In Practice Coaching in Economic Inclusion Learning from Existing Models and Casting a Way Forward By Shilohni Sumanthiran and Keetie Roelen 10 © 2023 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photo: Michael Karam / Trickle Up Volume 10 December 12, 2023 In Practice The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion Contents Acknowledgments iv About the In Practice series v Abbreviations vi Introduction 10 Interactive Table of Contents Coaching Design Parameters 12 Click to navigate Scope of Coaching 12 Depth of Coaching Support 13 Type of Coaching Support 15 Level of Engagement 17 Caseload 18 Staffing 19 Tools 22 Implementation Considerations 24 Staffing 24 Recruitment 24 Training 25 Coaching Tools 26 Caseload and Administrative Burden 27 Inclusive Coaching 28 Program Flexibility and Coordination 28 Recommendations 31 Appendix 33 Economic inclusion programs with coaching component included in review 34 References 35 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion Contents, continued Figures 1 | Scope of coaching 12 2 | Depth of coaching support 14 3 | Types of coaching support 15 4 | Frequency of coaching interactions 18 5 | Caseload 18 6 | Staffing options for coaching 19 7 | Tools for coaching 22 Tables 1 | Conversations with program stakeholders 11 Boxes Box 1 | Comprehensive coaching – Minimum package for Graduation, Rwanda 13 Box 2 | Impact of group and individual coaching – Graduating to Resilience Activity, Uganda 17 Box 3 | Community coaches – ASP, Niger 21 Box 4 | Digital tools in coaching – Fundación Capital 26 Box 5 | Training of coaches – Targeting the Hard-Core Poor, India 30 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion Acknowledgements This report was written by Shilohni Sumanthiran and Keetie Roelen at the Centre for the Study of Global Development at the Open University, UK. It was prepared under the guidance of Colin Andrews, Victoria Strokova, and Janet Heisey from the Partnership for Economic Inclusion (PEI), World Bank. The report greatly benefited from insights shared by stakeholders from implementing partners BOMA, BRAC Philippines, Fundación Capital, and JEEViKA. The authors are also grateful for valuable feedback from Catherine Mwema (BOMA), Ioana Botea (World Bank), and Victoria Strokova (World Bank). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion iv About the In Practice Series The Partnership for Economic Inclusion introduces the In Practice series featuring accessible, practitioner-focused publications that highlight learning, good practice, and emerging innovations for scaling up economic inclusion programs. Guide to navigation The In Practice series is interactive and provides built-in technical features to assist readers as they progress, including a navigation bar, progress bar, and the ability to jump to endnotes and back to the text throughout. Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Chapter navigation Progress bar Jump notes1 The navigation bar at the The progress bar tracks your 1. Notes throughout the text are linked top of each page allows easy progress through each chapter to allow easy navigation between navigation with a simple click. and throughout the document. endnotes and the main text. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion v Abbreviations ASP Adaptive Social Protection AVSI Association of Volunteers in International Service CGAP Consultative Group to Assist the Poor DOLE Department of Labor and Employment DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development FC Fundación Capital IGA Income-generating activity IPA Innovations for Poverty Action MPG Minimum Package for Graduation MRP Master Resource Person NBER National Bureau of Economic Research PROFIT Program for Rural Outreach of Financial Innovations and Technologies PSNP Productive Safety Net Program RCT Randomized Controlled Trial REAP Rural Entrepreneur Access Program SHG Self-help group SJY Satat Jeevikoparjan Yojana SLP Sustainable livelihoods program UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees USAID United States Agency for International Development VSLA Village saving and loan association WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene WINGS Women’s Income Generating Support The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion vi Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Introduction This In Practice paper shares insights and lessons learned from a comprehensive literature review of economic inclusion interventions and their approach to coaching. Economic inclusion programs are those facilitating all other components of a that gradually integrate participants program. As poverty is multidimensional into broader economic and community in nature, coaching seeks to address a range development processes by using a bundle of of needs and challenges participants face multidimensional interventions that support (Cassio and Efremova 2023). It facilitates the participants in increasing their incomes and ‘human side’ of interventions by providing assets and strengthening their resilience and participants with the extra support and future opportunities (Andrews et al. 2021). advice they need to take full advantage of The paper provides an overview of coaching program resources. These resources can range modalities, discusses their benefits and from training on livelihood and business challenges, and reflects on opportunities for plan development to providing life skills and implementation at scale. Where information supporting health and nutrition practices. is available, we comment on evidence for the By creating regular touchpoints between the impact of certain modalities and their cost- program and participants, coaching better effectiveness, although it should be noted that enables participants to utilize economic information is limited. inclusion programs. It helps boost savings, generate assets, build confidence and agency, Coaching is used in 90 percent of economic or learn life skills. It also acts as a feedback inclusion programs and is increasingly seen mechanism on what needs to be changed for as a critical component of such interventions programs to be more effective. As a result, (Andrews et al. 2021). It is a cross-cutting coaching is often considered the ‘X-factor’ in element in economic inclusion programming, economic inclusion programs (Roelen 2015). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 10 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations The paper explores coaching practices comprehensive but not exhaustive literature against seven design parameters, presenting review of publicly available information a spectrum of options for each parameter about economic inclusion programs that ranging from low resources and a relatively included coaching (see Annex 1) and narrow focus to high resources and a conversations with four program stakeholders broader focus. This paper considers coaching in July and August 2023, offering insight to be any activity that, in the context of across geographic areas (Table 1). Following economic inclusion programming, provides the review, the paper offers considerations ‘handholding’ or mentoring support, delivers for implementation and provides technical or other skills, or facilitates access recommendations. to other services. Analysis is based on a Table 1 Conversations with program stakeholders Organization In-Text Reference BOMA, Trickle Up - Sahel program BOMA, TU-S stakeholder BRAC Philippines BRAC-P stakeholder Fundación Capital, Colombia FC stakeholder JEEViKA, India JVK stakeholder The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 11 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Coaching Design Parameters Coaching approaches differ along seven design parameters: scope of coaching, depth of coaching, type of coaching (individual versus group), level of engagement, caseload, staffing, and coaching tools used in coaching. SCOPE OF COACHING The scope of coaching extends from providing or improving financial literacy skills (often narrow technical support to enhance economic tied in with access to savings or loans). outcomes to a wider focus on the broader Beyond focusing on livelihoods, coaches may welfare of the household, such as by enhancing provide psychosocial support and life skills gender equality (Figure 1). This scope is (for example, boosting self-confidence) and dependent on the program’s aims and the role facilitate broader developmental outcomes (for coaching plays in achieving those aims. At example, nutrition, health, and sanitation). a minimum, programs include training and They may also address social and cultural business planning for building livelihoods. norms that limit the