Mid-term Evaluation of the Housing Finance and Land Title for 
Ghana’s Poor Project (HFLTP)
This report was commissioned by: 
In partnership with: 
Bankable Frontier Associates LLC 
www.bankablefrontier.com
James Hokans, Director 
Jeff Abrams, Associate 
Brendan Norris, Junior Associate 
August 5, 2011 
(Revised December 21, 2012) 
The project is funded by: 
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The Housing Finance and Land Title for Ghana’s Poor Project (HFLTP) has struggled to achieve its interim 
targets. However, with concerted management effort and a commitment to a new marketing strategy, 
Sinapi Aba Trust (SAT), with support from Opportunity International (OI), International Land Systems 
(ILS) and Habitat for Humanity Ghana (HFHG), has the opportunity to develop one of the most significant 
housing and land projects in sub-Sahara Africa in the past 25 years. We fear this opportunity will be 
missed by the reluctance of management to adjust from a risk averse and expensive approach to credit 
assessment to a strategy for growth and scale supported by willing partners exercising greater input. 
The consultants present the following findings:
 Planned structures (staff, technology, processes) are mostly in place to deliver “property 
folios” and home loans but adjustments to product eligibility requirements, marketing and 
outreach are urgently required. 
The recent elevation of key senior managers at SAT headquarters for the delivery of both the property 
folios and the home loans may be a positive sign that SAT’s leadership is committed to the success of 
the project. The manager of the property folios component appears to be doing a particularly good job. 
However, the SAT Housing Finance Manager is still trying to find a balance between controlling risk and 
growing the portfolio, and he is not especially well-served by the OI project manager to train SAT staff or
adjust credit policies and procedures, which at the time of the evaluation were still not integrated or 
written down with SAT’s overall policies and procedures. 
As a result, at the SAT branch level staff members are not reaching agreed housing loan targets. In 
interviews with the consultant, the branch managers said they believe the program will reach its loan 
targets if they are allowed to make housing loans to non-SAT potential applicants who have been 
approaching them for loans. A broader number of branch staff should receive additional training in 
household cash flow analysis to make individual housing loans. Better promotional materials and 
innovative partnerships with building materials suppliers, especially around the installation of roofing, 
are also recommended by both branch managers and the consultant to increase outreach. They also 
said that HFHG had provided little if any construction technical assistance to date to the housing loan 
borrowers, and that staff had not received any additional follow-up training other than one power point 
presentation on the loan eligibility criteria. 
Also, the loan process practice that the housing loans manager at head office has to approve every 
housing loan undermines growth of the portfolio and may also undermine the morale of some branch 
staff. Moreover, the requirement that only existing SAT clients, mostly the better-off clients of the 
group-based loans, are eligible for the housing loan tends to stymie growth of the portfolio. This 
approach may even put some of these clients in too much debt (this risk needs to be analyzed once 
more loans are in place and transparent data is provided by SAT). These processes appear to be the 
result of concern that the branch staff themselves may not have sufficient training in household cash 
flow analysis for individual loans. To improve the situation, we recommend an Excel-based cash flow 
credit risk assessment model be developed and made easily accessible by computer at branch level. 
The technology at the branch and headquarters level to support the property folios has been somewhat 
slow to be implemented, yet the demand for the product is very strong, especially among those clients 
who have some minimum form of proof of “ownership” (e.g. the indenture). The evidence from the 
field visits suggests that the processes are essentially in place, with the very notable exception of a 
policy and procedure for distribution of completed property folios. In addition, the actual signing over 
certifying the property folio has to be weighed carefully to ensure against any liability, but also 
3
maximizing the potential for local traditional authorities will also sign off them. Evidence from the field 
suggests those who have already received housing loans and are now waiting for their property folio 
certificates see this documentation as having very high, almost sacred value. Some have even arranged 
for their local chief to also sign the property folio document, and we expect this to be a normal reaction 
from the beneficiaries of the surveys. The receipt of the property folio will be viewed as very personal 
event, and the consultants recommend that the distribution is handled with care and in private. The 
recipients should be encouraged to open a safe deposit box to keep extra copies in. 
To increase the number of overall housing loans, the consultants also recommend that the property 
folios should no longer be fully subsidized. As the number of property folios is completed and 
distributed, the actual cost to undertake the property folios will decrease as scale increases. For many 
very low-income applicants, the decreased price of purchasing a property folio may be the only small 
housing loan they can afford. By making small “land documentation loans”, which we recommend 
should be viewed by key stakeholders as an incremental housing loan, SAT will also be able to increase 
the possibility of attaining its housing loan targets simultaneously. Moreover, the consultants 
recommend that the project conducts a baseline survey in the next year or two of all those who 
received their property folios, so that a full social impact study in 3-5 years may be taken to follow what 
the recipients actually do with their land to answer policy questions about the inter-relatedness of 
housing, land security and asset-backed wealth creation. 
 For the most part, people receiving the loans and services actually are those who were 
identified as the most in need. 
To a large extent, the evidence from the field visits suggests that the housing loans are going primarily to 
the best of SAT clients and these borrowers are probably a bit better off (and appear to have more than 
one income in the household) than those who normally could pay for only one loan at a time and not 
two. However, even these “best clients” are low-income people and are retained by SAT as loyal 
customers. By “opening up” the project to non-SAT customers, however, we think the tendency will be 
to make smaller loans to lower income people who want a housing or land documentation loan. As 
stated above, by making small “land documentation” loans as incremental housing loans, the project will 
be able to offer much more affordable loans to individuals with less income but who still want to 
improve their land tenure situation before they have sufficient household income to take incremental or 
home improvement loans. 
Initial benefits going to the project’s clients are considerable, but far from reaching scale and 
sustainability. Nevertheless, client perceptions of the project since the initial focus group discussions 
are very positive. 
 Evidence that the project’s objectives will be achieved and sustained is less than optimal. 
SAT’s housing loans have a tendency to be somewhat larger than the other few individual loans that SAT 
is promoting (e.g. education, asset-backed business loans and emergency loans). The consultants argue 
that the essentially subsidized pricing of the larger housing loans may encourage leakage (non-housing 
usage) or product cannibalization, and the interest rates should be reviewed and aligned at least to the 
rates of SME loans to ensure for long-term sustainability after the cheap capital from USAID is fully 
disbursed. This approach will enable SAT to leverage this important start-up capital with other funding 
sources both local commercial sources, as well as international debt (e.g. Habitat for Humanity’s 
MicroBuild Fund). The consultants recommend extending the project to more branches over the next 
year, including more urban branches, but this expansion must be supported and encouraged vigorously 
by the OI Ghana manager or the expansion may be not really happen in any concerted way. The 
consultants provide a new Excel-based business model with this evaluation to test assumptions and 
4
recommend ways to improve overall sustainability of the housing portfolio. SAT did not respond to 
requests to analyze the cost allocation assumptions of the housing loan portfolio, nor were the 
consultants ever provided with any internal portfolio management reports. An analysis of the cost 
assumptions needs to be done to confirm the proposed adjustment in project assumptions and targets. 
To facilitate this review and setting of new targets, the consultants have provided USAID, Opportunity 
International, ILS and SAT a copy of the financial model developed by Bankable Frontier Associates. 
