1995/96. This represents approximately Rp. 40 million (US$17,000) per participating bank branch. PHBK disbursements in fiscal 1995/96 were approximately 55 percent as large as the P4K program's. Nevertheless, PHBK has expanded verv rapidly over the last several years, whereas P4K's lending declined in 1995/96.

**Table** 25 PHBK Required Savings

|PHBK management<br>does not keep track<br>of the volume of|**Tab**<br>PHBK Requ|**le**25<br>ired Sav|ings|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|voluntary savings||||**Fiscal**|**Year**||
|generated under this||**1992/93**|**1993/94**|**1994/95**|**1995/96**|
|program. The real<br>volume of required|Nominal outstanding savings<br>(Rp. million)|424|651|<br>1.263|<br>2,077|
|<br>savings deposits|<br>Real growvth**in**savings (percent)|NA|41|<br>79|<br>51|
|<br>grew by 79 percent|<br>Nominial outstanding savings (US$)|2033 13|304399|570165|895345|
|<br>in1994 and 51|<br>Savings pcrcent of outstanding loans|.<br>20|,<br>24|.<br> <br>24|.<br> <br>19|
|percent in 1995. By||||||

the end of fiscal 1995/96. required savings stood at Rp. 2.1 billion (about US$900,000), and equaled 19 percent of outstanding loans (Table 25).

_Outreach Depth._ This program's objective is to deepen rural financial markets. The program defines its target group as households that have not previously received a commercial bank credit. According to the program' s 1993 Impact Study carried out in Yogyakarta and Central Java, 93 percent of beneficiaries in those provinces met this criteria.

Although the program does not target a specific income group, it is nevertheless interesting to obtain some indication of the income of program beneficiaries. The program's monitoring system does not track beneficiaries' incomes. The 1993 Impact Study found that among surveyed participants in two provinces, less than 20 percent had monthly household expenditures below the poverty line. More than 40 percent of respondents had household expenditures more than twice as high as the poverty line. Furthermore, about I I percent of households were in the highest 13 percent of the income distribution. If these findings are representative of borrowers under the program today, then this program cannot be considered to be primarily reaching the low-income population, although some low-income households are being served. It is likely that virtually all of P4K's loan recipients have incomes as low or lower than the poorest one-third of PHBK participants.

The program does not keep track of the number of borrowers per group, and estimates for this figure are based on old data that no longer accurately reflect the makeup of participating groups. Thus, it is difficult to estimate the average loan size per individual borrower. One program manager's estimate of the average loan size per group member results in loans per person equal to 13 percent of GDP per capita. However, management estimates of the number of members in each borrower group results in loans per individual being equal to about 7 percent of per capital GDP. If the program's actual average loan size to end users is in the middle to higher end of this range, then this program has the largest average loan size of the 5 programs reviewed here. Nevertheless, this figure is much lower than the loan size-to-GDP-per capita figure for 9 of the most respected microcredit programs in the world (Christen et al., 1995).

61