don’t receive my commissions and/ prizes on 
time 33
Financially not attractive 26
Others 1
Total Unique Count 320
Note: Multi-choice multi response question
Respondents were surveyed soon after they became UrjaMitras to collect baseline data on how they perceive the opportunity, and on other 
factors that may affect sales performance in the future. While this baseline survey was not intended to predict sales performance, the responses 
merit consideration by Simpa as it recruits, trains and manages UrjaMitras. In addition to the benefits that they derive from being UrjaMitras, 
respondents’ current work patterns and their perceptions of customer demand were identified as factors that may influence sales performance 
in the future. 
The element of respondents’ work patterns that Simpa was most interested in was the extent to which UrjaMitras are mobile. It was found that 
UrjaMitras are largely not mobile, as 70% of respondents spend most of their working hours at a fixed location. Given that 61.7% of 
respondents also identified “increasing the goodwill that they enjoy with existing customers” as a benefit of being an UrjaMitra, this suggests that 
the majority of UrjaMitras may spend their working hours at a shop or other place of business. Consequently, they may expect that they will 
sell Simpa systems largely to their existing customers. Sales to households who are not existing customers of UrjaMitras may therefore depend 
on either word of mouth or marketing support by Simpa. 
While the data on UrjaMitras’ perceptions of customer demand seems contradictory, it may be that their responses capture a general sense of 
optimism on their part rather than specific market insights. When asked if the supply of electricity from the grid in their catchment villages will 
improve in the future, 75% said yes. However, given that the question did not specify a time period for which UrjaMitras should make their 
predictions, their responses constitute weak evidence. 
It is striking that 99% of UrjaMitras said that the biggest competitor to Simpa systems is the inverter. If the supply of electricity from the grid 
does improve, and if the biggest competitor to Simpa systems is the inverter, then this could affect Simpa’s sales adversely. The results from the 
customer survey in this report also include further analysis of the comparison between Simpa systems and inverters. 
When UrjaMitras were asked about demand for Simpa systems over the next 6 months, they did not predict the adverse effects that their other 
responses would suggest. 82% of UrjaMitras believed that demand would increase continuously. Although UrjaMitras were asked whether they 
believed they could earn commissions through selling systems, recharges, or both, this question may have been misunderstood and the 
responses were not clear. However, based on the responses to the other survey questions it seems that most UrjaMitras may not recruit new 
customers actively, especially beyond their existing customer base. In addition, only 2% of UrjaMitras believe that their effort is critical in 
whether there is a demand to recharge systems or not. Therefore, if Simpa expects UrjaMitras to drive new sales and recharges, this is an area 
that merits attention. 
Demand Prediction Count Percentage 
Will increase continuously 260 82.3%
Will increase initially and then reduce 48 15.2%
Will decrease continuously 8 25.0%
Total 316 100.0%
While UrjaMitras can play a role in ensuring that systems are recharged, customers’ own desires and ability to do so are also critical factors. 
The customer survey asked respondents about the value they derive from their Simpa system, which will influence their recharge behavior. The 
survey also asked customers about how using their Simpa systems have affected their satisfaction with, and the quality of, lighting in their house 
and health. Beyond their influence on recharge behavior, this data on the effects of using solar systems can aid Simpa in its’ efforts to improve 
customer satisfaction and well-being. 
In order to better understand Simpa’s value proposition for customers, the survey included both the Domain Specific Innovativeness-scale and 
questions on the aspects of the offering that respondents were most and least satisfied with. Customers were both asked specifically about the 
product and its installation, and about other design parameters in Simpa’s value proposition including the distribution channel, the pricing and the 
recharge process / payment channel. Customers were also asked if they would be willing to recommend Simpa to others and if so, for what 
reason. The responses to this question corroborated the data on the aspects of the Simpa offering that customers were most satisfied with. 
The Domain Specific Innovativeness-scale was intended to measure whether a desire to adopt a solar system because it is a new kind of energy 
product was one of the reasons that respondents chose to buy. While again it was assumed that solar technology was new to respondents, in 
the case of customers we know at least that only 1person was using another solar product (at the time of both the baseline and midline). As the 
table below shows, the survey found that customers were heterogeneous in terms of their adoption of new energy products. 
Adoption Categories Count %
Innovator 0 0.0%
Early Adopter 42 21.5%
The Early Majority 61 31.3%
The Late Majority 60 30.8%
Laggard 32 16.4%
Total 195 100.0%
The remaining questions on Simpa’s value proposition were intended to measure customers’ perceptions 10 to 12 months after they had had a 
system installed. Approximately a year after they had had a system installed, the greatest number of customers (32%) chose “affordable 
installments” as the aspect that they were most satisfied with. 102 customers also said that they would recommend Simpa to others because it 
is affordable. 
While these results make it clear that affordability is valued highly, it is difficult to use it to draw further conclusions on what affordability means 
to customers. More information is needed in order for Simpa to determine what to charge as a down payment and over time, and also to know 
whether customers would like the instalments to be more structured or more flexible. Given that only 15% of respondents said that any 
member of their household had held a salaried position in the last year, it is reasonable to hypothesize that customers would prefer more 
flexibility. However, these questions will be investigated further in the end-line evaluation. 
The other aspects of the Simpa system that respondents said that they were most satisfied with were “no need to travel for purchase or 
service” and “free warranty and service”. These were chosen by 13% and 11.3% of respondents respectively. However, 13% said that they 
were not satisfied with any aspect of their Simpa system. 
When customers were asked specifically about the product and its installation, no major issues emerged.64% of customers said that their 
systems run for 5 – 10 hours once the battery is charged. 79% said that the performance of the fan either meets or exceeds their expectations. 
60% were satisfied or fully satisfied with the position of the lights and fan in their house. Overall, 68% of customers are willing to recommend 
Simpa to others. 
The two aspects of the Simpa offering that respondents were least satisfied with were customer service, and that the system cannot be used to 
run other appliances. Only 44% of respondents who had made a complaint were satisfied or fully satisfied with Simpa’s customer service. This 
finding is corroborated by the fact that only 6% of respondents rated service as the aspect of the Simpa offering that they are most satisfied with. 
However, overall, respondents were much more dissatisfied that the system cannot be used to run other appliances than they were with 
customer service. 45.2% of respondents said that the aspect of the Simpa offering that they were least satisfied with was that it cannot be used 
to run other appliances. (In contrast, only 7.6% of respondents chose, “customer service is not responsive” as the aspect of the Simpa offering 
that they were least satisfied with). 
Currently, 68 customers said that they use the Simpa system to charge their mobiles and 24 said they used it for other appliances. In most cases 
what these appliances were was not specified. However, from the baseline survey there is evidence that their homes are one of the significant 
assets that respondents own. All respondents have homes that are built either only of pucca(durable) materials or homes that are semi-pucca. 
Most respondents also have homes with either 3 or 4 rooms. Customers’ satisfaction with the affordability of their Simpa systems, and their 
desire to be able to use them to run more appliances, suggest that they may be willing to invest more in their homes. 
Aspect Most Satisfied With Count Percentage 
Affordable installments 67 31.6%
No need to travel for purchase or service 27 12.7%
Not satisfied 27 12.7%
Free warranty & service 24 11.3%
Separate part purchase not required 23 10.8%
Immediate recharge upon payment 17 8.0%
Other 14 6.6%
Quick resolution of customer complaints 13 6.1%
Total 212 100.0%
Reason for Recommendation Count 
Affordable 102
Convenient to buy, recharge or use 84
Free warranty and servicing 74
Better quality than other solar companies 56
Other 1
Total Unique Count 199
Exhibit 9: 
Note: Multi-choice multi response question
No. of Hours the System Runs Count Percentage 
< 5 hours 31 15.0%
5-10 hours 131 63.6%
11-15 hours 44 21.4%
> 15 hours 0 0.0%
Total 206 100.0%
Fan Performance Count Percentage 
Exceeds expectations 57 26.8%
Meets expectations 111 52.1%
Below expectations 45 21.1%
Total 213 100.0%
Position of Lights and Fan Count Percentage 
Satisfied / fully satisfied 52 44.1%
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 32 27.1%
Dissatisfied / fully dissatisfied 34 28.8%
Total 118 100.0%
Aspect Least Satisfied With Count Percentage 
Cannot be used to run other appliances 95 45.2%
Not dissatisfied 39 18.6%
Cannot buy the parts separately 24 11.4%
Long time to recharge after payment 22 10.5%
Customer service is not responsive 16 7.6%
Too expensive 9 4.3%
Other 5 2.4%
Total 210 100.0%
Customers continue to use other options for lighting alongside their Simpa systems, often for the same activities.However, the use of “unclean” 
options (specifically candles / wax and kerosene lamps) dropped substantially. Correspondingly, the overall quality of health score improved 
substantially. 