 Challenges are many and some of the initial assumptions are generally valid with some key 
exceptions. 
Many of the initial assumptions of the project are still valid. The assumptions below are either explicit 
or implicit in the formal project documents. Nevertheless many of the assumptions, especially the key 
ones need to be adjusted and are contained in the table below: 
Original assumptions & targets Proposed revised assumptions & targets
The principal barrier to housing finance development in 
Ghana is the lack of secure and transparent titled lands.
This assumption remains, but we recommend that a 
baseline survey should be conducted on all those who 
receive a folio to track impact over time.
Property Folios:
Property Folios can substantially help remove this 
barrier.
This assumption remains, but still needs to be 
measured and tested.
A viable business model can be developed to allow the 
poor to use their own property to build asset value 
which can then be leveraged to access housing credit.
This assumption is correct, according to financial model 
developed by BFA for the project, but only if working 
capital is leveraged with SAT’s normal cost of funding..
If presented with large numbers of Property Folios, then 
government authorities can be convinced to accept 
Property Folios as an acceptable form of land 
documentation.
The only evidence to date is some traditional 
authorities are in agreement to officially sign the 
property folio attesting to the facts in the folio. This 
issue needs to be proactively addressed with 
government and traditional authorities.
Because many SAT clients do not have land documents, 
the Folio will be valuable to them.
This assumption is true according to interviews with 
housing borrowers.
Folios should be issued to clients for free, using donor 
subsidies.
We think this assumption is erroneous and flies in the 
face of scaling the number of folios and developing a 
business model that is sustainable.
The Folio product needs a separate marketing plan. This assumption is especially true across the board for 
the property folio and the home loan products.
The term “Property Folio” should be used instead of 
“Paralegal Title”.
Yes.
The Folio process needs to be closely related to the 
housing loan application process.
No. Many applicants for housing loans do not 
necessarily need a folio to qualify for a housing loan, 
and low-income applicants may also have effective 
demand for the property folio without the home loan.
Housing loans:
Existing SAT clients should be the primary (or even 
exclusive) target market for housing loans.
This is assumption is erroneous, and to reach more low￾income Ghanaians and to reach loan targets, we 
strongly recommend loans to non-SAT clients.
The housing loan offering should include 2 options:
 Home improvements (e.g., utilities 
connection or sanitation installation)
 Incremental build of new home
As a result, different housing loan products (different 
Different marketing strategies based on a market 
segmentation exercise at the borrower level need to be 
implemented, but the pricing should be related to 
credit risk not housing finance usage.
5
Original assumptions & targets Proposed revised assumptions & targets
features, pricing) may be needed.
Options for renters must be considered in the loan 
product design (i.e., long-term renters with proper 
rental agreement can be eligible for housing loan).
Yes.
The nature of housing loans makes them incompatible
with group lending methodology.
Yes.
Individual lending introduces loan security & collection 
issues that must be considered in the lending process.
Yes, but it raises the question of sufficient skills 
available to conduct household cashflow based analysis.
Housing loan assessment must be more rigorous (and 
thus more costly in terms of staff time) than standard 
business loans, because of site visits, neighbor/family 
interviews to ascertain property rights, cost estimating.
Yes, and this also means the loans have to be priced to 
ensure costs and risk are covered and to avoid 
cannibalization of individual business loans..
Assessment methods for housing loans should include: 
pre-screening, site visits, orientation & training, and 
CTA assessment.
This should happen only to extent they can be 
coordinated with the household cash flow analysis 
process. CTA is expensive, time consuming and 
probably unnecessary, except for loans over certain 
amounts (GHC 1,500) to new clients only. 
Construction technical assistance (CTA):
 Pre-construction: compulsory if complex
 Construction supervision: optional
 Post-construction verification: compulsory
CTA should be standardized as much as possible, and 
required only over threshold amounts (GHC 1,500). 
Post-construction verification should be randomized as 
the portfolio reaches scale and national scope.
Housing loan repayment schedules must consider 
existing (e.g., business) loan repayment schedules
Yes.
Adequate security for the desired loan amount 
(guarantors or collateral) is a problem for many clients. 
A smaller loan size requires lower security amounts. .
Yes.
ILS (Pichel) suggests land should be excluded as a 
collateral option for housing loans.
Yes, or no loans will be made, and land title cannot be 
perfected in court in any event.
Housing loan is piloted in 4 branches, before roll-out Channels for delivering housing loans needs to be 
expanded prudently but quickly to meet goals.
Impact goals:
Provide 1,300 poor people with opportunity to cost￾effectively obtain paralegal title to their property 
This goal is achievable.
Increase access to affordable, improved housing for 
2,000 working poor people (through scalable 
lender/housing partnerships and client-centric housing 
finance products)
This goal should be adjusted downwards to 1,000 with 
strong commitment to provide loans to non-SAT clients. 
New targets to reach financial sustainability are 
contained in financial model accompanying this report
Key project indicators should be regularly tracked Yes.
Loan product features:
Term: 2 – 24 months Yes.
Amount: 200 – 10,000 (Cedi) Yes, smaller loans should be promoted to those who 
want land documentation loans for property folios.
Interest rate: 30% per annum Needs to be aligned with SME rates to ensure against 
leakage to SME borrowers and achieve sustainability.
Repayment: equal periodic instalments Yes
Cash collateral (compulsory savings) of __% required Yes. !0-25%, but difficult for SAT to do.
Fees: 2% process, 2% CTA, 2% client welfare, 5 cedi 
application
No 2% CTA fee, except in special situations of larger 
loans to monitor risks of conflict with builder.
6
1. INTRODUCTION: PROJECT COMPONENTS, GOALS & OBJECTIVES 
The Housing Finance and Land Title for Ghana’s Poor Project (HFLTP) officially started in July 2009. The 
project was designed to be implemented by Opportunity International in partnership with Sinapi Aba 
Trust (SAT), International Land Systems (ILS) and Habitat for Humanity International. The project is 
funded by USAID under an IGP grant. 
The project has three components, the goals and objectives of which are described as follows: 
Land title: The goal is to provide the poor with the opportunity to cost effectively obtain paralegal title 
to their property while strengthening Ghana’s land title processes. The objectives are to: (i) 
demonstrate a private sector led approach to the documentation of land inventory and collection of 
land information representing “de facto” and “de jure” land occupation/ownership by the poor, (ii) 
design and implement a pilot program to produce paralegal title for the poor, and (iii) generate at least 
1,300 paralegal titles for the poor. The term “Paralegal title” was ultimately dropped in favor of 
“Property folio” but technically the same product.
Housing finance: The goal is to increase the working poor’s access to affordable, improved housing 
through scalable lender/housing organization partnerships and client-centric housing finance products. 
The objectives are to: (i) develop SAT’s institutional capacity to deliver and manage client-centric home 
loan finance products on a large scale to its low-income clients, (ii) determine the optimal mix of housing 
products for SAT’s clients based on their identified needs and ability/capacity to pay, and (iii) provide at 
least 2,000 housing and/or home improvement loans within three years and, if feasible, utilize land title 
as collateral for relevant loans. 