economic inclusion of Along the spectrum, programs may decide participants such as gender inequality. to layer support, such as providing more technical training for cohorts engaging in Most programs offer a variety of coaching specific income-generating activities (IGAs) support, although the combination differs Figure 1 Scope of coaching Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus Boosting income Building financial Psychosocial Improving human Addressing social generation and literacy (e.g., support and/or development and cultural livelihood + savings, credit + improving soft + outcomes (e.g., + norms (e.g., diversification support) skills (e.g., life nutrition, health) gender equality) skills, self-confidence) The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 12 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations across interventions. For instance, the Haku program in India work toward preventing Wiñay Program in Peru combines income women from making and smoking bidis (hand- generation and financial literacy with a healthy rolled cigarettes) (Dharmadasa et al. 2015; housing component that covers hygienic Sengupta 2013). practices, but it does not include life skills coaching (Conger 2016). The range of sociocultural issues that programs choose to address depends on the contextual Psychosocial support features in most challenges faced by participants. In the Rural programs, commonly with a focus on self- Entrepreneur Access Program (REAP) by reliance (Kingsly and Bernagros 2019). Coaches BOMA in Kenya, coaches focused on gender- in the Graduation Program in Ecuador, which based violence (Tiwari, Schaub, and Sultana worked with refugees, often had psychology 2019). In Western Uganda, in their Graduating degrees so that they could provide quality to Resilience Program, the Association of psychological support to participants (Sanchez Volunteers in International Service (AVSI) 2019). Programs also supported a range of integrated messages on gender disparities and context-specific soft skills and life skills. promoted equal decision-making regarding Coaches in the Targeting the Hard-Core Poor resources. This was found to be quite successful Box 1 Comprehensive coaching – Minimum package for Graduation, Rwanda The Minimum Package for Graduation led by the government of Rwanda offers an example of a comprehensive program. Through individual household visits and group training, coaches delivered 12 training modules. These modules covered livelihood activities such as farming and livestock rearing; financial skills such as managing money and saving for the future; and soft skills such as how to dress well, limit drinking, and household hygiene, human development outcomes on healthy diets and family planning, and cultural norms surrounding gender equality. Coaches visit households to monitor the progress of participants and help them create a plan of action going forward. Source: Devereux and Isimbi, 2018 with 76 percent of households in 2021, that participants attend training, understand compared to 47 percent in 2018, endorsing the content, and support them in implementing equal rights and treatment for women what they have learned. For instance, in some (Beiträge 2023). Rwanda's Minimum Package cases coaches may just provide follow-up for Graduation provides an example of a advice after a training provided by external comprehensive coaching package (Box 1). trainers. Toward the middle of the spectrum, coaches themselves may provide training, from DEPTH OF SUPPORT delivering standardized packages of training, often underpinned by a manual, to tailoring Depth of support refers to the level of support their support to individual needs. Further, that coaches provide (Figure 2). For programs depth of support entails coaches facilitating with a relatively narrower scope, coaches access to markets or services and providing engage in follow-up and monitoring to ensure participants with social support they require to The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 13 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations utilize the program. The ways in which various types of support build on each other may differ across programs but generally tends to be progressive, as shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 Depth of support Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus + + + ++ + +++ + +++ + + + + + Follow-up on Providing Tailored support Supporting access Include family technical trainings standardized and advice to markets and members in and support training and services program monitoring messaging Programs at the lower end of the spectrum, in Further up the scale, coaches focus more on which coaches play a more limited role, are rare. identifying and helping to resolve participants’ Coaches themselves are commonly involved unique challenges. In the Department of Labor in providing training, both standardized and Employment (DOLE) Graduation Project and tailored. The Satat Jeevikoparjan Yojana in the Philippines, coaches tailored the content (SJY) Program in India invested heavily in of the messaging to reflect the literacy levels standardizing coaching to limit the variation of the participants (Schelzig and Jilani 2021). in the quality of coaching. To do this, some In the Graduation Approach for Refugees programs use manuals and repeated messages. in Zambia, coaches visited those who are Coaches in Fonkoze’s Chemen Lavi Miyò struggling more often and grouped participants Program in Haiti discussed 2 of 12 messages, who faced common challenges (Simanowitz which they rotated and then repeated after a 2019). Similarly, in the Productive Safety Net full rotation of six weeks (Roelen and Müller Program (PSNP) IV in Ethiopia, coaches 2018). However, even with standardized plans, provided less individualized support for those coaches often have the flexibility to change the categorized as ‘fast climbers’ (Mahmood 2016). plans to meet the needs of the participants. Despite its focus on standardization, SJY has To meet needs that are not directly met through built-in methods of alternating what coaching the program, coaches can also be instrumental and support participants receive based on their in connecting participants to existing services needs at the time (JVK stakeholder). Similarly, and market actors. In Producing for My Future, the Department of Social Welfare and in Colombia, coaches accompanied participants Development (DSWD) Padayon Sustainable to purchase business inputs (Moen 2016). In Livelihoods Program (SLP) in the Philippines Niger’s Adaptive Social Protection (ASP) used digital monitoring surveys that, based on Program, coaches delivered sessions on market participants’ answers, activated prompts for access, buying inputs, and choosing suppliers. coaches to address the specific needs of that Some even went as far as acting as market participant (BRAC-P stakeholder). agents for the group by facilitating group The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 14 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations purchases and sales in exchange for a small TYPE OF COACHING SUPPORT payment (Bossuroy et al. 2021). In contrast, the Graduation Program in Ecuador shifted Coaching can be delivered at a group level, toward being less assistance-oriented in the individual level, or combined level (Figure 3). hope it would empower participants to access At the lower end of the spectrum, programs services themselves. Therefore, coaches shifted focus on group coaching only, thereby reaching from accompanying participants to services the largest number of participants but with to referring and providing participants with relatively little individual-level engagement. guidance on how to access them (Sanchez 2019). Further along the spectrum, households and Finally, programs sometimes involve family their members are engaged by coaches through members in the coaching approach. This home visits or at an individual level. This allows level of depth is often linked to addressing coaches to offer deeper and more tailored sociocultural norms and promoting conflict support but inevitably reduces the number resolution. Involving family members plays a of people that a coach can serve. Combined key role in reducing the backlash from male support sits at the far end of the spectrum, as it household members and increasing the success represents the modality offering broadest and of economic inclusion programs (Moqueet, deepest support and tends to be most complex Zaremba, and Whisson 2019). As a result, in terms of implementation. the Women’s Income Generating Support (WINGS) Program in Uganda included male Group coaching can take place in a variety spouses