In order to understand why respondents continue to use other options, the midline survey asked them to rate their satisfaction with and the 
quality of light from all the devices that they use. In order to ensure that the comparison was as accurate as possible, customers were asked for 
separate scores for each activity that they used the lighting device for. These activities were cooking, children’s studies, reading / writing by 
adults and eating dinner. In addition, customers were asked if they used their Simpa systems for any economic activities at home. 
The main option that respondents have access to for lighting is electricity from the grid. At the time of the midline survey 205 respondents 
reported having access to electricity from the grid, slightly more than the number of customers who said that they had used their Simpa system 
in the past 6 months (199). 15 more customers reported having access to electricity from the grid in the midline survey than in the baseline. 
However, the number of hours of electricity available decreased for 58% of customers. Perhaps not surprisingly, 8 more customers reported 
using inverters. 
There was an approximately 80% drop in the number of customers using candles / wax at the time of the midline compared to the baseline. 
There was an approximately 50% drop in the number of customers using kerosene for lighting. The average number of liters of kerosene used 
per month across all respondents was 5.5 at the time of the baseline survey and 2.62 at the time of the midline. This difference is significant (T-
test, p < 0.001). However, those customers who continued to use kerosene did not use much less of it.If only respondents who reported using 
keroseneat the time of the midline are considered, the reduction in usage was only 0.15 liters(from 2.87 to 2.72) and is not significant (T-test, p 
> 0.6).The hypothesis that larger families continue to use kerosene was explored, but no pattern emerged. 
While not an “unclean” option, there was also an approximately 90% drop in customers using rechargeable LED torches (flashlights) from the 
time of the baseline survey to the midline. In addition, while at the time of the baseline customers were using LED torches for cooking, 
children’s studies, reading / writing by adults and eating dinner, at the time of the midline they were not using LED torches for any of these 
activities. It is likely that they were only using LED torches for activities that require a portable light. 
Given that the increases in the number of customers with access to electricity and inverters between the baseline survey and midline were only 
15 and 8 respectively, and there are fewer customers using all of the other options, it is surprising thast 39% reported increases in expenditures 
on lighting (excluding payments for their Simpa system). Nevertheless, the average expenditure per month on lighting (excluding on the Simpa 
system) decreased by approximately INR 100 / USD 1.5, from the baseline figure of approximately INR 380 / USD 6. While analysis of the 
individual responses of the 39% of customers may reveal the sources of increased expenditure (and will be attempted to inform the end-line), it 
is also possible that the responses are inaccurate as expenditure data is difficult to collect. 
190
15
107
151
168
205
23 20 17
82
199
0
50
100
150
200
250
Electricity Inverter Candles / Wax Rechargeable 
LED Torch
Kerosene 
Lamp
Simpa Solar 
System
No. of Customers
Energy Option
Figure 1: Usage of Energy Options
Baseline Midline
Change in Expenditure on Lighting Count Percentage 
Increased 80 38.5%
Decreased 126 60.6%
No change 2 1.0%
Total 208 100.0%
While the survey attempted to estimate kerosene consumption from questions on the number and types of lamps used, their carrying capacities 
and how long they are lit for, it is difficult to collect accurate data on respondents’ usage of and expenditure on energy options other than 
Simpa. For this reason, and because it was beyond the scope of the survey, respondents were not asked about their use of “unclean” options 
for cooking. While we therefore cannot conclude that respondents’ overall usage of “unclean” options has reduced, a reduction in the use of 
“unclean” options for lighting does seem to correspond to improved health scores.
On a scale of 0 to 6, respondents’ quality of health improved from 2.5 in the baseline survey to 5.3 in the midline. This difference is significant 
(T-test, p < 0.001). The score of 5.3 was also disaggregated for respondents who were classified as kerosene users at the time of the midline 
survey and those who were not. The quality of health score was 4.9 for kerosene users and 5.6 for non-users. This difference is also significant 
(T-test, p < 0.001). 
The other benefits that customers report as a result of their Simpa systems are greater satisfaction with and better quality light. On average 
customers rated their satisfaction with and the quality of light from their Simpa systems as higher than for most other solutions, for the same 
activities. However the average scores for satisfaction with and the quality of light from the Simpa system were on par with or lower than that 
from the inverter (again for the same activities). These activities were cooking, children’s studies, reading / writing by adults and eating dinner. 
While customers on average prefertheir Simpa systems for these activities, it does not seem that increased productivity is an additional benefit 
of the system (only 4 respondents said that they used their systems for economic activities at home). 
Customers’ preferences for their Simpa systems could also be because they were receiving fewer hours of electricity from the grid at the time 
of the midline survey than the baseline. This is corroborated by the fact that comparing the satisfaction and quality scores in the baseline and 
midline surveys reveals that customers’ perceptions of light from the grid have worsened in this time period. These differences are significant 
for both men and women, as the bar graphs below illustrate. 
3.5 3.3
4.5
4.2
3.3 3.1 3.2 3.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Quality Score
Activity
Figure 2: Men's Average Quality Scores for 
Electricity
Baseline Midline
3.8 4
3.8 4
3.2 3.1 3
3.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 3: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores for 
Electricity
Baseline Midline
This section of the report summarizes the impact data that was gathered throughthe midline evaluation and has been discussed above. In 
addition, it compares the baseline and midline values where relevant. All of the indicators are presented in table form, with the exception of 
“average score for satisfaction with lighting by situation (gender disaggregated)”. Bar graphs have been chosen to more effectively present the 
“average score for satisfaction with lighting by situation”, and have been included following the table. Customers’ experiences with using the 
Simpa system for cooling have been omitted from this table as it was expected that the values for this indicator would not be comparable due to 
3.33 3.5
3.9 4.2
3.1 3.2 3.1 3.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing 
by Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Quality Score
Activity
Figure 4: Women's Average Quality Scores 
for Electricity
Baseline Midline
2.9
3.9
4.4
4.1
3.1 3.1 3 3
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 5: Women's Average Satisfaction Scores 
for Electricity
Baseline Midline
seasonal variations. However, customers’ experiences with using the Simpa system for cooling were discussed earlier in this report. 
Indicator Year 1 Year 2
Average score for satisfaction with customer service N/A 4*
Average quantity of kerosene purchased 5.5 liters 2.62 liters
Average score for quality of health 2.5 5.3
Benefit most valued by UrjaMitras N/A Commissions and prizes
Average expenditure on solar lanterns INR 1,268 (approximately USD 20)** N/A
* 8.98% margin of error 
** This figure reflects the cost of purchasing a solar lantern, and includes travel costs. It does not include the costs of repairing the lantern, 
which will be accounted for in the end term evaluation. 
3.8 4
3.8 4
3.2 3.1 3
3.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 6: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores for 
Electricity
Baseline Midline
4.2 4.3 4.2 4.4
4.1 4.2
3.9
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 7: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores 
for Inverters
Baseline Midline
2.4
1.8
2.7
4
2.9
3.5
3
2.8
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 8: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores for 
Candles
Baseline Midline
2.3 2.3 2.1
4
2.9 2.8 2.6 2.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing 
by Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 9: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores 
for Kerosene
Baseline Midline
4.2 4.1
4.5
3.9
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 10: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores for 
Simpa Solar System
Midline
3.06
4.2
3.04 3.3
2.72
4.08
0
1
2
3
4
5
Electricity Inverter Candles / Wax LPG/Petromax Kerosene Lamp Simpa Solar 
System
Average Satisfaction Score
Energy Option
Figure 11: Men's Average Satisfaction Scores 
Across Activities 
Midline
2.9
3.9
4.4
4.1
3.1 3.1 3 3
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing 
by Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 12: Women's Average Satisfaction 
Scores for Electricity
Baseline Midline
4.3 4.3
5
4.5 4.3 4.1 4 3.9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 13: Women's Average Satisfaction 
Scores for Inverters
Baseline Midline
2.1 2
4.4
3.1
4
2
3
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing 
by Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 14: Women's Average Satisfaction 
Scores for Candles
Baseline Midline
2.4
2.1
2.9
3.9
2.9 2.8
2.5
2.8
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 15: Women's Average Satisfaction Scores 
for Kerosene
Baseline Midline
4.1 4.1
4.5
4.1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Cooking Children's Studies Reading / Writing by 
Adults
Eating Dinner
Average Satisfaction Score
Activity
Figure 16: Women's Average Satisfaction Scores 
for Simpa Systems
Midline
CONCLUSIONS 
The main findings of the midline survey of customers relate to how they value the Simpa offering and benefit from it, both in isolation and in 
relation to their experiences with other energy options. The main findings of the survey of UrjaMitras relate to how they value the Simpa 
offering, although they also contribute to a better understanding of the comparison between Simpa systems and other energy options. In 
addition to the conclusions based on these findings, this section of the report also includes changes that will be made to the execution of the end 
term survey, to address the challenges that were faced in the midline. 