Land title and housing model: The goal is to create a viable business model allowing the poor to use 
their own property to build asset value and real net worth which can then be leveraged to access 
housing credit. The objectives are to: (i) determine whether paralegal land title (property folio) for 
Ghana’s poor can provide a reliable basis for a lender to underwrite a loan using the described property 
as collateral, and (ii) determine if a viable business model can be achieved in Ghana coupling land title 
with housing loans for the poor. 
A housing loan is a fixed 
investment in a fixed residential 
property. One such fixed 
investment is the acquisition of 
poly tanks to collect and store 
water at the homes of SAT 
borrowers. The largely rural target 
market has initially shown a strong 
interest in using their loans for 
better access to water. This priority 
is also reflected in other HMF 
programs in Africa. 
7
The project truly began to take shape in the latter half of 2010. 
As a mid-term evaluation, the purpose of the present assignment is to analyze progress (both 
quantitative and qualitative) made against agreed project goals, objectives, target indicators and 
deliverables so as to create an opportunity for refining targets based on project experience and the 
lessons learnt. 
A number of the beneficiaries of the 
housing finance component of the project 
are looking at creative ways to use their 
housing loans to address their need to 
access and sell water in their 
communities. This type of innovation 
should be encouraged.
2. EVALUATION QUESTIONS AND METHODOLOGY 
2.1 KEY QUESTIONS 
The following are the key Evaluation Questions the consultants sought to answer during the assignment: 
(i) Are the planned structures (staff, technology, processes) in place to deliver “property folios” to 
land owners and loans to those in need? 
(ii) What are the initial benefits going to the project’s clients, and what are their perceptions of the 
project since the baseline? 
(iii) Are the people receiving the loans and services actually those who were identified as the most in 
need? 
(iv) What challenges exist and are the initial assumptions still valid? 
(v) Is there evidence that the project’s objectives will be achieved and sustained?
2.2 METHODOLOGY AND ITS LIMITATIONS 
The consultants acknowledge both the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology undertaken 
during this evaluation. The consultant James Hokans employed a structured face-to-face interview 
approach with a limited number of SAT, OI and ILS staff, as well as “walk around” interviews with some 
of the borrowers, some of whom were also seeking property folios. Similar to the focus group 
discussion approach undertaken by Habitat for Humanity and SAT staff before launch of the housing 
loan products, the results are primarily qualitative in nature and not quantitative (no large number of 
surveys were conducted). The results should not be misconstrued as scientifically “representative” of 
8
the portfolio of housing loans as a whole or of all the property folio beneficiaries, but they do offer the 
evaluator the opportunity to ask the question: “why did you do it this way or why do you want to do it 
that way?” This ability to ask why is difficult to achieve in large-scale quantitative analysis which 
generates more representative data. We hope the evaluation offers actionable insights based on client 
and staff interviews. 
The field interviews were followed by a powerpoint presentation of the field-based results and 
observations to the leadership of SAT and OI management. The list of the client borrowers interviewed 
is contained below in the body of the report, and others are contained in the annexes. 
3. CURRENT TRENDS IN THE SAT HOUSING LOAN PORTFOLIO 
3.1 THE POSSIBLE IMPACT OF THE OVERALL LOAN PORTFOLIO AS OF MARCH 31, 2011 
The consultants were not able to obtain a full analysis of SAT’s current overall portfolio, or discuss the 
portfolio in any detail with management, nor were we given any housing loan portfolio aging reports or 
financial management reports, even though we asked for this information well before we arrived in the 
country. 
We did receive, however, a copy of a first quarter 2011 report1
 that offers some limited insights on the 
overall health and trends of SAT. In the first quarter of 2011, SAT was able to achieve most of its targets. 
Interestingly, SAT nearly doubled its target for signing up new clients and beat its target for new loans by 
more than 150 percent, but it did not quite attain its target for Gross Loan Portfolio. These figures 
suggest that most of its new loans are relatively small and probably short-term. We do not have a 
breakdown of how many of the new clients and loans are for individuals versus group loans with group 
guarantees for individual members. We were told by at least three members of headquarters’ staff and 
by the branch managers that SAT sought to diversify its predominantly group-lending portfolio. SAT has 
set a target of 20 percent for individual loans per branch to individual borrowers s rather than to groups. 
The interviewees also informed the consultant that the incremental housing and home improvement 
loan products are a significant component of this diversification strategy: 
Table A: Operational Highlights: Q1 2011 
Key Indicator Target Actual % Achieved
Gross Loan Portfolio GH¢ 30.20m GH¢ 29.88m 99%
Number of Clients 109,707 109,835 101%
New Clients 4,347 8,032 185%
Number of Loans 14,989 23,147 154%
Value of Loans GH¢ 17.47m GH¢ 21.45m 123%
PAR > 30 Days <2% 1.94%
Clients' Savings GH¢ 2.91m GH¢ 2.41m 84%
 
1
The following analysis derives from Sinapi Aba Trust, “Operational Highlights, 1st Quarter 2011”, Issue 13 May 2011.
9
Moreover, since 2009, SAT has clearly gone into a relatively conservative period with an appropriate 
focus on reducing its portfolio at risk. We do not have figures on how many loans have been written off, 
or what the provisions policy is for individual loans. The positive downward trend in PAR>30 days 
continued in the first quarter of 2011. The once high rate of PAR> 30, plus the subsequent concomitant 
higher price in private commercial bank borrowing, makes the support for low cost working capital from 
USAID presumably attractive. SAT is also considering transforming into a regulated savings and loans 
institution and would also in part explain the generally conservative approach the institution towards 
rolling out new individual loan products. 
Table B: Trends in Portfolio at Risk 
Table C below indicates that the overall number of loans made during the first quarter over the past 5 
years has not increased as dramatically as the number of clients and the value of the portfolio. We think 
this suggests that either SAT’s loans are serving larger groups of clients with larger loans, or that SAT has 
begun making headway in providing larger SMS-type loans to successful, former group loan clients, or 
both. 
Table C: Trends in Portfolio Value: loan statistics 
2.36%
3.38%
1.85% 1.75%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010 Q1 2011
Par > 30 Days
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
Q1 2007 Q1 2008 Q1 2009 Q1 2010 Q1 2011
Number of Loans Number of Clients GHC Value of Loans
10
3.2 THE HOUSING PORTFOLIO as of July 2011 
The slow take-off in the approval and disbursement of housing loans is noted in the 2010 year-end 
project progress report of OI and ILS. While the rate of growth in number of loans and value of the 
housing portfolio over the first 7 months of 2011 is substantial, these figures are calculated off a very 
low base. Please find below the only loan portfolio data report that the consultants were given: 
December 2010 July 2011
Branch Housing Loans Disbursed Housing Loans Disbursed
(cumulative)
Offinso 13 19
Tema 0 3
Sunyani 0 27
Obuasi 0 8
Total 13 57
Total Value US $8,143 GH¢ 60,950 (US $50,633)
Average Loan Size GH¢ 1,069 (US $730)
New branches (commencing July 2011): Kumasi, Adum and Central Market branches,
Dunkwa, Ejura, Konongo, Nkawkaw all in Ashati Region. Brekum, Dormaa Ahenkro, Goaso and 
Techiman, all in Brong Ahafo Region.