in the program from its inception. of forums, locations, and forms. The groups Village Enterprise has a family support module themselves can have different origins, such that invites family members to be a part of as saving groups, Village Saving and Loans the conversation, while Concern Worldwide Associations (VSLAs), self-help groups (SHGs), employs an ‘engaging men and boys’ component and groups formed around livelihood activities in its programs in Malawi, Burundi, and or based on geography. The Stronger Women, Rwanda. Through these modules, the coaches Stronger Nations Program in Nigeria used discuss social issues such as gender roles, power, group coaching through VSLAs. A randomized and healthy relationships (Bhari and Laszlo controlled trial (RCT) conducted on this 2020). program showed that group coaching had a Figure 3 Type of coaching support Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus Combination group Group coaching Individual coaching and individual coaching The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 15 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations significant positive impact on average income The Targeting the Hard-Core Poor in India when compared with no coaching (Women had hour-long group sessions during which for Women International et al. 2022). Many coaches encouraged peer-to-peer learning. programs highlight that group coaching These sessions were followed by coaches facilitates peer-to-peer learning and helps build visiting households for half an hour to inspect community between participants. the household and help participants with To that effect, group coaching often includes the specific challenges they faced (Sengupta team-based activities that build trust and skills. 2016). Similarly, in Ethiopia’s PSNP IV, the Administratively, this increases the possible government balanced cost-efficiency and caseload of a coach. It should be noted that quality by having coaches meet groups of 20 to within group coaching, it is still possible to 30 participants every two weeks and conducting individualize content. The DOLE Graduation individual household visits monthly (Mahmood Project in the Philippines had small groups 2016). alongside interactive and hands-on sessions. This program combined individualized There is some evidence about the relative livelihood programs with group coaching for benefits of group versus individual coaching, life skills, thereby giving participants flexibility but findings are mixed. In Targeting the and autonomy over their livelihood and Hard-Core Poor in India, the program operation while also allowing them to benefit found that home visits played a pivotal role from peer-to-peer learning and camaraderie in transforming the confidence levels and (Schelzig and Jilani 2021). aspirations of women (Sengupta 2013). In the DOLE Graduation Project in the Philippines, Other programs, such as Building Self Reliance the research found that while the retention and Resilience in Uganda and the Kakuma rate was similar, the average attendance rate Graduation Project in Kenya, use individual was higher in individual sessions than in group coaching, typically through household visits sessions (Schelzig and Jilani 2021). However, (Trickle Up 2023a). Group settings make the Program for Rural Outreach of Financial it difficult for a coach to understand the Innovations and Technologies (PROFIT) pilot specific concerns or contexts that may affect in Northern Kenya, which delivered coaching a participant’s ability to progress. Individual to individual businesswomen alongside visits, however, let them build a more trusting coaching to three-person business groups, relationship and friendship with participants found that the three-person businesses resulted and tailor their support to that participant’s in greater income diversity and division of labor needs. As a result, many implementing benefits, while individual businesses found it organizations suggest that individualized difficult to get started and keep afloat. The coaching is crucial to the success of the two groups showed no substantial differences graduation approach (Moqueet, Zaremba, and regarding food security, water treatment, and Whisson 2019). family planning knowledge (Lewis and Mallé 2020). As reflected in the case study on Uganda’s Most programs use both group and individual Graduating to Resilience Program (Box 2), coaching, where the coach facilitates a group Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) found discussion and follows up with individuals that group and individual coaching had similar privately or uses the group setting to reinforce impacts, with group coaching costing 13 percent lessons from individual coaching sessions. less than individual coaching (IPA 2023). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 16 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Box 2 Impact of group and individual coaching - Graduating to Resilience Activity, Uganda The Graduating to Resilience Activity in Uganda is a seven-year activity that was initiated in 2017. IPA has conducted a randomized evaluation to assess the effectiveness of the program while AVSI Foundation reported an assessment of the program for the first cohort. Key findings from these assessments provide insight into the impact of specific approaches to coaching. Overall: Coaching contributed significantly to the graduation of poor refugee and host communities. Coaching also had the strongest impact on nutrition and water, sanitation, and hygiene practices. Participant feedback on coaching: 97 percent of participants said coaching was beneficial and relevant for addressing their household needs, particularly savings, income and business generation, and basic food and nutrition, while 98 percent of participants indicated that their skills had improved due to coaching. However, participants found it difficult to implement topics such as action planning, setting Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound (SMART) goals, and conflict management and negotiation. Group versus individual coaching: Group and individual coaching had similar impacts, with group costing 13 percent less than individual coaching. Nearly 85 percent of participants indicated that they received individual attention in group coaching. Family coaching: A gender assessment showed that both men and women found that family coaching helped them manage family conflict and facilitated implementation of their plans. Coaching feedback: 94.4 percent of coaches had either received or provided support to another coach. Coaches reported reaching out to other coaches for support, primarily on technical, personal, or administrative issues. Source: IPA 2023; USAID and AVSI 2021.Note: USAID = United States Agency for International Development LEVEL OF ENGAGEMENT once every two weeks or weekly, as per the suggested frequency in BRAC’s 2019 Ultra- The parameter regarding the level of Poor Graduation Handbook. The Consultative engagement refers to the frequency of Group to Assist the Poor (CGAP)-Ford interactions and intensity of coaching. At the Foundation pilots, for instance (in Bangladesh, lower end of this spectrum, interactions take Ethiopia, Ghana, Honduras, India, and place infrequently—once every few months— Pakistan), used weekly coaching visits (Hashemi thereby requiring fewer resources in terms and de Montesquiou 2011). Some coaching of labor and time. At the higher end of the standards state that coaching should ideally spectrum, interactions take place on a weekly take place at least once a month (Moqueet, basis (Figure 4). Zaremba, and Whisson 2019). The frequency of visits can be critical in Some programs alter the frequency of visits establishing a strong relationship between the based on contextual factors such as the level participant and the coach (Cassio and Efremova of household vulnerability and the need for 2023). Most programs have coaching sessions more support, distances between participants, The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 17 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Figure 4 Frequency of coaching interactions Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus Infrequent Once every two Monthly Once every two Weekly months interactions weeks interactions and availability of resources to conduct regular The length of coaching sessions varies visits. They are also often timed to coincide across programs. However, there is no clear with other program activities such as savings relationship between the number of visits group meetings. Frequency may change over and the amount of time coaches spend with time, in recognition of changes in participant participants. In the Terintambwe