The sample of customers was planned to consist of the first 370 acquired in Uttar Pradesh state. Since these were the first customers, it was 
expected that they would be more likely to be innovators in technology adoption than later customers. It was also expected that UrjaMitras 
would be likely to be innovators in technology adoption, who would then convince customers of the benefits of solar technology. The surveys 
found that the first customers in Mathura were more likely to be innovators in technology adoption than UrjaMitras in the 5 sampled districts. 
The bar graph below compares the data that was presented earlier on the percentages of customers and UrjaMitras in each of the adoption 
categories. 
3.05
4.075
3.025
2.333
2.75
4.2
0
1
2
3
4
5
Electricity Inverter Candles / Wax LPG/Petromax Kerosene 
Lamp
Simpa Solar 
System
Average Satisfaction Score
Energy Option
Figure 17: Women's Average Satisfaction 
Scores Across Activities 
Midline
However, the technology element of Simpa’s value proposition is likely to be secondary to the financial for both customers and UrjaMitras. For 
customers it is the affordability of the system that is important, and for UrjaMitras it is the rewards that they receive. While the end term 
survey will further investigate what makes the Simpa offering affordable to customers, as long as payment in installments is a contributing factor 
it will be critical to make it easy for them to recharge and to make these commissions attractive for UrjaMitras. 
Yet, customers also stated that they want systems that can run more appliances. Accommodating the demand for systems that can run more 
appliances may lead to a trade-off with affordability for customers in the future. Similarly UrjaMitras who want to earn greater rewards will have 
to increase their investments of time and effort proportionately, which may eventually lead to a trade-off with their existing activities. 
The value customers’ perceive from the Simpa offering, and therefore the ability of UrjaMitras to sell to them, is also shaped by other energy 
options. In particular, the midline survey revealed from customers’ responses that there has been both a drop in the number of hours of 
electricity they receive and their satisfaction with this option. In the same time period, 8 customers have acquired inverters resulting in a total 
of 23 in the sample. For these 23 their average satisfaction scores with inverters were higher than the corresponding figures for all customers 
with Simpa systems. While UrjaMitras believe that inverters are the main competitors to Simpa systems it would seem that the former are still 
too expensive for many customers to own. However, in considering its value proposition to customers, the cost comparison to inverters would 
seem like an additional factor that it is important to include. 
It was important for the midline survey to investigate customers’ use of other energy options not only to understand how these influence 
Simpa’s value proposition but also because the potential health and environmental benefits of solar systems can only be realized when the 
0.0%
21.5%
31.3% 30.8%
16.4%
1.2%
15.2% 18.0% 20.1%
45.50%
-10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
Innovator Early Adopter The Early 
Majority
The Late Majority Laggard
Adoption Category
Figure 18: Customers and Urja Mitras by 
Adoption Category 
Customer UrjaMitra
consumption of “unclean” fuels is reduced or stopped. Based on the available data, customers’ use of candles / wax and kerosene has dropped 
dramatically. This was corroborated by customers’ quality of health scores. However, these findings will be validated further through the end 
term evaluation. 
Validation will be very important in the end term evaluation because of the issues that arose during the midline. The midline had been designed 
so that phone surveys could be used to monitor the in-person data collection. 30% of customers and 20% of UrjaMitras were asked some of 
the same questions over the phone as they had been in person. The intention was that any falsification of the data collected in-person would be 
detected if it did not match the responses to the phone surveys. 
However through a detailed investigation process it emerged that the phone and in-person survey responses differed even when there was 
reliable evidence that the same person had been asked both sets of questions. The midline phone surveys were therefore not a reliable tool to 
detect whether the in-person data had been falsified. In order to address these issues, some of the questions in the end term evaluation will be 
modified to make them easier to answer. In addition, both the in-person and phone surveys are in the process of being pilot tested to check 
whether consistent answers can be expected from the same respondent. It is also planned to ask enumerators to provide the GPS co-ordinates 
of respondents and photograph the system IDs to make it very difficult to falsify data. 
ANNEXES 
ANNEX I: EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK 
01/05/2013 
Terms of Reference for Evaluation of “Prepaid Energy” Program
Intervention Background 
In India at least 400 million people are without reliable access to electricity. Without access to electricity, consumers and small businesses rely 
on traditional fuels, kerosene, candles and batteries. It is estimated that the off-grid segment is already spending $50+ billion per year on these 
sub-optimal and highly unsustainable energy solutions. 
There are many promising technical solutions available to customers today, ranging from small-scale solar lanterns, to pico-solar home systems, 
to larger installed solar home systems, to community scale solar or biomass electricity micro-grids, to solar-hybrid UPS/inverter solutions for 
the home and business. The problem is that these clean energy technologies almost always involve significant up-front costs and therefore must 
be financed. 
Simpa Networks is a for-profit enterprise with an innovative solar-as-a-service business model. Simpa customers take home a solar energy 
system by making a small initial down payment, then purchase prepaid energy credits using a mobile phone in amounts they choose – mimicking 
the highly successful pricing model for prepaid mobile airtime. Simpa’s cloud-based software tracks and processes payments, delivering proof of 
payment to the customer via SMS. 
Simpa’s results chain is as follows:
Inputs Processes Outputs Outcomes Impact
People
Product – solar
Capital
Product integration
Product development
Training
Risk assessment
Sales
After-sales service
Research
Systems installed Systems used / energy paid 
for and consumed
Improvements in well￾being of consumer 
households
Over the next two years Simpa plans to scale up sales of Solar Home Systems on a pay-as-you-go basis, and demonstrate the commercial 
viability of the model at sufficient scale to attract private market investment. Simpa plans to provide access to clean energy to 60,000 un-
electrified people, mostly in Uttar Pradesh, in the next 2 years, and nearly 4 million people in 5 years. It is expected that the results of the 
evaluation will be used by Simpa to refine their value proposition, particularly in terms of the solar product, and their expansion plans. 
Evaluation Purpose and Indicators 
The purpose of the evaluation is to answer the following question: 
What are the impacts on customers, in terms of access to energy and its resulting benefits, which are attributable to Simpa? 
In addition to measuring the indicators below, the evaluation should also address financial/economic benefits, and whether health and education 
impacts are relevant. 
Indicator Data Source External Reporting Frequency
Availability and/ quality of energy services Baseline and End-Term Evaluation At end of project
Levels of access to energy services achieved Baseline and End-Term Evaluation At end of project
Confidence in ability to seize opportunities provided 
by energy (gender disaggregated)
Baseline and End-Term Evaluation At end of project
Methodology 
The evaluation design will be quasi-experimental. The comparison group will be chosen from the districts in which Simpa plans to launch after 
May 1st, 2015. They will be consumers of kerosene, candles and/ D-cell batteries, who live in un-electrified homes. 
The evaluation design must include a mid-term and a final evaluation. The consulting firm is free to propose that a baseline study be conducted 
as well. However, it should keep in mind that unlike in the case of a non-profit organization, it is not possible for Simpa to select the treatment 
group. This is because as a for-profit, customers must choose Simpa (and not vice-versa). In addition, by 1st August, 2013, it is expected that 
only 220 Solar Home Systems will be sold in Uttar Pradesh. 
The evaluation should use a mixed method approach (i.e. both qualitative and quantitative tools). 
Collaboration and Communication 
The consulting firm will be accountable to an M&E consultant hired by Simpa. She will be involved in the design of the evaluation tools, the 
analysis of the data and co-authoring the evaluation reports. She may also choose to engage as a participant-observer in certain portions of the 
data collection. 