Exchange Rate 1 USD = 1.5 Ghanaian cedis 
The consultants were informed that SAT leadership considered the pilot of lending from the proposed 
first four branches of SAT to be a success and now wanted to expand the number of branches making 
housing loans. However, we were unable to independently confirm that housing lending was to 
commence or had commenced in 11 new SAT branches as a strategy for catching up to loan approval 
and disbursement targets. Any monitoring reports that are required following this consultancy should 
review the performance of the other 11 new branches. 
3.3 INTERVIEWS WITH BORROWERS: REACHING THE TARGET MARKET 
A selection of client borrowers to interview about their experience in the project was made by OI 
project staff in collaboration with SAT and to a lesser extent by ILS and HFHI. We found that the initial 
benefits going to the project’s clients are considerable, but far from reaching scale and sustainability at 
this mid-term stage of the project. Nevertheless, the consultants found that the perceptions of the 
project by the beneficiaries since the initial focus group discussions are very positive. The following 
borrowers were interviewed and their loan details are provided below: 
11
Branch Borrower Loan
Amount 
(GH¢)
Loan 
Period
(Months)
Mo. 
Payment 
(GH¢)
Purpose
Ashanti Region
New 
Edubiasi
Georgina 
Mensah
500 8 76.62 Construction of a borehole near occupied house
Obuasi Margaret 
Boateng
1500 10 191.74 Painting, tiling, and ceiling in occupied house
Obuasi Rachael 
Prempeh
2000 10 255.83 Roofing on house under construction
Obuasi Agnes Yeboah 800 10 122.58 Extension of electricity to occupied house
Offinso Afua 
Boahemaa
700 8 108.58 One-room extension to occupied house
Offinso Afua Serwaa 1000 10 275.83 One -room extension, ceiling, tiling, painting, and a 
security gate on new house soon to be occupied
Offinso Adjoa 
Adowaa
2000 12 655 Construction of a borehole, purchase of a water 
pump, installation of a polytank near occupied house
Offinso Mavis 
Oppong
1000 12 327.5 Roofing, plastering, and fixing doors on unoccupied 
house
Brong Ahafo Region
Sunyani Stephen Kofi
Siaw
1500 12 450 Extension of electricity to occupied house, doors, and 
roofing
Sunyani Comfort 
Nyamekye
350 12 40 Roof the oven, continue construction of a 3 bedroom 
unoccupied house
Sunyani Afua Sarpong 500 12 55 Construction of a security gate to occupied house
Greater Accra
Tema Clara Nartey 7000 6 1350 Roofing on large unoccupied house under 
construction
11 Female Ave loan size: 1,077 (not counting Tema loan, which we considered obvious leakage))
1 Male
Similar to housing microfinance borrowers across the world, Ghanaians are extremely resourceful and 
innovative. They know what they want and what their priorities are, depending on their existing 
housing situation. The borrowers were especially interested in: 
 Roofing loans 
 Access to water and electricity 
 Burglar bars and security doors 
 Other home improvements, including finishes (e.g. tiling) 
All borrowers said they got good value-for-money from their loans, and all were happy with the housing 
results of their loans. 
12
Of the 12 borrowers interviewed, four took loans primarily for roofing purposes and a fifth also took a multiple 
purpose loan that also included work on his roof. The unoccupied house on the left is owned by a household with 
two adult incomes, including waged employment from the husband. The woman on the right is the sole 
breadwinner in her family and plans to move in now that she has put a roof on her house which is constructed on 
land owned by her mother. This is the first individual loan she has ever taken in her own name.
13
Similar to the other SAT borrowers who were able 
to afford roofing loans, the woman on the right is 
planning to move into her unoccupied home once 
the roof is constructed. She is formally employed 
as court reporter, and plans to have her mother
(L) live with her.
For those who already have a roof over their heads, these borrowers above are concentrating on home 
improvements such as tiling and finishing ceilings. These types of fixed investments in fixed property reflect pride 
of ownership and frequently happen before festivals or special family events.
14
4. OPERATIONAL CHALLENGES: INTERVIEWS WITH STAFF 
SAT has appointed two of its most experienced staff to jointly manage the project and grow the loan portfolio and 
property folios. Vedi Marfo (left interviewing borrower), a regional manager of the retail branches for 10 years, is 
the manager of the Propert Folio aspects of the project. Richard Owuso, the Housing Finance Manager (right) is 
standing with the branch manager of the Obuasi branch Jennifer Owusu-Mensah.
4.1 SLOW START-UP AND FOCUS 
Interviews with SAT head office project managers, SAT branch staff, the OI project manager and the ILS 
project manager revealed important common themes and challenges: 
1. Training about the products was slow to take place and follow-up training seems to be non￾existent. 
Before the evaluation commenced, the consultants requested copies of all training materials and a 
training schedule or plan for supporting SAT branch staff and the Housing Finance Manager to make 
housing loans. We received only a powerpoint presentation, which seemed to be incomplete on a 
number of salient points related to loan products, but especially on credit assessment and promotion 
for housing micro-finance. The training powerpoint was used at the beginning of the pilot, but there is 
no evidence to suggest that the materials were improved or used more than once. This is an aspect of 
the project that has been neglected and should be the responsibility of the OI project manager, who 
does not have a training or a microfinance background, but has a background in mortgage origination. 
Moreover, he is located in Accra while the SAT Housing Finance Manager is located in Kumasi. 
Furthermore and more damaging, the SAT Housing Finance Manager has been very slow to respond to 
developing written credit policies and procedures for the housing loan products on which a training 
program could be developed. 
15
2. The housing product is viewed by SAT staff primarily as a way to retain good group borrowers 
and graduate them to individual loans. 
In interviews with branch managers and some branch staff, the consultants were told that the housing 
product, as well as the possibility of obtaining the subsidized property documentation, was linked to a 
strategy for rewarding loyal customers or retaining the better-off micro-entrepreneurs and it took time 
by loan officers to see the advantage of promoting the housing products. However, once a few of the 
loans had been made, most of the branch staff were very excited about the possibilities of the housing 
products based on positive feedback from eligible existing clients. 
3. Branch staff recommended that non-SAT clients be allowed to apply for and take up loans, 
and according to two branch managers, partnerships with building materials suppliers or 
water tank sales points to recommend SAT housing loans to potential applicants should be 
explored. 
The branch managers cited the increase in competition from other microfinance institutions in their 
catchments, and the need for promoting its competitive advantages. The branch managers were visibly 
excited by the potential of developing partnerships with building material suppliers, hardware stores 
and sales points for water tanks and block-makers who could recommend applicants, if the eligibility 
criteria were expanded. They were also concerned about over-indebtedness of their better group 
clients. 
4. Developing new skill sets (household cashflow analysis) and staff incentives are a priority for 
improved outreach. 
Branch staff also cited the need to broaden the skills and capacity to undertake household cash flow 
analysis which is now concentrated in only a few loan officers. SAT is working on this already, but this 
training needs to be strongly supported by the OI Project Manager. He should take a look at the way 
Boafo undertakes cash flow analysis at his previous employer the HFC Bank, as well as provides 
incentives to loan officers. 