Program in status that emerge over time. The Empowering Burundi, visits could range from three minutes Women and Youth through the Graduation to an hour, with some home visits being limited Approach and Financial Inclusion Program to monitoring, while in Producing for My in Mexico effectively phased out coaches’ Future in Colombia, visits were 30 minutes engagements from once every two weeks long but were extended once coaches developed to monthly, and eventually twice quarterly a relationship with participants (Moen 2016; (Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius 2021). Similarly, Roelen et al. 2019). in the ASP Program in Niger, coaching was intensive during the first three months and CASELOAD then reduced in intensity and was based on need (BOMA-S stakeholder). Devereux et al Caseloads range (Figure 5) from 10 households, (2015) found no difference between high- and such as in Targeting the Hard-Core Poor in low-intensity support, although this was partly India, to between 500 and 1,000 households, explained by community spillover effects. such as in some of the ASP Programs (Sengupta 2016; JVK stakeholder). Most programs have Figure 5 Caseload Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus >100 households 76-100 households 51-75 households 25-50 households <25 households The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 18 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations caseloads with fewer than 75 households per Programs sometimes adjust their caseloads over coach and a small number of interventions have time, reacting to the feedback they receive from very high caseloads of over 100. Caseloads are coaches. In Rwanda’s MPG Program, coaches an important determinant of how much time covered 14 to 16 households each in the first coaches can spend with households and how phase of the intervention, but this subsequently well they are able to support each household. increased to 40 to 50 households in phase two (Devereux and Isimbi 2020). Producing for My The caseload a coach can realistically take on Future in Colombia moved in the opposite depends on the role that the coach plays, what direction, with the caseload reducing from 100 activities they need to complete during sessions participants to 60 (Moen 2016). (thereby how long the session is likely to take), and the travel time between households. In STAFFING India’s Targeting the Hard-Core Poor Program, coaches supported up to 75 households each Coaching is implemented by different staff in some areas but only 50 in those with lower (Figure 6). Among the options for low-resource density or more difficult terrains (Sengupta operations, programs may involve coaches 2016). Caseload also depends on whether from within the community, sometimes non- coaches are interacting with participants in remunerated or, more commonly, working groups or individually. for a small stipend. At the upper end of the spectrum, programs may involve external Recommended caseloads range widely from 40 coaches who often have higher skills and will to 50 (Kingsly and Bernagros 2019) and 40 to 120 be relatively well remunerated. Government households (Moqueet, Zaremba, and Whisson community workers serving as coaches would 2019). When meeting in groups, coaches can sit in the middle of this spectrum. A range of effectively have higher caseloads, with groups terms is used to describe the roles played by often having between 15 and 25 people. The coaches, including ‘mentor,’ ‘field officer,’ or DOLE Graduation Project and DSWD Padayon ‘community resource person.’ While these terms SLP Program in the Philippines facilitated have slightly different connotations, they all caseloads as high as 150 by combining group deliver one or more components of coaching. coaching for skills trainings and individual coaching to support livelihoods, further enabled Most programs that recruit community coaches by rapid monitoring (digital) tools that helped do so for the following reasons: focus the tasks of coaches on participants’ needs (BRAC-P stakeholder). • Community coaches have better knowledge Figure 6 Staffing options for coaching Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus Community Coaches Government Coaching External External coaches having left community teams coaches coaches with community workers local support The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 19 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations of the context and language, allowing The ASP program in Niger (Box 3) highlights them to build strong relationships with some of the benefits and challenges of participants, show empathy, and establish employing community coaches. Broadly trust. Community coaches also often show speaking, programs prefer community a stronger commitment to supporting coaches—valuing their interpersonal skills participants. In the Graduation Approach and ability to build trust over technical and for Refugees in Zambia, coaches visited educational qualifications. participants more times than they were required to and even tried to visit indirect Sometimes it may be beneficial to hire beneficiaries when possible (Simanowitz community coaches who have left the 2019). community to pursue education or work. In the Empowering Women and Youth through the • Salaries tend to be lower compared Graduation Approach and Financial Inclusion to external or professional coaches. Program in Mexico, indigenous women who Logistically too, coaches often incur fewer had left for education or employment were costs because they live in the area with hired as coaches, enabling them to act as role participants. There is however a large models and promote the transformation of pay range for community coaches, from gender norms while still having the benefit of part-time community mobilizers in SJY local knowledge (Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius receiving between US$ 9 and US$ 12 (paid 2021). by SHGs) to US$ 200 a month in Uganda’s Graduating to Resilience Program (JVK Government community workers, who are stakeholder; USAID and AVSI 2022). local to the community, can also act as coaches. Furthermore, in the Graduation Approach They are more likely to have the qualifications for Refugees in Zambia coaches were needed and are already working within the only paid part-time but had an informal government system but require lower pay agreement to work full-time (Simanowitz and qualifications than external coaches. 2019). In Ethiopia’s PSNP IV, the government had development agents who already worked for There are also trade-offs in engaging the PSNP act as coaches so that they would community coaches: not have to hire new people (Mahmood 2016). During the second round, the Terintambwe • They often have fewer educational Program coaches shifted to government qualifications than external coaches. In community workers who had lower pay and Producing for My Future in Colombia, the qualifications than the Concern Worldwide program experienced difficulties finding managers who had previously held the role coaches in rural areas who met their (Roelen et al. 2019). Additionally, as they are qualification requirements. Additionally, already hired for this role, government workers the program had concerns that local reduce the burden on programs to hire new coaches may try and cut corners and merge people and allow for the possibility of scaling work with social visits (Moen 2016). up. However, government workers often have other responsibilities that limit how much they • The Ultra-Poor Graduation Handbook can take on in the program. In fact, although notes that while coaches should be from the program initially wanted to use government the same area as the participants, they community development workers as coaches should not be from the same community in the Graduation Approach for Refugees in to prevent potential biases (Moqueet, Zambia, they were unable to do so because Zaremba, and Whisson 2019). of all the pre-existing responsibilities of the government workers (Simanowitz 2019). The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 20 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Box 3 Community coaches – ASP, Niger The ASP program in Niger offers a case study of community coaches. Some programs in the Sahel ASP program, such as Senegal, used field agents, who served as coaches in more than one community. Niger, however, employed community coaches. In contrast to field agents, community coaches were better able to engage in individualized needs-based coaching. This was because they had more time as they lived with the communities that they supported. Field agents in Senegal also found it more difficult to integrate into the