In addition to regular meetings with the M&E consultant, the consulting firm must also be willing to meet monthly with the Simpa team while the 
evaluations are being conducted. The purpose of these meetings will be to present progress and results, and receive feedback. 
The key deliverables and dates are below: 
Deliverable Date
Evaluation Plan 27/05/13
Mid-term Evaluation 21/06/14
End-term Evaluation 20/04/15
However, if Simpa achieves its sales targets faster than planned, the dates for the mid-term and end-term evaluations will be brought forward. If 
this happens, the evaluation team will be given sufficient advance notice. 
Evaluation Team 
The ideal evaluation team would include thematic expertise in energy and social enterprise/market-based models, and functional expertise with 
both mixed method and integrated-cost approaches. 
Applications 
To be considered, please submit your proposed methodology, timeline and budget, as well as the qualifications of the evaluation team, to 
Devyani.oskarsson@gmail.com by the end of the day on Monday, May 6th.
ANNEX II: EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS 
A quasi-experimental design was chosen for the evaluation of Simpa’s customers, in which they were matched with non-customers. Non￾customers were asked to participate in an in-person survey if they resembled Simpa customers in terms of the education level of the chief 
earner, and either his / her occupation or the material used in the construction of the house. Once the surveys had been completed, customers 
and non-customers were matched using propensity score matching. Scores were generated using logistic regression. The qualifying variables 
considered for matching were age, gender, family members, education, earning members, marital status, school children, house type and rooms. 
The significant variables were age, family members, earning members and school children. 
A rolling baseline of customers was designed, with a sample that would consist of the first 400 customers acquired in Uttar Pradesh state. 
However, because of communication and coordination issues related to surveying each customer between approval and installation, the baseline 
survey was halted for a month before it was resumed. Customers acquired by Simpa in this month are therefore not part of the sample, and 
this may be a source of bias. 
The evaluation of UrjaMitras is through a pretest-posttest design. However, in this context in which UrjaMitras are acquired on an ongoing 
basis as Simpa expands into new districts, and will continue to sell once the grant period is over, the evaluation seeks to measure changes in 
motivations across time rather than before and after a discrete event. Therefore at the time of the baseline survey respondents had been 
UrjaMitras for varying lengths of time. 
Structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of UrjaMitras to develop the baseline survey of UrjaMitras. In order to 
construct the purposive sample, it was decided to compare a district Simpa had entered recently with one in which it had a longer presence. 
Hathras and Aligarh were chosen out of convenience because of their geographical proximity to each other. 5 UrjaMitras were initially selected 
in each district. 
UrjaMitras were chosen from 2 categories. The first category was those who have sold 2-4 systems in a month. The second category was 
those who have sold 5 or more systems in a month. The 2 categories were almost equally represented in each district. An additional UrjaMitra 
was interviewed in Aligarh. 
A stratified sampling technique was chosen to identify the UrjaMitras to be surveyed. The sample was selected so as to be representative of 
UrjaMitras in different districts and performance categories at the time of the end-term evaluation. The sampling frame was the 420 UrjaMitras 
who had made at least one sale in the past 4 months. 
This report presents the results of the customer and UrjaMitra surveys that began on the 13th of September, 2014. From an original sample size 
of 400 customers, 378 were matched and 215 were surveyed in the midline. The sample size of UrjaMitras was 323. Based on these sample 
sizes, the margin of error for the customer survey is 6.62% and is 5.07% for the UrjaMitra survey (95% significance). The drop from 378 at the 
time of the baseline to 215 at the time of the midline was because many customers were not easily reachable on the days on which the survey 
was scheduled. For the end line attempts will be made to reach the original 378 customers and improve the scheduling of the surveys. 
There are limitations to how conclusive the evidence from the midline survey is, due to the methods themselves, data quality issues and bias. 
For the evaluation of UrjaMitras a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods was the most appropriate as it would yield data on both 
the range of motivations for becoming an UrjaMitra, and the prevalence of each. For the evaluation of customers quantitative methods were 
considered the most appropriate as they would enable close-ended questions to be asked, and the gathering of quantitative data. Close-ended 
questions were used to ask about the specific parameters of the value proposition that Simpa had identified prior to the baseline and wanted 
feedback on. Quantitative data was required to compare customers’ satisfaction levels with a range of energy options, and to estimate their 
usage of kerosene and expenditure on energy (in order to determine impact and cost-effectiveness). However, given that much of the 
quantitative data that the evaluation sought to gather is difficult to recall, observational methods may have provided better quality data (but for a 
purposive sample). 
The midline had been designed so that phone surveys could be used to monitor the in-person data collection. 30% of customers and 20% of 
UrjaMitras were asked some of the same questions over the phone as they had been in person, after an interval of 2 months or less. The 
intention was that any falsification of the data collected in-person would be detected if it did not match the responses to the phone surveys. 
It is suspected that inaccuracies in respondents’ answers and data falsification made quality issues the most serious of the limitations of the 
midline evaluation.When through a detailed investigation process it emerged that the phone and in-person survey responses differed even when 
there was reliable evidence that the same person had been asked both sets of questions, the conclusion was reached that either the information 
being asked for was difficult to recall, or respondents did not appreciate the importance of answering accurately. This was the first issue that 
affected data quality. The second issue was falsification of the data. From a non-random sample of surveys, 11% of the midline data is estimated 
to be false (although not proven). This estimate is based on one common question in the in-person and phone customer surveys that provided 
consistent answers. 
There are four threats to internal validity of the evaluation of customers that were identified at the time of its design. The first is selection bias. 
Since Simpa customers must choose to buy a solar connection, they cannot be selected randomly. In addition, because customers will be 
acquired gradually, the first 400 customers were surveyed, rather than a random sample from the universe of customers. 
The second threat is mortality, or attrition. If customers who are dissatisfied with their Simpa system stop repaying, then it will be mostly those 
who are satisfied who are retained as customers after 2 years. This is likely to exaggerate the benefits of Simpa’s systems. The third threat that 
is related, but will have the opposite effect, is if customers minimize their usage of the system. They may then report the Simpa system to not 
be of much benefit to them, when in fact they haven’t used it enough.
The fourth threat is that there is a lack of variability in some of the indicators such as quality of health. If customers do not perceive poor health 
due to poor lighting and kerosene usage to be a problem, they may downplay its effects. This will lead to a result that suggests the benefits of 
solar lighting are less significant than they are. 
ANNEX III: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS 
Customer Survey 
Good…………….! I am……………….. As you may recollect, we had surveyed you last winter on your experience with lighting solutions. This 
survey is being conducted across 2 years and we would like to speak to you again now. I would be grateful if you could spare some time to help 
us by answering a few questions. Please be assured that your name will not be associated in any way with the information you have provided, and 
that no one will contact you for selling anything to you based on this information.This is purely for our reference. 
Respondent agrees to be interviewed 1 CONTINUE
Respondent does not agree to be interviewed 2 END
 
Name of Simpa Customer
Address
Block Name
Village Name
Pincode
Mobile No. 0
State Uttar Pradesh 1 District Mathura 1
NSCENER S 
Interview Details 
Date of Interview Interviewer’s Name
Duration of Interview (In 
Mins)
Starting Time of 
Interview
Quality Check Accompaniment Back Checked Scrutinized
Supervisor 1 1 1
Field Head 2 2 2
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) The Head of Household (HoH) must be one of the participants.
2) For some questions responses from a male and female household member are required. These questions will be indicated with further 
instructions. 
Section 1: Lighting and Electricity 
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q1.1 Is the site electrified? Yes.......................................01 CONTINUE
No........................................02 SKIP TO 
Q7.1
Q1.2 On average, how many hours of electricity are you receiving in a 
day at present?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q1.3 In the last month, what was the total household expenditure on 
electricity?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q1.4 Do you use a stabilizer to control power fluctuation? Yes......................................01 SKIP TO Q3
No........................................02 CONTINUE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q2
What are the 
activities that you 
do when you are 
using the grid supply 
/ electricity / 
government supply 
for lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the grid supply / 
electricity / 
government supply 
to perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from the 
grid supply / electricity 
/ government supply 
to perform these 
activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the grid supply / 
electricity / 
government supply 
to perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from the grid supply 
/ electricity / 
government supply 
to perform these 
activities?