5. Promotion campaigns that are well-timed would help to expand take-up.
At the moment, no real marketing campaigns seem to be in the pipeline, and the SAT marketing staff 
members are not involved in the project at all, as far as the consultants could assess. More on 
marketing is provided below. Both OI Project Manager and the SAT Housing Finance Manager must take 
this issue marketing and promotion very seriously. Neither of them is focused on marketing at this 
point. Marketing is done mostly by word-of-mouth to existing clients. 
4.2 MARKETING AND PROMOTION: THE QUESTION OF MARKET SEGMENTATION 
Habitat for Humanity undertook market research for Opportunity International (OI) with logistical 
support from Sinapi Aba Trust (SAT). The purpose of the study was to assess housing market conditions 
as well as the need and to a lesser extent the effective demand for housing finance to guide the project 
in developing the parameters for a loan product. The study comprised of 40 focus group discussions, 30 
participatory rapid appraisal sessions, and 158 individual interviews with clients. It should be noted that 
Focus Groups are qualitative in nature and not representative of the adult or household population. All 
of the discussants were SAT clients, and it is not clear if the discussants knew each other or not. 
Normally, FGDs comprise “homogenous strangers” in order to maximize participation. 
16
The researchers interpreted the inputs from the discussants and concluded that two loan products 
should be created: Incremental Housing Loans for completing unfinished houses and Home 
Improvement Loans for repairing and improving existing houses. These loan products are necessary, 
according to the report, as alternatives to the only currently available business working capital loans 
that are not well suited to fixed investment in fixed property. However, it should be noted that the 
actual loan terms and conditions for each of the loan products are the same. There is in fact only one 
housing loan product that addresses two types of housing needs.
The research focused on Ashanti and Brong Ahafo regions of Ghana. Ashanti and Brong Ahafo are both 
rural regions, but Brong Ahafo is much more rural. Significant income discrepancies are apparent 
between the regions. Among 158 SAT clients surveyed, mean income of Ashanti residents was 387.51 
GHC compared to 173.00 for Brong Ahafo (no period was provided for the income statistics). Ashanti 
residents surveyed also save about twice as much as people surveyed in Brong Ahafo. Clients save 
through a mix of banks, microfinance institutions, cooperatives and Susus. MFIs are the most popular in 
Brong Ahafo and commercial banks are the leading choice for saving in Ashanti, probably reflecting 
rural-urban divide between the two regions. 
Among SAT clients in these regions, roughly 70% were either renting a home or living in a family house. 
54% of those people reported they want to build upon an existing project; i.e. a partially-built house in 
which they were not currently residing. These people would make up the core of the market for 
Incremental Housing Loans. The Home Improvement Loans, by contrast, would be intended for people 
who own their own homes and would like to improve them, or those who rent and have permission 
from the landlord to make improvements. 
According to the research report, the loans should be complemented by construction technical 
assistance on an as-needed basis to guide more complicated construction projects, though it is not clear 
that the discussants themselves actually sought this assistance. On the surface, the researchers also 
conclude that collateral appears to be readily available as most respondents are willing to use their 
house as collateral. This conjecture is much more complicated for both a lender because of difficulty in 
perfecting title where it does not officially exists as well as a borrower who rarely wants to take a chance 
of losing property that s/he claims ownership over, according to research in other parts of Africa as well 
as Ghana. 
Lack of market segmentation and promotion 
It became abundantly clear during the interviews with both staff and the borrowers that no specific 
marketing strategy and promotion had grown out of the initial research. We saw no evidence of well 
disseminated, relevant marketing materials at the branches, nor did we attend any group meetings to 
understand what was actually said to the existing SAT clients about the product. Moreover, we saw no 
evidence of any strategic partnerships at the community level between the branches and building 
materials suppliers or builders to promote the housing loan products. 
4.3 SAT’S INDIVIDUAL LOAN PRODUCTS: POTENTIAL FOR LEAKAGE 
SAT has developed and rolled out other individual loan products in an attempt to meet the needs of its 
existing group loan clients. The consultants are particularly concerned about the 10 month individual 
business loan competing with the housing loan products. The potential risk of a client taking a housing 
loan and using it for business purposes seems likely, given the advantages of the housing loans. We saw 
evidence of this risk in Tema. 
17
Loan Type Maximum 
Term
Maximum 
Amount
Interest 
Rate
Remarks
Individual 
Business
10 Months GH¢ 5,000 40% COF at 28%; graduating group 
borrowers to individual loans
Home 
Improvement
2 Years GH¢ 10,000 30% COF at 0%; for existing SAT 
clients only who have the 
cashflow to handle 2 loans at 
the same time
Education 3 Months GH¢ 1,000 38% Popular in September
Asset (for 
business)
2 Years GH¢ 5,000 36% Few of these loans, but also 
for graduating group 
borrowers to individual 
Leakage or diversion of funds can take two forms, and they are often debatable if they are leakage or not. On the 
left, the borrower’s highest priority was to make a fixed investment in a roof to cover her clay oven for baking 
bread from which she pays her SAT group loan, while retaining the balance of the individual housing loan to work 
on the residence behind the oven. 
On the right, a woman borrower and long-time SAT client is building a three story, multi-bedroom and multi￾bathroom house in Tema. She originally applied for a housing loan to repair her two story structure in another 
location at which she is living and running her business. Instead, she is spending the loan for a roof for her future 
home above in which she has already invested over 60,000 cedis in savings from her import business. 
Both of these are arguably leakage: one for usage and the other on income, though they are both fixed 
investments related to housing. Is it worth the cost of monitoring every loan while achieving scaled impact?
4.4 THE ROLE OF HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL
Habitat for Humanity Ghana (HFHG) has several important roles to play in the project that are not to 
date fully exploited. The significance of these roles became clear in interviews with SAT borrowers who 
were either somewhat unhappy with their builder or actual Habitat clients who had paid off their low￾interest rate Habitat “mortgage loans” and had now borrowed from SAT at market interest rates to 
improve their homes. The following recommendations are offered: 
 For SAT’s marketing purposes, Habitat should provide SAT with a list of all those Habitat 
beneficiaries in Ghana who have paid off their “mortgage” loans in full. These Habitat 
borrowers have demonstrated that in spite of Habitat’s often lax collection on these relatively 
18
long-term loans, they are willing and prepared to pay for home loans. Moreover, they have a 
significant reason to acquire or borrow for a property folio. 
 Habitat should provide limited construction technical services to borrowers taking home loans 
of more than GhC 1,500, as these loans tend to be longer-term and may need technical input 
on a demand basis, especially for roofing and specialized home improvements. 
 Habitat should help to prevent any possible disputes between builder and borrower with 
assistance from loan officers, as these will rise over time, especially on the larger loans. 
 Habitat should consider training loan officers on educating the borrowers on progress 
payments, reviewing lists of building materials and developing their own builder contracts. 
 Habitat may facilitate a wholesale loan from the new Micro-Build Fund to SAT to leverage 
USAID grant working capital, but this process will take time and should be commenced soon. 
The consultants also point out that in spite of our requests before arrival in the country to interview 
HFHG, the OI Project Manager never organized this meeting. 