community and build trust as they were not from the community. Community coaches in Niger posed fewer costs to the program, unlike the field agents in Senegal who required fuel for motorbikes, had to travel far distances, and were more expensive in labor costs. However, the program experienced challenges in recruiting community coaches with adequate levels of education and training them effectively. Seeking to work successfully with coaches with lower levels of education and different language skills, coaching manuals included pictures rather than text. However, pictures were not uniformly understood or interpreted across coaches, thereby undermining their ability to communicate program messages to its participants. Recruitment of suitable coaches was also undermined by community leaders interfering with the selection process and putting forward their own candidates, even if they didn’t fit the criteria. The program responded to this challenge by gathering the whole community together and informing them of the role and requirements for a coach, and how coaches are chosen. They also used a script for choosing coaches. The practitioner we spoke to felt that despite the challenges community coaches pose, they should be the preferred coaches due to their ability to engage meaningfully with participants. Source: BOMA, TU-S stakeholder Some programs that struggled to find Programs also use external coaches community coaches with the necessary skills with stronger educational and technical resolved the issue by having coaching teams. qualifications than community coaches. One partner in the Empowering Women and External coaches are often from the Youth through the Graduation Approach and implementing organization or from other parts Financial Inclusion Program in Mexico used of the country. The Jharkhand State Livelihood groups of two to three coaches. This enabled Promotion Society Program initially had the group to have the necessary technical, to recruit coaches from other parts of India social, and language skills (Sanson, Alfaro, because they could not find coaches with the and Ahlenius 2021). This also helped with necessary qualifications in Jharkhand (Parida accountability and staff turnover. However, 2015). External coaches, although qualified, are it resulted in duplication of efforts and could also often much more expensive. It can also be increase costs. While the DOLE Graduation reasonably assumed that programs will find Project in the Philippines did not use coaching it more difficult to recruit external coaches teams, they did have coaches from different willing to live in particularly remote areas. professional backgrounds. Therefore, when Moreover, it is harder for them to connect specific issues arose, it enabled those with the with locals due to language barriers and a lack relevant expertise (such as nurses for health of local knowledge. Programs sometimes hire issues) to address the concern at hand, tapping locals to support the external coaches. For into experience or offering advice as required instance, another implementing partner in the (BRAC-P stakeholder). Empowering Women and Youth through the The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 21 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Graduation Approach and Financial Inclusion guides. The use of digital tools is increasing. Program hired women from the community Importantly, most programs use a mix of to help build trust with participants. These these tools—providing coaches with a manual women were not coaches but instead helped for guidance while also implementing digital bridge the gap between external coaches and modules. Fundación Capital (Box 4), Village the community. However, this led to power Enterprise, and BOMA give their coaches asymmetries between the lower-paid locals tablets to monitor the progress of participants. and the external coaches (Sanson, Alfaro, and Trickle Up has developed an application Ahlenius 2021). called Echb’eenink to support coaches through 100 interactive modules and a tool called TOOLS M-POWERED that puts phones in the hands of participants to support information- Coaches are provided with tools to support sharing between coaching sessions (Trickle them in carrying out their roles, ranging from Up 2023b). Fundación Capital uses platforms no formal tools being used (such as standard such as WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger manuals or modules) to digital tools to be used to share information with participants outside by coaches or even by participants themselves of coaching sessions. The inclusion of digital (Figure 7). technologies in coaching has led to increased digital literacy of participants, yet the aspect While the Terintambwe Program in Burundi of the human touch of a coach is invaluable had no formal manuals (Roelen et al. 2019), and cannot be replaced by digital tools (FC most programs work with manuals or coaching stakeholder). Figure 7 Tools for coaching Low resources High resources Narrow focus Broad focus + + + ++ + +++ + + + Standard manuals Digital modules for Digital tools in the No formal tools and guides coaches to use hands of participants The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 22 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Box 4 Digital tools in coaching - Fundación Capital Fundación Capital has been developing and diversifying the use of digital tools as part of coaching. Context is vital in deciding the types of technology to employ and how they are used. In remote areas with limited connectivity and high levels of illiteracy, tablets are used by coaches to deliver training content. As connectivity improves along with household smartphone ownership, Fundación Capital is transitioning toward the use of apps on participant devices. Digital technologies can help coaches provide more tailored support and respond better to beneficiaries’ needs. Instead of having to memorize all training content, for example, coaches can be more attentive to beneficiaries’ specific situations, such as the establishment of business plans or plans for life skills development. Face-to-face engagement for such tailored support is crucial, meaning that digital technology can enhance the human touch but not replace it. Digital technologies also address the limitations programs face when trying to recruit coaches with the right profile and skillset. As much of the technical content is provided through digital technology, programs are less dependent on the knowledge base of coaches. Digital technologies also bring various benefits in terms of cost-effectiveness. First, the use of digital technology significantly reduces the cost of training coaches, especially in remote areas. Virtual delivery of training-of-trainers, especially when rolling out training to large cadres of coaches, can largely replace face-to-face training, depending on coaches’ pre-existing (digital) skills. Second, the use of technology allows for a slight increase in caseload as it helps coaches work more efficiently. Less time is spent on the delivery of standard training, freeing up time for more tailored engagement within the existing caseload, and for reaching more participants. This is an important consideration, especially in helping governments to move to scale, such as those supported by Fundación Capital. Fundación Capital’s experience offers various lessons that are important to keep in mind when integrating digital technologies in the delivery of coaching. First, technology development requires large up-front investment. Depending on organizations’ in-house capacity, such development might need to be outsourced, especially in the start-up phase. Second, it is crucial to adapt the technology to the context and test apps or other tools. Third, and relatedly, engaging coaches and participants in the development of apps or tools will ensure that they will support coaches’ work and benefit participants in the best way possible. Fourth, integration of technology requires continuous development to update and improve both front-end user experience and back-end functioning. Overall, Fundación Capital’s experience shows that the use of digital technology can harness the power of coaching while at the same time supporting a move to scale. The use of apps and other tools can improve the quality of coaching by delivering training content in an engaging manner and allow coaches to focus on the relational aspect of their work. The digital delivery of training content allows for a modest increase in caseload, while digital training-of-trainers can lead to substantial cost savings. However, the program experienced challenges in recruiting community coaches with adequate levels of