Code Cooking..................01
Children’s 
studies.....................02
Reading / writing 
by adults................03
Eating 
dinner...............04
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied..05
Very satisfied............04
Somewhat satisfied..03
Not very satisfied....02
Not at all satisfied....01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied..05
Very satisfied.........04
Somewhat 
satisfied..03
Not very 
satisfied..02
Other (specify).....05 Not at all 
satisfied..01
Respons
e
2.1.1 Cooking 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.1.6
2.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6
2.3.1 Reading / 
writing by 
adults 
2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6
2.4.1 Eating 
dinner
2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.4.6
2.5.1 Other - 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 2.5.5 2.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q3 In the past 6 months have you used an inverter 
for lighting?
Yes...........................................................01 CONTINUE
No............................................................02 SKIP TO Q5.1
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q4
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used the 
inverter for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the inverter to 
perform these 
activities?
How would you rate 
the quality of the 
inverter to perform 
these activities?
How would you rate 
the quality of the 
inverter to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from the Inverter 
to perform these 
activities?
Code Cooking................01
Children’s 
studies...................02
Reading / writing 
by 
adults.....................03
Eating 
dinner...............04
Other 
(specify).............05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied....05
Very satisfied.............04
Somewhat satisfied...03
Not very satisfied......02
Not at all satisfied......01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very satisfied...04
Somewhat 
satisfied..03
Not very 
satisfied..02
Not at all 
satisfied..01
Respons
e
4.1.1 Cooking 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6
4.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6
4.3.1 Reading / 
writing by 
adults 
4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5 4.3.6
4.4.1 Eating 
dinner
4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 4.4.5 4.4.6
4.5.1 Other - 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.5.5 4.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q5.1 In the past 6 months have you used a generator for lighting? Yes..........................................01 CONTINUE
No...........................................02 SKIP TO 
Q7.1
Q5.2 What is the fuel used for running the generator? Only kerosene......................01 SKIP TO Q6
Only diesel............................02 CONTINUE
Both kerosene and diesel..03 CONTINUE
Petrol......................................04 SKIP TO Q6
Q5.3 In the last month, how much did you spend on diesel to run the 
generator?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q6
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used the 
generator for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the generator to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from the 
generator to perform 
these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the generator to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from the generator 
to perform these 
activities?
Code Cooking..............01
Children’s 
studies.................02
Reading / writing 
by 
adults...................03
Eating 
dinner...............04
Other 
(specify).............05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied........02
Not at all satisfied.......01
Very 
good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very 
bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied..05
Very satisfied........04
Somewhat 
satisfied..03
Not very 
satisfied..02
Not at all 
satisfied..01
Respons
e
6.1.1 Cooking 6.1.2 6.1.3 6.1.4 6.1.5 6.1.6
6.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
6.2.2 6.2.3 6.2.4 6.2.5 6.2.6
6.3.1 Reading / 
writing by 
adults 
6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 6.3.5 6.3.6
6.4.1 Eating 
dinner
6.4.2 6.4.3 6.4.4 6.4.5 6.4.6
6.5.1 Other - 6.5.2 6.5.3 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q7.1 In the past 6 months have you used a lead acid battery for lighting? Yes..............01 CONTINUE
No..............02 SKIP TO Q9
Q7.2 In the past month, how much did your household spend on recharging your lead 
acid battery or batteries?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q8
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used a lead 
acid battery for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the lead acid battery 
to perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you with 
the light from the lead 
acid battery to perform 
these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the lead acid 
battery to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from the lead 
acid battery to 
perform these 
activities?
Code Cooking..............01
Children’s 
studies.................02
Reading / writing 
by adults............03
Eating dinner......04
Other (specify)..05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Very good..........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad.............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied.............04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied............02
Not at all 
satisfied.............01
Respons
e
8.1.1 Cooking 8.1.2 8.1.3 8.1.4 8.1.5 8.1.6
8.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
8.2.2 8.2.3 8.2.4 8.2.5 8.2.6
8.3.1 Reading / 
writing by 
8.3.2 8.3.3 8.3.4 8.3.5 8.3.6
adults 
8.4.1 Eating 
dinner
8.4.2 8.4.3 8.4.4 8.4.5 8.4.6
8.5.1 Other - 8.5.2 8.5.3 8.5.4 8.5.5 8.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q9 In the past 6 months have you used a Simpa solar system for 
lighting?
Yes................................................01 CONTINUE
No................................................02 SKIP TO 
Q11.1
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q10
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used a Simpa 
solar system for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the Simpa solar 
system to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are you with 
the light from the Simpa 
solar system to perform 
these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the Simpa solar 
system to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied 
are you with the 
light from the 
Simpa solar 
system to 
perform these 
activities?
Code Cooking..............01
Children’s 
studies.................02
Reading / writing 
by adults............03
Eating dinner......04
Other 
(specify)...05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied...........04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied...........02
Not at all 
satisfied...........01
Respons
e
10.1.1 
Cooking 
10.1.2 10.1.3 10.1.4 10.1.5 10.1.6
10.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
10.2.2 10.2.3 10.2.4 10.2.5 10.2.6
10.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
10.3.2 10.3.3 10.3.4 10.3.5 10.3.6
10.4.1 Eating 
dinner
10.4.2 10.4.3 10.4.4 10.4.5 10.4.6
10.5.1 Other - 10.5.2 10.5.3 10.5.4 10.5.5 10.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q11.1 In the past 6 months have you used any solar product (other 
than Simpa) for lighting?
Yes...............................01 CONTINUE
No...............................02 SKIP TO 
Q13.1
Q11.2 How was this product bought? Cash up front..............01 CONTINUE
Loan from bank...........02
Loan from MFI.............03
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q12
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used solar 
energy (other than 
a Simpa system) for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
solar energy to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from solar 
energy to perform these 
activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
the Simpa solar 
system to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied 
are you with the 
light from solar 
energy to 
perform these 
activities?
Cooking................01
Children’s 
studies...................02
Reading / writing 
by adults..............03
Eating dinner.......04
Other (specify)...05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied...........04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied...........02
Not at all 
satisfied...........01
Respons
e
12.1.1 
Cooking 
12.1.2 12.1.3 12.1.4 12.1.5 12.1.6
12.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
12.2.2 12.2.3 12.2.4 12.2.5 12.2.6
12.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
12.3.2 12.3.3 12.3.4 12.3.5 12.3.6
12.4.1 Eating 
dinner
12.4.2 12.4.3 12.4.4 12.4.5 12.4.6
12.5.1 Other - 12.5.2 12.5.3 12.5.4 12.5.5 12.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q13.1 In the past 6 months, have you used wax (candles) for 
lighting?
Yes..................................................01 CONTINUE
No...................................................02 SKIP TO 
Q15.1
Q13.2 In the past month, how much did your household spend 
on candles?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q14
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used wax 
(candles) for
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
wax (candles) to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from wax 
(candles) to perform 
these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
wax (candles) to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from wax 
(candles) to 
perform these 
activities?
Cooking................01
Children’s 
studies...................02
Reading / writing 
by adults..............03
Eating dinner.......04
Other (specify)...05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied...............04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied..............02
Not at all 
satisfied.............01
Respons
e
14.1.1 
Cooking 
14.1.2 14.1.3 14.1.4 14.1.5 14.1.6
14.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
14.2.2 14.2.3 14.2.4 14.2.5 14.2.6
14.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
14.3.2 14.3.3 14.3.4 14.3.5 14.3.6
14.4.1 Eating 
dinner
14.4.2 14.4.3 14.4.4 14.4.5 14.4.6
14.5.1 Other - 14.5.2 14.5.3 14.5.4 14.5.5 14.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q15.1 In the past 6 months have you used an LPG-based lamp 
(Petromax) for lighting?
Yes....................................01 CONTINUE
No.....................................02 SKIP TO 
Q17
Q15.2 How often do you fill gas in the lamp? RECORD 
RESPONSE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q16
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used an LPG￾based lamp for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
an LPG-based 
lamp to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from an 
LPG-based lamp to 
perform these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
an LPG-based 
lamp to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from an LPG-based 
lamp to perform 
these activities?