The woman on the right is a long time SAT client who also resides in a Habitat for Humanity house in the 
Nkwantakese community. She paid off her Habitat “mortgage loan” 5 years ago, where others did not have the 
same willingness to pay off their loans. She has put both her savings and other loans into extending and improving 
her house. Habitat rules mitigate against those residents who have not paid off their Habitat loans from borrowing 
from other sources. This woman estimates that more than 50% of the 150 residents of Nkwantakese have paid off 
their Habitat loans and are now seeking other home improvement loans to extend or repair their houses. Most of 
these people are not SAT clients, and like her would want to obtain a property folio to secure their land.
5. PROPERTY FOLIO PROGRESS SUMMARY 
At the time of the mid-term evaluation, the project was poised to begin distribution of the completed 
property folios. The property folio is expected to comprise a summary of the clients’ understanding of 
their property rights (including interviews with neighbours), all property/individual photos and a 
description or copy of any supporting documents, and lastly the site plan developed by trained 
surveyors. A draft property folio is provided in Annex (minus the five original site plans that make up 
the last pages of the property folio). SAT and ILS are finalizing the design of the property folio with plans 
of distributing them commencing in August 2011. Field work with the surveyor was expected to 
19
commence in Nkawkaw, Berekum, Dormaa and Techiman. The surveyors were just beginning to be on 
their own in the field. A progress report is contained below: 
Branch Name Process 
Started
Claimant 
Interviewed
Neighbor 
Interviewed
Survey 
Conducted
Site Plan 
Prepared
Property 
Folio Issued
Sunyani 70 53 39 48 0 0
Offinso 72 64 56 69 69 0
Obuasi 0 0 0 0 0 0
Adum 67 0 0 0 0 0
Central Market 11 0 0 0 0 0
Konongo 30 0 0 0 0 0
Nkawkaw 36 6 0 0 0 0
Techiman 37 15 11 15 0 0
Berekum 38 14 10 14 0 0
Dormaa 24 9 6 9 0 0
Dunkwa 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gaoso 0 0 0 0 0 0
Dzorwolou 0 0 0 0 0 0
Abeka 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kasoa 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tema 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 385 161 122 155 69 0
Regarding costs, the per unit survey cost is US$45 (inclusive of surveyor time, travel, preparation of site 
plans, etc.). The software cost for management of data was expected to be relatively low once the 
property folio is finalized – one-time costs of $500 per license. Then each branch will need (though 
most already have) a digital camera. 
The project is targeting a cost slightly under $100 USD per folio. A documentation loan rather than a 
subsidy of 150 GHC would cover the cost eventually, and SAT would potentially reach a lower income 
client group who may only be able to afford a small housing or “land documentation” loan. To achieve 
sustainability and wide usage of the property folio, the consultants strongly recommend that a small 
land documentation loan be included as one type of housing loan. 
Moreover, we also urge the project to carefully consider how and by whom the property folio is 
disseminated upon completion of the surveys and documentation. It should be signed and certified in 
such a way as to facilitate the possibility of support from the traditional authorities, as well as limit any 
liability to SAT. Eventually, this “certification” should derive from the surveyors and site planners. This 
may also be another reason for converting the property folio from a subsidized product to a land 
documentation loan product. 
20
The HFLTP borrower on the left is also seeking a free property folio from the SAT, which she said she would be 
happy to pay for herself. She views the property folio as an important step towards protecting her boundaries 
from interlopers as the property is clearly becoming more valuable. She has already approached her chief to sign 
and agree to the site plan. She currently has no plans to sell her property, but she could probably be able to get a 
recognized mortgage loan from HFC Bank. 
6. A BUSINESS MODEL FOR SUSTAINABLE HOUSING AND LAND SECURITY IMPACT 
One key component to be tested under the project is the goal to create a viable business model allowing 
the poor to use their own property to build asset value and real net worth. The following section 
reflects on the financial implications of some of the key findings and presents a detailed set of financial 
projections for a scenario of substantial growth of the SAT housing loan program. We walk through the 
salient highlights below. 
21
Basic assumptions related to loans Month 1
(August 
2011)
Month 13 Month 60
Number of branches offering housing loans 16 47 47
Number of loans originated per month 80 195 1,197
Cumulative number of loans from Jan 2011 137 1,636 31,739
Average loan size originated this month $700 $950 $1,400
Average loan period (months) 12 12 12
Bad debt provision 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%
Total value of loans originated this month $56,000 $185,547 $1.7 million
Total value of outstanding loans $56,000 $936,574 $11.7 million
Total value of loans originated since Month 1 $56,000 $1,319,172 $39.4 million
During the first half of 2011 (into early July), four branches offered housing loans, and SAT had a 
portfolio of 57 individual loans with a total value of $40,633. As of early August, the number of 
branches offering housing loans jumped to 16 covering all of Ashanati and Brong Ahafo regions. If we 
assume that in the first full month of offering housing loans across all 16 branches (“Month 1”) each 
branch originates five loans per month (on average), at an average individual loan value of US$700, this 
results in 80 loan originations (with a total value of US$56,000) per month. 
Further, we assume that after 12 months operating in these select 16 branches, the housing loan 
program expands to all 47 branches, such that in “Month 13” the total loans originated per month is 195 
(just over 4 per branch per month), with a total monthly origination value of $185,547 (assuming 
average loan size of $950). Moreover, we assume these numbers steadily increase over time, such that 
– by the end of Year 5 (in Month 60) – the 47 branches originate 1,197 loans per month (an average of 
25 per branch), with a total monthly origination value of $1.67 million (average loan size of $1,400). 
Based on this growth, and using other assumptions summarized below, the outstanding portfolio at the 
end of Year 5 is $11.7 million, with a total value of originations since inception of $39.4 million (which 
includes amounts originated, paid back and then recycled). This introduces two key strategic issues: 
 Is there sufficient effective demand in the market that SAT can competitively capture to 
support this projected growth? 
 If so, can SAT do so while maintaining prudent loan origination (and servicing) practices? 
As would be expected, a key assumption affecting the business model is the source and cost of funding 
to grow the loan portfolio. We assume that the loan book grows by using a blend of funding sources, 
namely 20% “equity” and 80% debt, such that for each $1.00 of new loan originations, $0.20 is funded 
by equity (e.g., investment into SAT by grants, social investors)2
 and $0.80 is funded by debt (e.g., loan 
to SAT from a commercial bank or a social investor, such as Micro-Build or Omidyar at market rates).3
 
The existing $250,000 grant pool from OI/USAID is deemed equity, and it could and should leverage $1.0 
million of debt ($1.25 million total), to maximize housing and social impact. This amount would last until 
approximately Month 16. Thereafter, additional “equity” or subordinated debt or surplus cash would be 
required to maintain a 20% equity ratio. 
 
2
The particular legal structure of this investment, in light of SAT’s status as a non-profit/NGO, is not covered here. While the current SAT does 
not require “equity” it does require a layer of surplus to absorb first loss.
3 We do not project using progressive or mandatory ‘savings’ (‘cash collateral’) as a funding source, though if SAT were to convert into a bank, 
the cost of funding would presumably decrease. 
22
This projected funding mix introduces two key strategic issues: 
 Can SAT raise “equity-like” investments sufficient to support the projected portfolio growth? 
 Can SAT raise debt financing sufficient to support the projected portfolio growth? 