education and training them effectively. Seeking to work successfully with coaches with lower levels of education and different language skills, coaching manuals included pictures rather than text. However, pictures were not uniformly understood or interpreted across coaches, thereby undermining their ability to communicate program messages to its participants. Recruitment of suitable coaches was also undermined by community leaders interfering with the selection process and putting forward their own candidates, even if they didn’t fit the criteria. The program responded to this challenge by gathering the whole community together and informing them of the role and requirements for a coach, and how coaches are chosen. They also used a script for choosing coaches. The practitioner we spoke to felt that despite the challenges community coaches pose, they should be the preferred coaches due to their ability to engage meaningfully with participants. Source: FC stakeholder The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 23 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Implementation Considerations The review of coaching approaches brings to the fore a range of challenges in implementing coaching as part of economic inclusion programming, especially when bringing programs to scale. STAFFING • Budgets often dictate what type of coaches programs can afford. Programs must ensure Various factors should be considered in that remuneration for coaches aligns with deciding who is best placed to implement the skillset and profile that they require coaching. to avoid high turnover of coaches (Kingsly and Bernagros 2019). Cost-effectiveness also • Programs often require coaches with comes into play, with organizations striving specific knowledge or skills. The Haku to provide low-cost solutions that offer Wiñay Program in Peru selected coaches high value for money. from local farmers based on their knowledge of farming, agricultural RECRUITMENT techniques, and the ecosystem (Conger 2016). Coaches’ soft skills are crucial in The following considerations come into play supporting participants’ success. As a when recruiting coaches with the requisite result, many programs highlight the need profile and skills. for coaches to have strong mentorship, listening, and communication skills, for • Attracting coaches with the right profile instance (de Montesquiou et al. 2017; can be difficult. As previously mentioned, Moqueet, Zaremba, and Whisson 2019). most programs prefer community coaches, Most programs prioritize coaches who can yet community members may not meet establish trust with participants, with many formal qualification criteria, even if programs preferring coaches from within minimal. As a result, programs may need the community for that reason. However, to hire external coaches—who are more there are contextual considerations that expensive and lack local knowledge—or affect trust. For example, in refugee camps, choose options such as coaching teams that ethnicity may play a big role in the ability are also resource intensive. For instance, of coaches to gain trust (Kingsly and the Terintambwe Program in Burundi and Bernagros 2019). Similarly, factors such Empowering Women and Youth through as age, gender, and language should be the Graduation Approach and Financial considered. Inclusion Program in Mexico had to hire The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 24 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations coaches from outside their communities TRAINING due to issues such as low education and literacy levels in the community (Roelen et Training of coaches depends on the scope and al. 2019; Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius 2021). depth of coaching, and thus the mix of requisite In some instances, as in Jharkhand’s State hard and soft skills that coaches should have to Livelihood Promotion Society Program, fulfill their roles. this could act as a temporary measure while the program builds the capacity of • Across programs, coaches tend to receive community coaches (Parida 2015). training in a range of foundational areas, such as being sensitive to beneficiaries’ • The recruitment process requires careful needs and diverse situations to avoid any attention. Community involvement bias (de Montesquiou et al. 2014). Training in recruitment processes is common, content is determined by the outcomes supporting community ownership of a the coaching aims to achieve. Coaches who program but also raising challenges. In the support participants with their livelihoods ASP Program in Niger, community leaders may require trainings with entrepreneurs were tasked with choosing coaches based on or in market assessments (de Montesquiou the profile given to them by the program. et al. 2014). In the ASP Program in Burkina However, in some instances, they would Faso, agriculture extension workers trained choose their own children, regardless of coaches so that they could facilitate access whether they met the requirements for the to quality agricultural inputs and outlets role. In other instances, coaches who were (BOMA, TU-S stakeholder). leaving the program would choose their replacement themselves before leaving. • Who provides the training and through Such issues undermine the program’s ability what medium will have implications for to have coaches with the chosen profile training efficacy and associated costs. (BOMA, TU-S stakeholder). This risk can Professional trainers may have stronger be minimized by giving those selecting skills but are more expensive, while coaches a script to guide recruitment and community trainers may lack necessary announcing the role and requirements skills but can be engaged at lower cost of the coach to the whole community. for the program. In the ASP Program in Additionally, communicating the procedure Niger, coaches were trained by community to all stakeholders in the event of a coach’s trainers, but trainers were unable to resignation may help prevent coaches from transfer knowledge at the same capacity. recruiting their own replacements. Therefore, Trickle Up started providing the training and the refresher training directly • Context matters. In the refugee context, (BOMA-S stakeholder). In some programs, there are additional challenges to recruiting coaches provide training-of-trainers, coaches. For instance, local regulations especially in relation to livelihoods. can restrict the formal hiring of refugee coaches. This was an issue in the Kakuma • Refresher trainings are critical for ensuring Graduation Project in Kenya, where that coaches remember what they learned. refugees do not have the legal right to work. In the Terintambwe Program in Burundi, In this situation, the program focused on reduced training and follow-up training building transferrable skills to support the led to coaches having low confidence professional development of coaches as in how to conduct their duties (Roelen they could not receive a salary (Trickle Up et al. 2019). Moreover, coaches working 2023a). with participants who require specialized support may require additional training. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 25 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Box 5 Community funding mechanism for coaches - SJY, India The Targeting the Hard-Core Poor program in India, which was initiated in 2007, provides an example of a relatively comprehensive training curriculum. Coaches who were hired for this program underwent classroom-based training over a period of seven to eight months. This training covered how to screen for participant eligibility, how to support social development enterprise development, and the graduation process. The program then provided refresher trainings based on their performance. Additionally, the field experience provided coaches with experiential learning that helped them cultivate sensitivity toward the participants and trained them in dealing with unexpected issues. Source: Sengupta 2016 For instance, coaches in the Empowering • Many programs work with manuals to Women and Youth through the Graduation outline the content that coaches need to Approach and Financial Inclusion cover. However, depending on the profile Program in Mexico were supposed to of the coach, this can pose challenges. In help participants with disabilities access the ASP Program in the Sahel, coaches’ specialized health and rights services, yet low levels of education meant that they they lacked knowledge of these services sometimes struggled to use manuals. The and were therefore limited in their ability program tried addressing this issue by to carry out their role (Sanson, Alfaro, and using pictures, but this conveyed different Ahlenius 