Cooking................01
Children’s 
studies...................02
Reading / writing 
by adults..............03
Eating dinner.......04
Other (specify)...05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good..........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad.............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied........02
Not at all satisfied.......01
Very good..........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad.............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied...................04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied..............02
Not at all 
satisfied.............01
Respons
e
16.1.1 
Cooking 
16.1.2 16.1.3 16.1.4 16.1.5 16.1.6
16.2.1 
Children’s 
16.2.2 16.2.3 16.2.4 16.2.5 16.2.6
studies 
16.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
16.3.2 16.3.3 16.3.4 16.3.5 16.3.6
16.4.1 Eating 
dinner
16.4.2 16.4.3 16.4.4 16.4.5 16.4.6
16.5.1 Other - 16.5.2 16.5.3 16.5.4 16.5.5 16.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q17 In the past 6 months have you used a rechargeable LED torch / 
light for lighting?
Yes....................................01 CONTINUE
No.....................................02 SKIP TO Q19
Instructions to Interviewer 
2) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q18
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when you 
used a rechargeable 
LED torch / light for 
lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of a 
rechargeable LED 
torch / light to 
perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from a 
rechargeable LED torch 
/ light to perform these 
activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
a rechargeable 
LED torch / light 
to perform these 
activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from a 
rechargeable LED 
torch / light to 
perform these 
activities?
Cooking..................01
Children’s 
studies.....................02
Reading / writing 
by adults................03
Eating dinner.........04
Other (specify).....05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied........02
Not at all satisfied.......01
Very good..........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad.............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied...............04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied..............02
Not at all 
satisfied.............01
Respons
e
18.1.1 
Cooking 
18.1.2 18.1.3 18.1.4 18.1.5 18.1.6
18.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
18.2.2 18.2.3 18.2.4 18.2.5 18.2.6
18.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
18.3.2 18.3.3 18.3.4 18.3.5 18.3.6
18.4.1 Eating 
dinner
18.4.2 18.4.3 18.4.4 18.4.5 18.4.6
18.5.1 Other - 18.5.2 18.5.3 18.5.4 18.5.5 18.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q19 In the past 6 months have you used a kerosene lamp for 
lighting?
Yes.............................................01 CONTINUE
No..............................................02 SKIP TO 
Q22.1
No.
Question 
20
Which type of 
kerosene lamps do 
you use?
What are the oil 
carrying capacities 
of your kerosene 
lamps?
Once filled, how many days do 
they last?
On average, how 
many kerosene 
lamps do your 
household light each 
day?
On average, how 
many hours per 
day do you light 
kerosene lamps 
for?
Code 5 days or less...........................01
6-10 days...................................02
11-15 days................................03
16-20 days................................04
21-30 days................................05
More than 30 days..................06
Response Wick 20.1.1 20.1.2 20.1.3 20.1.4 20.1.5
Hurricane 20.2.1 20.2.2 20.2.3 20.2.4 20.2.5
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q21
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you used a 
kerosene wick / 
lamp for lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of a 
kerosene wick / 
lamp to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from a 
kerosene wick / lamp to 
perform these activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of a 
kerosene wick / 
lamp to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are 
you with the light 
from a kerosene 
wick / lamp to 
perform these 
activities?
Cooking................01
Children’s 
studies...................02
Reading / writing 
by adults..............03
Eating 
dinner...............04
Other 
(specify).............05
Kitchen...........01
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely satisfied......05
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Very good...........05
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Extremely 
satisfied...........05
Very 
satisfied.............04
Somewhat 
satisfied..........03
Not very 
satisfied.............02
Not at all 
satisfied.............01
Respons
e
21.1.1 
Cooking 
21.1.2 21.1.3 21.1.4 21.1.5 21.1.6
21.2.1 21.2.2 21.2.3 21.2.4 21.2.5 21.2.6
Children’s 
studies 
21.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
21.3.2 21.3.3 21.3.4 21.3.5 21.3.6
21.4.1 Eating 
dinner
21.4.2 21.4.3 21.4.4 21.4.5 21.4.6
21.5.1 Other - 21.5.2 21.5.3 21.5.4 21.5.5 21.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q22.1 In the past 6 months have you used any other fuel for 
lighting?
Yes (please specify)......................01 CONTINUE
No...................................................02 SKIP TO 
Q24.1
Q22.2 In the past month, what was your expenditure on this fuel? RECORD 
RESPONSE
Instructions to Interviewer 
1) Ask the following questions to the male respondent.
No. Ask the following questions to the 
female respondent
Questio
n Q23
What are the 
activities that you 
have done when 
you have used this 
fuel for lighting?
Where do these 
activities take 
place?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
this fuel to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied are you 
with the light from this 
fuel to perform these 
activities?
How would you 
rate the quality of 
this fuel to perform 
these activities?
How satisfied 
are you with 
the light from 
this fuel to 
perform these 
activities?
Cooking................01 Kitchen...........01 Very good...........05 Extremely satisfied......05 Very good...........05 Extremely 
Children’s 
studies..................02
Reading / writing 
by adults..............03
Eating dinner.......04
Other (specify)...05
Room..............02
In the open....03
Other..............04
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
Very satisfied...............04
Somewhat satisfied.....03
Not very satisfied.........02
Not at all satisfied.........01
Good...................04
Fair......................03
Bad......................02
Very bad..............01
satisfied.........05
Very 
satisfied..04
Somewhat 
satisfied........03
Not very 
satisfied.........02
Not at all 
satisfied........01
Respons
e
23.1.1 
Cooking 
23.1.2 23.1.3 23.1.4 23.1.5 23.1.6
23.2.1 
Children’s 
studies 
23.2.2 23.2.3 23.2.4 23.2.5 23.2.6
23.3.1 Reading 
/ writing by 
adults 
23.3.2 23.3.3 23.3.4 23.3.5 23.3.6
23.4.1 Eating 
dinner
23.4.2 23.4.3 23.4.4 23.4.5 23.4.6
23.5.1 Other - 23.5.2 23.5.3 23.5.4 23.5.5 23.5.6
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q24.1 Have you used the lights powered by your Simpa system for any economic 
activity at home?
Yes.........................01 CONTINUE
No.........................02 SKIP TO 
Q24.3.1
Q24.2 What is the activity? RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q24.3.1
24.3.2
24.3.3
24.3.4
24.3.5
24.3.6
Which of the following appliances do you use your Simpa system for? Mobile...................01
Other (specify)...02
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
No.Q25
Question To what extent do you agree with the statement that [STATEMENT]?
Code Fully Agree…………………………………………………………………………………01
Agree..................……………………………………………………………………………02
Neither Agree Nor Disagree……………………………………………………………..03
Disagree…...................………………………………………………………………………04
Fully Disagree………………………………………………………………………………05
Statements
Q25.1
In general, I am among the first in 
my circle of friends and relatives to 
buy a new type of energy product 
when it appears.
Q25.2 If I heard that a new type of energy 
product was available in the store, I 
would be interested enough to buy 
it.
Q25.3 Compared to my friends and 
relatives, I own many types of 
energy products.
Q25.4 In general I am the first in my circle 
of friends and relatives to know the 
brands of the latest energy 
technologies.
Q25.5 I will buy a new energy product 
even if I haven’t heard of or tried it 
before.
Q25.6 I like to buy new energy products 
before other people do.
SECTION 2:Health Concerns 
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q26.1.
1
26.1.2
26.1.3
26.1.4
Which of the following problems have you experienced in the past 6 
months? (Record aided)
Respiratory Infection....01 MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Eye irritation due to 
smoke...............................02
Breathing problems.......03
None of them................04
Q26.2 In the past 6 months have you experienced any accident caused by 
using lighting sources such as kerosene, candles or a generator? 
Yes..................................01 CONTINUE
No....................................02 SKIP TO 
Q27.1
Q26.3.
1
26.3.2
26.3.3
26.3.4
What is the nature of these accidents? Fire....................................01 MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Severe burn.....................02
Tripping over lighting 
device..............................03
Other (specify)...............04
Q26.4 Have any of these accidents happened more than once in the past 6 
months?
If yes, record accident 
code and the number of 
times the accident 
happened.
SECTION 3:Household Information 
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q27.1 Have any members of your household worked as labourers in the past 
12 months? (Include members not present at the time of the survey)
Yes..................................01 CONTINUE
No..................................02 SKIP TO 
Q29.1
Q27.2 How many of your household members have worked as labourers in 
the past 12 months?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
No.
Question 
Q28
For how many 
months was this 
person resident in 
this house in the 
past 12 months?
What is the 
type of labour 
this person 
performed?
How was this 
person paid?
How much was 
this person paid 
per day for this 
work?
How many 
days in a month 
did this person 
do this work?