Worth noting is the substantial leveraging effect in terms of funds originated at retail level relative to 
equity invested into SAT. For instance, the initial $250,000 grant/equity could translate into almost $2.0 
million of originations, based on 80/20 debt equity ratio for funding portfolio growth and the recycling 
of loan repayments into new originations. By the end of Year 5, we project a $2.2 million equity 
investment to grow the portfolio into almost $40 million of loan originations. 
Another key assumption is the cost of funding (especially debt), and the interest rate charged to SAT 
customers. Based on current market conditions in Ghana, we project SAT can borrow commercially at a 
blended 22% interest rate (per annum); and we recommend that SAT’s loans to customers average a 
35% rate, still below the rates currently charged on the other individual loan products but not so low as 
to encourage cannibalization or leakage. 
Key assumptions on financing terms
Sources of funding SAT portfolio growth
 Debt (e.g., commercial bank) 80%
 ‘Equity’ (e.g., surplus/social 
investor/grantor) 20%
Cost of debt funds 22% (per annum)
Interest rate charged to customers 35% (per annum)
Average loan term (to customers) 12 months
Based on (i) this 13% interest rate margin, (ii) the portfolio growth discussed above, and (iii) certain 
estimated incremental operating expenses associated with the housing loan rollout and 
management(increased costs at head office and branches), we project the housing loan operation can 
break-even (on a monthly cash flow basis) around Month 29 (see graphic below, where the blue line 
crosses above the “0” breakeven line) and the early operating losses (during the first 29 months) are 
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
1 13 25 37 49 60
US Dollars
Month
Portfolio growth & funding sources
Debt financing Equity financing
23
recovered by around Month 48 from profits/surpluses during the ensuing 19 months (see graphic below, 
where red line crosses above the “0” line).
From an annual income statement perspective, we project a loss in the first two years, then a slight 
profit in year 3, rising to substantial financial sustainability by Year 5. 
If the $100,000 grant pool is used, this would cover operating losses for the first nine months (Month 9), 
but an additional approximately $200,000 is required to absorb the start-up losses projected for the 
ensuing 20 months (i.e., through Month 29). Presumably, this could be funded by further grants or 
seeking equity investment(s). This amount is in addition to the investment required to grow the loan 
-30,000
-20,000
-10,000
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
1 13 25 37 49 60
US Dollars
Month
Monthly Net Income
-400,000
-300,000
-200,000
-100,000
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
1 13 25 37 49 60
US Dollars
Month
Cumulative Net Income
Income statement
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Revenues
 Interest income (gross) 92,294 428,487 1,052,082 1,741,280 2,758,399
 Fees 11,336 35,092 68,091 108,245 171,005
Total revenues 103,630 463,579 1,120,173 1,849,525 2,929,405
Expenses
 Interest expense 60,975 262,845 625,238 1,028,613 1,628,897
 Bad debt expense (provision) 28,341 87,730 170,226 270,613 427,513
 Head office staff costs 46,200 50,820 79,391 87,330 96,063
 Other operating expenses 22,553 21,025 30,596 33,255 36,181
 Branch staff costs 62,400 183,300 183,300 183,300 183,300
Total expenses 220,468 605,720 1,088,751 1,603,111 2,371,953
Net Income -116,838 -142,140 31,422 246,414 557,451
24
portfolio. In addition, we project a need for additional cash investment, for additional working capital to 
fund business operations. This is not to cover start-up operating losses or fund portfolio growth, per se, 
but to have sufficient cash on hand to allow smooth operations. We assume this amount grows over 
time, and we tie it to the amount of funds advanced from equity (i.e., 20% of total advances) during the 
given month. This is $73,000 for Year 1, and grows to $371,000 (cumulative) by Year 5. Again, this could 
be funded by further grants or seeking equity investment(s), and again is in addition to the investment 
required to grow the loan portfolio or cover start-up operating losses. The table below summarizes the 
three uses of equity/cash investment. 
Again, this raises the key strategic issue of: 
 Can sufficient grant funding and/or equity-like capital be raised, in addition to that required 
for portfolio growth, to support these operational requirements? 
Summary of equity/cash investment required
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
(i) Subsidize losses until break-even is achieved:
Annual equity investment to cover early losses 116,838 142,140 -31,422 -246,414 -557,451
Cumulative equity investment to cover losses 116,838 258,978 227,556 -18,858 -576,309
(ii) Funding of equity portion of loan portfolio
Targeted debt-to-equity ratio: 80/20
Annual equity investment to fund loan portfolio 166,036 343,469 423,377 549,152 857,942
Cumulative equity investment to fund loan portfolio 166,036 509,504 932,881 1,482,033 2,339,975
(iii) Cash for operations**
Annual equity investment to fund cash for operations 73,390 107,986 -29,646 85,973 133,093
Cumulative equity investment to fund cash for operations 73,390 181,376 151,730 237,704 370,796
Total equity investment required (sum of: (i), (ii) & (iii))
Annual 356,264 593,595 362,308 388,711 433,583
Cumulative 356,264 949,859 1,312,167 1,700,878 2,134,462
Balance sheet
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Assets
 Cash 73,390 181,376 151,730 237,704 370,796
 Advances receivable 830,178 2,547,521 4,664,405 7,410,163 11,699,873
Total assets 903,569 2,728,898 4,816,135 7,647,866 12,070,669
Liabilities
 Loan payable 664,142 2,038,017 3,731,524 5,928,130 9,359,898
Total liabilities 664,142 2,038,017 3,731,524 5,928,130 9,359,898
Shareholders' equity
 Capital investment 356,264 949,859 1,312,167 1,700,878 2,134,462
 Retained earnings (losses) -116,838 -258,978 -227,556 18,858 576,309
Total equity 239,426 690,881 1,084,611 1,719,736 2,710,771
Total liabilities & shareholders' equity 903,569 2,728,898 4,816,135 7,647,866 12,070,669
25
7. CONCLUSIONS 
This project has tremendous potential with new growth assumptions described above in the section on 
the business model to leverage existing capital with more commercially priced debt. Please find below a 
list of recommended revisions to project assumptions and targets. 
Original assumptions & targets Proposed revised assumptions & targets
The principal barrier to housing finance development in 
Ghana is the lack of secure and transparent titled lands.
This assumption remains, but we recommend that a 
baseline survey should be conducted on all those who 
receive a folio to track impact over time.
Property Folios:
Property Folios can substantially help remove this 
barrier.
This assumption remains, but still needs to be 
measured and tested.
A viable business model can be developed to allow the 
poor to use their own property to build asset value 
which can then be leveraged to access housing credit.
This assumption is correct, according to financial model 
developed by BFA for the project, but only if working 
capital is leveraged with SAT’s normal cost of funding..
If presented with large numbers of Property Folios, then 
government authorities can be convinced to accept 
Property Folios as an acceptable form of land 
documentation.
The only evidence to date is some traditional 
authorities are in agreement to officially sign the 
property folio attesting to the facts in the folio. This 
issue needs to be proactively addressed with 
government and traditional authorities.
Because many SAT clients do not have land documents, 
the Folio will be valuable to them.
This assumption is true according to interviews with 
housing borrowers.
Folios should be issued to clients for free, using donor 
subsidies.
We think this assumption is erroneous and flies in the 
face of scaling the number of folios and developing a 
business model that is sustainable.