2021). messages to different coaches and led to inconsistent implementation (BOMA, • Digitalization is increasingly used as a TU-S stakeholder). part of coaches’ training and can pose a solution to some challenges surrounding • Some programs include resources that the standardization of training, quality participants can use themselves, such as of training, and cost of training (Box 5). workbooks. Such tools pose challenges According to Fundación Capital, using similar to those of coaching manuals. In e-learning courses to train coaches has the Producing for My Future Program reduced costs and improved learning in Colombia, participants were given outcomes for coaches, with 100 percent workbooks that were too dense for them. of coaches from a program in Colombia Unfortunately, because altering these stating that the content has been useful, workbooks needed approval from the and 90 percent completing every module government, the budget limitations and the (Dharmadasa et al. 2015). However, bureaucracy made updating this content developing digital training applications difficult (Moen 2016). require a substantial initial investment by programs. • Digital technology increasingly facilitates coaching and direct communication with COACHING TOOLS participants, such as through WhatsApp, which has proved helpful in continuing The tools that are used to deliver coaching are program delivery during the COVID-19 key in amplifying coaching impact and can have pandemic. Yet, while some communities strong cost implications. have increased access to smartphones and applications, this is still a challenge in many The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 26 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations parts of the world. In the Empowering visited and having to cover vast distances Women and Youth through the Graduation between households (Roelen et al. 2019). Approach and Financial Inclusion Program in Mexico, participants who did not have • Responsibilities beyond coaching WhatsApp were unable to benefit from the also contribute to coaches’ workload. coaching that was delivered through that Many programs also require coaches to medium (Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius engage in administrative work on top of 2021). The use of digital tools can increase their coaching duties, such as entering participants’ dependency on the program participant data, meeting with supervisors, or others. For example, in REAP in Kenya, and doing other office work. Some participants lacked an understanding of programs even devote a full or half day for mobile phones and virtual money and such work (Kingsly and Bernagros 2019). became dependent on coaches and others, including children or relatives, instead of • High workloads can affect the well-being facilitating their independence (Tiwari, of coaches and lead to high staff turnover. Schaub, and Sultana 2019). However, In fact, the very programs that report high Fundación Capital found that a side benefit workloads for coaches—Terintambwe of using these tools is that participants Program in Burundi and Producing for become more digitally literate over time My Future in Colombia—also report high (FC stakeholder). The difference between turnover rates (Moen 2016; Roelen et al. whether they become dependent or 2019). High turnover rates can also be digitally literate may hinge on how coaches due to coaches having gained skills that introduce digital tools and explain their increased their employability. This was usage to participants. one of the reasons for the 10–20 percent turnover rate of community mobilizers CASELOAD AND ADMINISTRATIVE in SJY (JVK stakeholder). Some programs BURDEN address this issue by training a larger pool of candidates and retaining them to fill in if Coaches’ caseload and administrative burden needed (Trickle Up 2023a). need to be balanced against the cost of employing more coaches and the resultant • Spreading the roles of coaching across impact on cost-effectiveness. individuals is one option to address coaches’ overburdening. SJY employs • Caseloads are commonly high and master resource persons who provide difficult to manage. Coaches in Colombia’s individual coaching, community mobilizers Producing for My Future Program had to who support the SHGs, and community work weekends to meet their targets. In resource persons who each have specific the Terintambwe Program in Burundi, skills with which they can support coaches were supposed to have caseloads of community mobilizers. Additionally, they 40 households. Yet, they often had between have dedicated bookkeepers and poultry 45 and 51, with some coaches even having or animal husbandry resource persons up to 65 households. Therefore, despite (JEEViKA 2021; JVK stakeholder). This coaches only being hired for four-day work system gives each person the time and weeks, they ended up working overtime. focus to delve deeply into the area of Coaches struggled to manage their caseload, support that they provide while ensuring encountering practical issues such as that the program covers a broader scope of participants not being home when they coaching. Another option is to gradually The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 27 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations expand the scope or depth of the coaching • A coach being from the community they approach over time as the implementer serve will inevitably influence the dynamics builds capacity and experience—thereby of their interactions. As noted above, their reducing the additional burden of position in the community often ensures employing a more intense coaching a sense of rapport and trust. However, approach on the coaches. there may also be negative effects. In Producing for My Future in Colombia, INCLUSIVE COACHING the program found that because coaches were from the community, they would An important, yet often overlooked, challenge sometimes cut corners during the visits by in the implementation of economic inclusion combining a work visit with a social visit or programming, including its coaching consolidating individual visits into a group component, is the meaningful inclusion of all visit, for instance (Moen 2016). Invariably, program participants. programs had to deal with coaches who misused their positions. For instance, in • Participants sometimes self-exclude from Uganda’s Graduating to Resilience Activity, programs. In the Empowering Women and there were cases of coaches borrowing Youth through the Graduation Approach money from participants and defaulting on and Financial Inclusion Program in Mexico, their payment (USAID and AVSI 2021). coaches found it difficult to convince participants, or their family members, • Social cultures and norms continue to pose with disabilities to participate in the a challenge to coaching. While Uganda’s program (Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius Graduating to Resilience Activity reported 2021). Trickle Up found that this challenge positive outcomes from family coaching, is also common among extremely poor they did struggle to engage male spouses households, where participants self-exclude in the process. Additionally, some women due to low self-confidence, suspicion of reported not wanting to share incidents of outsiders, and community stigma. One way gender-based violence with coaches out of of mitigating this problem is for coaches fear that they would be labelled bad wives to make multiple household visits to build (USAID and AVSI 2021). Therefore, coaches rapport and trust with the household and must be aware of the contextual nuances to provide them with examples of others in of the societies they are coaching and take similar situations (Trickle Up 2023a). steps to overcome them. • The coach’s profile can undermine PROGRAM FLEXIBILITY AND meaningful engagement with coaching COORDINATION topics, especially those that are highly shaped by social and gender norms. In the Program features such as flexibility to adapt Empowering Women and Youth through and the way in which it coordinates across the Graduation Approach and Financial other programs can affect the quality of the Inclusion Program in Mexico, participants coaching and the sustainability and potential were not comfortable discussing certain for scale-up of economic inclusion programs. topics with male coaches while local authorities were reluctant to engage with • Programs commonly make changes in how female staff. The program dealt with this they implement their coaching component issue by using coaching teams that had a over the course of the program period. This male and female coach (Sanson, Alfaro, and includes who does the actual coaching, the Ahlenius 