A methodology for Grading of Self Help Group

Self Help Groups (SHGs) form the first level organization of the women. SHGs
formed out of affinity among members of the group have to organize and
conduct their group activities strictly. For the grading there are three aspect i.e
institutional, financial and impact. All this three aspects are further divided into
specific criteria as given below.
Table 1 Aspect wise Criteria

Institutional Financial Impact

Vision mission Goal and Savings Training programs
Rules
Size of SHG Sanction of Loan Planning, Implementing,
Monitoring and Evaluating
Program
Economic Condition Loan repayment Social Action and Community
action Program
Meeting Rotation of Common Fund Education literacy and Numeracy
Attendance in meeting Idle Capital Nil
Participation of Decision Cash Handling
making
Participation in Resource Mobilization
Responsibility Sharing
Rules and Regulations Book keeping and
Documentation
Audit

Now all the criteria are elaborate in different level of performance of a group. Then the
performances are given a suitable score for its performance. Good performance get the good
marks and bad performances are getting less marks respectively. After this all the criteria are
given suitable Weightage according to the criteria importance. Then according to the SHG
performance in all criteria SHG is given the marks. After that aggregated weighted score is
taken.

Aggregated weighted score =

Percentage of

{ }
Score Weightage Factor
x x 100
SUM of
100 100

1
Table 2 Performance wise Score of Criteria
Sl.
No Criteria Performance wise Score
Discussed in SHG and make by Participation of all members with all
Vision mission Goal members = 1, If not = 0
1 and Rules Written = 1 Oral = 0
2 Size of SHG 15-20= 4, 21-30 = 3, 31-35 =2, < 36= 1 , > 15 = 0
All members are poor = 3, Mixture of Poor and improved economic
3 Economic Condition condition = 2, Only improved economic condition= 1
Weekly= 4, Fortnightly = 3, Monthly = 2, Monthly and not regular = 1,
4 Meeting Time and place Known to all= 2, Time and place not Known to all = 1
Attendance in
5 meeting < 50% members = 1. 50- 75% members = 2 .,> 75% members = 3
Participation of All members= 4, 75% members = 3, 50 % members = 2 Leader only = 1,
6 Decision making Promoter only =0
Participation in Work changes every work= 4, Work changes within 2 years= 3 Work
Responsibility changes after 2 years = 2 Work changes after more than 3 years = 1, Work
7 Sharing do not change =0
Not a single mistake is tolerated = 4, Some mistakes can be tolerated but
Rules and with warning = 3, Rules are there but penalty not charged = 2 No rules yet
8 Regulations =1
< 50% members contribute regularly = 1. 50- 75% members contribute
regularly = 2. > 75% members contribute regularly = 3
9 Savings Rs. 40/ Month = 4 Rs. 20/month =3, Rs. 10/month =2, less than Rs.10 = 1
All are getting equal chance to het loan = 2 If not = 1,
Loan giving decision is made by promoter/leader = 2 If not = 1,
10 Sanction of Loan Productive = 2 Nonproductive = 1
11 Loan repayment >95% = 4, 75-95% = 3, 60-75%= 2, <60%= 1
Rotation of Common
12 Fund 100%=4. 75-100%=3, 50-75=2, <50= 1
13 Idle Capital Nil All money is used= 4, 75% used = 3, 50%= 3 >50%= 1
All members=4, Representatives=3, Representatives and promoter=2,
14 Cash Handling Promoters= 1
Resource
15 Mobilization: 100%=4, 75%= 3, 50% = 2, < 50%= 1
Book keeping and Representative of outside SHG = 1, Group representative or a literate
16 Documentation member = 2
17 Audit Done yearly =3 , Not regularly Done= 2 , Never Done= 1
18 Training Programs < 25% = 0: 25- 50% = 1 50- 75% = 2 : > 75% =3
Planning,
Implementing,
Monitoring and
19 Evaluating Program Yes= 1 No=0
Social Action and
Community action All members = 4, 75% members= 3, 50% members= 2 , < 50%= 1, <25%
20 Programs =0
Education literacy
21 and Numerate 25% = 0: 25- 50% = 1 50- 75% = 2 : > 75% =3

2
Table 3 Aggregated weighted score wise Grade board of SHGs

Aggregate Weighted Score Grade Analysis Grade

70 & above A Good
50-70 B Average
30-50 C Poor
Below 30 D Very Poor
A sample test of the methodology – Sample Group name Maa Durga SHG
Table 4 Score board of Maa Durga SHG

Percentage of
Highest score

SHG Score

Aggregated

Score / 100
Weightage

Weighted
Sl. No

factor

Score
Particulars

1 Vision Mission Goal and Rules 2 6 1 50 0.03

2 Size of SHG 4 6 4 100 0.06
3 Economic Condition 3 5 2 66.67 0.03
4 Meeting 6 5 2 33.33 0.02
5 Attendance in meeting 3 6 1 33.33 0.02
6 Participation of Decision making 4 4 4 100 0.04
7 Participation in Responsibility Sharing 4 4 0 0 0
8 Rules and Regulations 4 5 2 50 0.03
9 Savings 7 5 7 100 0.05
10 Sanction of Loan 6 5 5 83.33 0.04
11 Loan repayment 4 5 3 75 0.04
12 Rotation of Common Fund 4 4 4 100 0.04
13 Idle Capital Nil 4 4 3 75 0.03
14 Cash Handling 4 4 3 75 0.03
15 Resource Mobilization 4 5 3 75 0.04
16 Book keeping and Documentation 2 5 2 100 0.05
17 Audit 3 5 1 33.33 0.02
18 Training Programs 3 4 0 0 0
Planning, Implementing, Monitoring and
19 1 4 0 0 0
Evaluating Program
Social Action and Community
20 4 4 0 0 0
action Programmers
21 Education literacy and Numeracy 3 5 0 0 0
Total 0.56

Aggregated Weighted Score of Amman Mandram: 0.56 x 100 = 56 %

According to Table No. 4 Amman Mandram’s Grade is B (Average)