The Folio product needs a separate marketing plan. This assumption is especially true across the board for 
the property folio and the home loan products.
The term “Property Folio” should be used instead of 
“Paralegal Title”.
Yes.
The Folio process needs to be closely related to the 
housing loan application process.
No. Many applicants for housing loans do not 
necessarily need a folio to qualify for a housing loan, 
and low-income applicants may also have effective
demand for the property folio without the home loan.
Housing loans:
Existing SAT clients should be the primary (or even 
exclusive) target market for housing loans.
This is assumption is erroneous, and to reach more low￾income Ghanaians and to reach loan targets, we 
strongly recommend loans to non-SAT clients.
The housing loan offering should include 2 options:
 Home improvements (e.g., utilities 
connection or sanitation installation)
 Incremental build of new home
As a result, different housing loan products (different 
features, pricing) may be needed.
Different marketing strategies based on a market 
segmentation exercise at the borrower level need to be 
implemented, but the pricing should be related to 
credit risk not housing finance usage.
Options for renters must be considered in the loan 
product design (i.e., long-term renters with proper 
rental agreement can be eligible for housing loan).
Yes.
The nature of housing loans makes them incompatible 
with group lending methodology.
Yes.
Individual lending introduces loan security & collection Yes, but it raises the question of sufficient skills 
26
Original assumptions & targets Proposed revised assumptions & targets
issues that must be considered in the lending process. available to conduct household cashflow based analysis.
Housing loan assessment must be more rigorous (and 
thus more costly in terms of staff time) than standard 
business loans, because of site visits, neighbor/family 
interviews to ascertain property rights, cost estimating.
Yes, and this also means the loans have to be priced to 
ensure costs and risk are covered and to avoid 
cannibalization of individual business loans..
Assessment methods for housing loans should include: 
prescreening, site visits, orientation & training, and CTA 
assessment.
These will be too expensive and time consuming and 
probably unnecessary, except for loans over certain 
amounts (GHC 1,500) to new clients. .In any event, 
other than site visits there is no evidence of orientation 
and training or CTA assessment.
Construction technical assistance (CTA):
 Pre-construction: compulsory if complex
 Construction supervision: optional
 Post-construction verification: 
compulsory
CTA should be standardized as much as possible, and 
required only over threshold amounts (GHC 1,500). 
Consultants saw no evidence of post-construction 
verification by HFHI but only SAT.
Housing loan repayment schedules must consider 
existing (e.g., business) loan repayment schedules
Yes.
Adequate security for the desired loan amount 
(guarantors or collateral) is a problem for many clients. 
A smaller loan size requires lower security amounts. .
Yes.
ILS (Pichel) suggests land should be excluded as a 
collateral option for housing loans.
Yes, or no loans will be made, and land title cannot be 
perfected in court in any event.
Housing loan is piloted in 4 branches, before roll-out Channels for delivering housing loans needs to be 
expanded prudently but quickly to meet goals.
Impact goals:
Provide 1,300 poor people with opportunity to cost￾effectively obtain paralegal title to their property 
This goal is achievable.
Increase access to affordable, improved housing for 
2,000 working poor people (through scalable 
lender/housing partnerships and client-centric housing 
finance products)
This goal should be adjusted downwards to 1,000 with 
strong commitment to provide loans to non-SAT clients. 
New targets to reach financial sustainability are 
contained in financial model accompanying this report
Key project indicators should be regularly tracked Yes.
Loan product features:
Term: 2 – 24 months Yes.
Amount: 200 – 10,000 (Cedi) Yes, smaller loans should be promoted to those who 
want loans for property folios.
Interest rate: 30% per annum Needs to be adjusted upwards to ensure against 
leakage to SME borrowers and achieve sustainability.
Repayment: equal periodic installments Yes
Cash collateral (compulsory savings) of __% required Yes. !0-25%, but hard for a NGO to do
Fees: 2% process, 2% CTA, 2% client welfare, 5 cedi 
application
No 2% CTA fee, except in special situations of larger 
loans to monitor risks of conflict with builder..
27
28
REFERENCES 
Emmanuel Asamoah, “Analysis of Market Research Undertaken by Habitat for Humanity”, September 
20, 2010. 
Habitat for Humanity Ghana and Sinapi Aba Trust, “Preliminary Product Design Recommendations”, 
Kumasi, Ghana, September 14, 2010. 
Sinapi Aba Trust, “Operational Highlights, 1st Quarter 2011”, Issue 13 May 2011.
USAID Evaluation Policy: http://www.usaid.gov/evaluation/ January 2011. 
ANNEX A: INTERVIEWED PROJECT STAFF 
Interviewee Title
Sinapi Aba Trust
Anthony Gyasi-Fosu CEO
Aaron Rex Opoku-Ahene Head of Business
Vida Marfo Regional Manager & Property Folio Manager
Richard Owusu Afriyie Housing Finance Manager
Kingsley Gaisie Tema Branch Manager
Jennifer Owusu-Mensah Obuasi Branch Manager
Philip Sakyi Sunyani Branch Manager
Enoch Kuranchie Offinso Branch Manager
Opportunity International
Makonen Getu Vice-President, International Business 
Development
Emmanuel Asamoah Housing Finance Specialist
Diane Griffin Senior Program Manager
International Land Systems 
Frank Pichel Regional Manager
Oheneba Amoakoh, Losamills Consult Technical Surveyor
Habitat for Humanity Ghana
James Ayando Construction Quality Manager
William Asamoah Abetia Recovery Manager
USAID
Edwin Afari Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist
29
ANNEX B: PROPERTY FOLIO MOCK-UP (WITHOUT SITE PLAN)
PROPERTY FOUO 
"' oIrMrii R:aml d ~'a C(III'IIWfIt:/ m the Sd.)fe "'est 0tIbd, AWrIti Regan at !he Rl'F~c III 
~NMdon"'*d,wPll¥'8ItJItOCtd'rdOlMdt"'frOOt~.byMII Y .. ~tu WIiI 
law dr'tflftflld t'~you ~",nadollaMrd;ad'1'd lllcorc.tlcd rvhl ~ d ~ ;'~l1ft 
penad~'" aUli3 ~ Inn ... aI issw allhl PrqMrtyFa60Io.td" AU.. TWtT p_met 
pJI'OII 0I1M1 PfI'.1I*tt ~In IN ~ (OIIIlnlrift, oafldleMifINHd lnIIt6'Jeclillill'l Pfl' ~ 
I:ft n d~ .,.nmtd tu .,. "GIo w.fC 1111 ~MIUIi II'IftIflI'" 1111. pr-=--*"" IJ!II ,lib. 
IINIJOtYItf \4XII'I 011,1"* ... NICI POKt Of PifOfl 01 M ~ 
''''MTNESS 'MERECf' I hiI' ...... tntd fff( Nmt InOI'I beNt! 01111 SlNpAbA Trullon fit 2(Jt 
Iii;' 01 J.nt 2)t f 
'.-101" USAID 
PROPERTV PHOTO 
RJGHTHOLDER PHOTO 
' ... 101<1 - USAID 
30
PROP!JITYOOCIlltlENI'ATJON 
u 
'1II_)eI' -=- USAID