How many 
months in a 
year did this 
person do this 
work?
Code Use 1 row for each 
household member. 
The total number 
of rows should be 
equal to the 
response to Q 
27.2
According to the 
criteria, is this 
person a 
member of the 
household?
Yes...................01
No...................02
Response 28.1.1 28.1.2 28.1.3 28.1.4 28.1.5 28.1.6 28.1.7
28.2.1 28.2.2 28.2.3 28.2.4 28.2.5 28.2.6 28.2.7
28.3.1 28.3.2 28.3.3 28.3.4 28.3.5 28.3.6 28.3.7
28.4.1 28.4.2 28.4.3 28.4.4 28.4.5 28.4.6 28.4.7
28.5.1 28.5.2 28.5.3 28.5.4 28.5.5 28.5.6 28.5.7
28.6.1 28.6.2 28.6.3 28.6.4 28.6.5 28.6.6 28.6.7
28.7.1 28.7.2 28.7.3 28.7.4 28.7.5 28.7.6 28.7.7
28.8.1 28.8.2 28.8.3 28.8.4 28.8.5 28.8.6 28.8.7
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q29.1 Have any members of your household held a salaried position in the past 
12 months? (Include members not present at the time of the survey)
Yes..................................01 CONTINUE
No..................................02 SKIP TO 
Q30
Q29.2 How many of your household members have held salaried positions in the 
past 12 months?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
No.
Question 
Q29
For how many months was this person 
resident in this house in the past 12 
months?
What is this person’s 
salary per month?
How long has this person been 
working for this employer?
Code Use 1 row for each household 
member. The total number of rows 
should be equal to the response to 
Q29.2
According to the 
criteria, is this person a 
member of the 
household?
Yes...................01
No...................02
Response 29.1.1 29.1.2 29.1.3 29.1.4
29.2.1 29.2.2 29.2.3 29.2.4
29.3.1 29.3.2 29.3.3 29.3.4
29.4.1 29.4.2 29.4.3 29.4.4
29.5.1 29.5.2 29.5.3 29.5.4
29.6.1 29.6.2 29.6.3 29.6.4
29.7.1 29.7.2 29.7.3 29.7.4
29.8.1 29.8.2 29.8.3 29.8.4
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q30 Does your household cultivate its own land? Yes..................................01 CONTINUE
No..................................02 SKIP TO 
Q32.1
No.
Questio
n Q31
What crops did you 
cultivate in the past 12 
months?
How many times did 
you harvest this crop 
in the past 12 months?
What was the yield 
in quintals per 
harvest?
What price did you sell the 
crop at per quintal?
What were your 
expenditures per 
quintal?
Code
Respons
e
31.1.1 
Wheat
31.1.2 31.1.3 31.1.4 31.1.5
31.2.1 Rice 31.2.2 31.2.3 31.2.4 31.2.5
31.3.1 
Pulses
31.3.2 31.3.3 31.3.4 31.3.5
31.4.1 Oil 
seeds
31.4.2 31.4.3 31.4.4 31.4.5
31.5.1 
Potatoes
31.5.2 31.5.3 31.5.4 31.5.5
31.6.1 
Sugarcane
31.6.2 31.6.3 31.6.4 31.6.5
31.7.1 
Other
31.7.2 31.7.3 31.7.4 31.7.5
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q32.1 Have any members of your household worked in their own business 
in the past 12 months? (Include members not present at the time 
of the survey)
Yes..................................01 CONTINUE
No..................................02 SKIP TO Q34
Q32.2 How many of your household members have worked in their own 
business in the past 12 months?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
No.
Question 
Q33
For how many months 
was this person resident 
in this house in the past 
12 months? 
Code Use 1 row for each 
household member. The 
total number of rows 
should be equal to the 
response to Q32.2 
According to the 
criteria, is this person a 
member of the 
household?
Yes..............................01
No...............................02
What is the 
business that your 
household 
member(s) work in? 
(Response)
How much does the 
business earn per month 
(i.e. earnings net of 
expenses)? (Response)
When was this business 
started? (Response)
Response 33.1.1 33.1.2 33.1.3 33.1.4 33.1.5
33.2.1 33.2.2 33.2.3 33.2.4 33.2.5
33.3.1 33.3.2 33.3.3 33.3.4 33.3.5
33.4.1 33.4.2 33.4.3 33.4.4 33.4.5
33.5.1 33.5.2 33.5.3 33.5.4 33.5.5
33.6.1 33.6.2 33.6.3 33.6.4 33.6.5
33.7.1 33.7.2 33.7.3 33.7.4 33.7.5
33.8.1 33.8.2 33.8.3 33.8.4 33.8.5
No. Q34
Question In the last month, what were your 3 most important expenses? What was the expenditure on each?
Code
Response 34.1.1 34.1.2
34.2.1 34.2.2
34.3.1 34.3.2
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q35.1 In the last month, to what extent were you able to meet the expenses 
that you mentioned?
Fully.................................01
Partially............................02
Not at all..........................03
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q35.2 In the last month, what was your total household expenditure on 
kerosene?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q35.3 What were your household savings in the last month? RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q35.4 Does anyone in your household have a bank account? Yes...................................01
No....................................02
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q35.5 Is anyone in your household currently repaying a loan? Yes...................................01 CONTINU
E
No....................................02 SKIP TO 
Q37.1
No. Q36
Question What is the monthly repayment for each loan? What is the source of each loan? What is the purpose of each 
loan?
Code
Response 36.1.1 36.1.2 36.1.3
36.2.1 36.2.2 36.2.3
36.3.1 36.3.2 36.3.3
36.4.1 36.4.2 36.4.3
SECTION 4:Feedback on Simpa
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q37.1 Which of the following 
aspects of your Simpa 
system are you most 
satisfied with? (Record 
aided)
I am not satisfied with any aspect of my Simpa 
system..................................................................01
I pay in instalments so it is 
affordable.................02
I don’t have to buy all the parts 
separately.........03
I don’t have to travel to buy the system, 
recharge or service it........................................04
Once I pay, my system recharges 
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
immediately....05
There is a warranty and servicing is free......06
Customer service resolves my complaints 
quickly..................................................................07
Other (specify)....................................................08
Q37.2 Which of the following 
aspects of your Simpa 
system are you least 
satisfied with? (Record 
aided)
I am not dissatisfied with any aspect of my 
Simpa system.......................................................01
It is too expensive..............................................02
I cannot buy the parts separately....................03
I cannot use it to run other appliances (e.g. 
TV, fridge, another fan)......................................04
It takes a long time for my system to recharge 
after I pay.............................................................05
Customer service is not responsive..............06
Other (specify)....................................................07
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q37.3 How many hours does 
your system run for?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q37.4 How does this compare to 
your expectations?
Exceeds expectations........................................01
Meets expectations............................................02
Below expectations............................................03
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q37.5 How does the 
performance of the fan 
compare to your 
expectations?
Exceeds expectations........................................01
Meets expectations............................................02
Below expectations............................................03
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q37.6 How satisfied are you with 
the position of the Simpa 
lights and fan in your 
house?
Fully satisfied.......................................................05
Satisfied...............................................................04 
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.....................03
Dissatisfied...........................................................02
Fully dissatisfied...................................................01
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q37.7 Have you ever made a 
complaint to customer 
service?
Yes.......................................................................01 CONTINU E
No........................................................................02 SKIP TO 
Q37.9
Q37.8 How satisfied are you with 
Simpa’s customer service?
Fully satisfied.......................................................05
Satisfied...............................................................04 
SINGLE 
CODE 
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.....................03
Dissatisfied...........................................................02
Fully dissatisfied...................................................01
ONLY
Q37.9 Would you recommend 
Simpa to others?
Yes.......................................................................01 CONTINU
E
No........................................................................02 TERMINAT
E
Q38.1
Q38.2
Q38.3
Q38.4
Q38.5
What would you tell 
others about Simpa? 
(Record aided)
The instalment / credit model makes it 
affordable............................................................01
It is convenient to buy, recharge and get 
serviced................................................................02
There is a warranty and servicing is 
free.............03
Simpa provides higher quality than other solar 
companies...........................................................04
Other (specify)....................................................05
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Is there anything else that 
you want to tell us?
USE BACK 
OF THE 
PAGE IF 
YOU NEED 
MORE 
SPACE
Definition of household: A group of people who normally live and eat their meals together. For the purposes of this survey, “normally” is 
taken to mean that the person concerned has lived in the household for at least three of the past twelve months. 
1. The only exceptions to be made to this rule should be for: (i) persons who are the main provider for the household; and (ii) newlyweds. 
2. Servants, lodgers, farm-workers, and other such individuals who live and take meals with the household are to be counted as household 
members, even though they may have no blood relation to the household head. 
It is very important that you define the household membership strictly according to the criteria outlined above. These guidelines may not be the 
same as others you may be familiar with from other surveys, and at times they may not conform to the household’s own notion of who should 
be considered to be a household member. Please discuss any questions that arise in the field with your supervisor. 
UrjaMitra Survey 
We are conducting a study to understand your experience as an UM. We would be grateful if you could spare us some time. There are no 
right or wrong answers, and we would just like your honest responses. While we will be sharing some of this information with Simpa, please be 
assured that your name will not be associated in any way with the information you have provided. No-one will contact you to sell you anything 
based on this information. 
Respondent agrees to be interviewed 1 CONTINUE
Respondent does not agree to be interviewed 2 END
Name of UM
Address
Block Name
Village Name
Pincode
Mobile No. 0
State Uttar Pradesh 1 District
NSCENER S 
Interview Details 
Date of Interview Interviewer’s Name
Duration of Interview (In 
Mins)
Starting Time of 
Interview
Quality Check Accompaniment Back Checked Scrutinized
Supervisor 1 1 1
Field Head 2 2 2
No.Q1
Question To what extent do you agree with the statement that [STATEMENT]?
Code Fully 
Agree………………………………………………………………………………01
Somewhat Agree…………………………………………………………………02
Neither Agree Nor Disagree……………………………………………………03
Somewhat Disagree………………………………………………………………04
Fully Disagree…………………………………………………………………05
Statements
Q1.1
In general, I am among the first in my circle 
of friends and relatives to buy a new type of 
energy product when it appears.
Q1.2 If I heard that a new type of energy product 
was available in the store, I would be 
interested enough to buy it.
Q1.3 Compared to my friends and relatives, I 
own many types of energy products.
Q1.4 In general I am the first in my circle of 
friends and relatives to know the brands of 
the latest energy technologies.
Q1.5 I will buy a new energy product even if I 
haven’t heard of or tried it before.
Q1.6 I like to buy new energy products before 
other people do.
No. Question Code Response Instruction 
Q2 Before you first heard about Simpa, 
what was your exposure to solar 
energy?
I had not heard of solar……………………………01
I had heard of solar but not seen any products…02
I had seen other solar products…………………03
I had used another solar product…………………04
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q3 In how many villages have you tried to 
sell a Simpa system?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q4 On average, how many hours of 
electricity per day do those villages get?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q5 Do you think their electricity supply 
will improve in the future?
Yes…………………………………………………01
No…………………………………………………02
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q6 In how many of those villages had they 
heard of solar energy before?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q7 In how many of those villages had they 
seen a solar product before?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q8.1
Q8.2
As an UM, how can you earn 
commissions from Simpa?
Through selling systems…………………………01
Through recharges………………………………02
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Q9 Which of the following factors will 
most influence whether your 
customers recharge their systems in 
the future? (Record Aided)
How much money they have at the time…………01
How well their system has been working…………02
How convenient it is for them to recharge………03
Changes in the weather…………………………04
How insistent Simpa and the UM are……………05
Other (specify)……………………………………06
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q10 What do you think is the biggest 
competitor to Simpa systems (solar or 
non-solar)?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q11 -
Q11.1
Q11.2
Q11.3
Q11.4
Q11.5
Q11.6
Q11.7
Q11.8
Q11.9
Q11.10
Which of the following are the 
advantages to you of being an UM? 
(Record Aided)
There are no advantages to being an UM…………01
I can sell systems alongside my other activities…02
When I provide my customers with an additional 
product it increases the goodwill that they have for 
me…………….03
The more I work, the more I am rewarded through 
commissions and prizes……………………………04
I am rewarded in the form of commissions and 
prizes…..05
It makes me feel good to benefit my customers and 
serve society………………………………………06
More people in my village and neighboring villages 
have a good impression of me……………………07
I like making productive use of my time…………08
The reputation of my village has increased because 
we have solar………………………………………09
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Q11.11 I have brought something new to my customers…10
Other (specify)……………………………………11
Q12 Of the advantages that you mentioned, 
which is most important to you?
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q13 -
Q13.1
Q13.2
Q13.3
Q13.4
Q13.5
Q13.6
Which of the following are the 
advantages to you of being associated 
with the Simpa company? (Record 
Aided)
There are no advantages to being associated with 
the Simpa company………………………………01
Being an UM is the first step towards other 
opportunities with Simpa (e.g. sevamitra, RSA)…02
I enjoy attending events Simpa organizes for its 
team…..03
I like receiving visitors from Simpa’s offices in 
Bangalore and other places………………………04
I want to be known by Simpa’s senior management 
for my performance………………………………05
Other (specify)……………………………………06
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Q14 -
Q14.1
Q14.2
Q14.3
Q14.4
Q14.5
Q14.6
Q14.7
Which of the following are the 
disadvantages to you of being an UM? 
(Record Aided)
There are no disadvantages to being an UM……01
I do not receive a fixed income……………………02
Being a recharge agent is not attractive financially.03
When my customers are dissatisfied it affects my 
reputation………………………………………04
I don’t receive my commissions and/ prizes on 
time……..05
Due to some changes made by Simpa, I have not 
received the prizes that I believed that I would…06
Other (specify)……………………………………07
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Q14.8 If the Simpa offering remains as it is, 
what changes do you expect in demand 
over the next 6 months? (Record 
Aided)
It will increase continuously………………………01
It will increase initially and then reduce…………02
It will decrease continuously………………………03 
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q15 -
Q15.1
Q15.2
Q15.3
Q15.4
Over the past 12 months, what are the 
types of work that you have done?
Casual labor (farm and non-farm)…………………01
Salaried employment (specify position)…………02
Own farm activities………………………………03
Own business (specify)……………………………04
MULTIPLE 
CODES 
POSSIBLE
Q16 When you are working, do you spend Travelling…………………………………………01 SINGLE 
most of your time travelling or at a 
fixed location?
At a fixed location…………………………………02 CODE 
ONLY
Q17 Approximately what percentage of your 
working hours do you spend on Simpa?
RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q18 How much agricultural land does your 
household own?
RECORD 
AMOUNT 
AND UNIT
Q19 What is your level of education? Illiterate…………………………………………01
Literate but without formal schooling……………02
Less than primary…………………………………03
Primary……………………………………………04
Middle……………………………………………05
Matriculate…………………………………………06
Intermediate………………………………………07
B.A./B.Sc…………………………………………08
M.A./M.Sc…………………………………………09
Professional degree………………………………10
Diploma……………………………………………11
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q20 What is your approximate age? RECORD 
RESPONSE
Q21 Record gender of UrjaMitra.
Male………………………………………………01
Female……………………………………………02
SINGLE 
CODE 
ONLY
Q22 Is there anything else that you want to 
tell us?
USE REST 
OF THE 
PAGE IF 
YOU NEED 
MORE 
SPACE
UrjaMitra Interview Guide 
We are conducting a study to understand your experience as an UM. We would be grateful if you could spare us some time. There are no 
right or wrong answers, and we would just like your honest responses. While we will be sharing some of this information with Simpa, please be 
assured that your name will not be associated in any way with the information you have provided. No-one will contact you to sell you anything 
based on this information. 
Can we talk to you? 
Can we record our conversation? 
1. How did you become an UM? 
2. Why did you become an UM? 
3. What are the ways in which you earn commissions from Simpa? 
4. How has your experience compared to your initial expectations? 
5. Has it been easy or difficult to earn commissions? 
6. Do you think this will change in the future? Why or why not? 
7. Are you interested in continuing to be an UM? If yes, why? 
8. Other than being an UM, what is the other work you do? 
9. Do you work from a fixed location, or do you travel? 
10. Is there anything else you want to tell us about being an UM?
ANNEX IV: SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Persons interviewed 
5 UrjaMitras in Hathras district, and 6 UrjaMitras in Aligarh district 
Project documents 
2012 Application for Prepaid Energy Project by Simpa Networks
Milestone Reports (since 2013)
Comparison Of Simpa To Other Products, Simpa Networks 2014

U.S. Agency for International Development 
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 
Washington, DC 20523