2021). delivery of group versus individual coaches, The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 28 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations and other elements of the coaching model. coaches were employed by the government Doing so is vital to ensure that the coaching but were paid by Concern Worldwide, model is tailored to the context of the causing confusion for coaches (Roelen program and the needs of participants. For et al. 2019). Moreover, within a program, instance, REAP by BOMA adapted the role those with different roles must coordinate and profile of coaches to support better with one another. Many programs, quality business support to beneficiaries therefore, highlight the importance of clear (ThinkPlace and USAID, n.d.). Similarly, communication and coordination between the DSWD Padayon SLP Program in the different stakeholders involved. The the Philippines was able to build on the bigger a program is, the more of a challenge learnings from a study by IPA on group this poses. Programs sometimes address and individual coaching to adopt a cost- this challenge by including staff members effective combination of individual and who support coordination. For instance, group coaching (BRAC-P stakeholder). in Producing for My Future in Colombia, one coordinator oversees the work of five • A key feature in facilitating flexibility is coaches (Moen 2016). having administrative systems that allow informed changes to the program. In the • Coordination, and ideally integration, with Graduation Approach for Refugees in government systems helps ease the pressure Zambia, coaches had regular meetings on programs, as they scale up and enable with the program to discuss the progress them to be more sustainable. As reflected in of participants and any challenges the the case study on SJY in India (Box 6), using coaches were facing (Simanowitz 2019). existing systems and personnel, programs Uganda’s Graduating to Resilience Program incur lower financial costs and potentially even conducted a needs assessment of expand the scope of the program. Similarly, participants and coaches (USAID and AVSI some government programs in Mexico 2021) while India’s SJY had performance had the ability to provide grants to reviews quarterly, bi-annually, and annually women, yet could not provide coaching (JEEViKA 2021). Fundación Capital also (Sanson, Alfaro, and Ahlenius 2021). Thus, highlighted the importance of using by complementing these programs with participant and coach feedback when coaching, Trickle Up could facilitate more designing and adapting their tools (FC sustainable outcomes. stakeholder). Therefore, consistent reviews of the coaching approach that uses the • The cost of coaching is core to discussions feedback of key stakeholders are critical for about the potential and feasible role of raising the relevance of the approach for the coaching in economic empowerment given program. programming. Coaching is generally seen as an expensive component of economic • Many programs rely on coordination inclusion programming. In the six-country between multiple parties such as CGAP study, costs of the training and governments and nongovernmental coaching component were on average twice organizations to effectively carry out that of direct transfers, although costs vary economic inclusion programs, including greatly per program (Banerjee et al. 2015). its coaching component. The lack of The cost of coaching depends largely on clarity regarding responsibilities can the scope, depth, and staffing approaches undermine implementation. For instance, that the program employs. The costs can in the Terintambwe Program in Burundi, therefore range from negligible amounts, The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 29 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations as in the Productive Social Safety Net the ASP Program in Niger, VSLAs and Project in Côte d‘Ivoire and Graduating the program each contributed 50 percent to Resilience in Uganda, to 35 percent to the salary of coaches. This allowed the of the total cost in Togo’s Employment participants to feel like they had more Opportunities for Vulnerable Youth ownership over the program and enabled Project and 27 percent in Peru’s Haku the continued support by coaches when Wiñay Program (Chaudhary, Chaman, and external funding for coaches stopped Swatton 2022). Importantly, this challenge (BOMA, TU-S stakeholder). The case study should not be addressed by paying coaches on SJY (Box 6) also depicts a potential low or unlivable wages or substituting avenue for programs to self-fund. pay for other benefits. Instead, one way of addressing this challenge is to design the program to be increasingly self-reliant. In Box 6 Community funding mechanism for coaches - SJY, India Satat Jeevikoparjan Yojana (SJY) in Bihar, India, began in 2018 and has reached approximately 140,000 households. SJY presents two useful considerations for programs looking to scale up. The first is on funding. Master resource persons (MRPs) and community mobilizers largely play the roles of individual and group coaches. Over time, SJY reduced its dependence on funds from the project to pay these coaches and increased its ability to self-fund. In SJY, communities form self-help groups (SHGs). At least 25 percent of the interest generated from the savings in SHGs goes to village organizations that employ people such as bookkeepers and 25 percent goes to the level above village organizations—cluster-level federations—to pay their staff. The remaining interest is used to pay the community mobilizers (INR 50 from each group—USD $0.60) who support 15 to 20 SHGs. The MRPs are paid INR 10,000 (US$ 120) by the program but also receive some support from the SHGs. The second consideration is integrating the program within the community and converging it with government systems. Integrating the program within the community could involve designing it to enhance the community’s ownership over the program or utilizing coaches recruited from within the community. Convergence with the government system could include using existing government structures, such as linking or referring participants to existing government programs where appropriate or engaging different government departments and ministries as needed. This is important because the program cannot be expected to provide all the support that the participants require. Instead, they should be able to help the participants access existing government programs and support systems. Source: JVK stakeholder The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 30 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Recommendations This paper highlights the vast range of approaches to coaching, from whom to employ to what tools to use in delivery. Decisions along each of the design parameters come with both benefits and limitations. Decisions along each of the design parameters 2. Ensure sufficient training and support for come with both benefits and limitations. coaches. This includes refresher trainings There is no one-size-fits-all approach or an throughout the program lifecycle to ideal coaching model. Instead, decisions about mitigate the risk of coaches forgetting coaching must be made against the backdrop what they have learned, to boost their of program objectives, implementation confidence, or to give the program a context, available resources, and participants’ chance to update coaching approaches. needs. We identify various best practices that Coaches also benefit from continuous implementers may consider when designing support and supervision, through digital their coaching components. or other means. As with choosing coaches, a range of factors are to be considered, 1. Consider the profile of participants including assessing available resources, and the coach’s responsibilities when training needs, and other skills, such as determining the coach’s profile. coaches’ literacy and numeracy levels. While there is a general preference for community coaches—primarily 3. When possible, include families in due to their ability to build trust with coaching. This can create a social context participants and because of their relatively that enables the participants to succeed low cost—this may not always be the in their goals. Considering gender and most appropriate option, especially when social norms will be important for making needing to respond to complex needs or this work, for instance, to increase in contexts of deep marginalization. A the likelihood of participation of the program’s coaching component should primary participant and family members primarily focus on the elements that in the program or to facilitate open are critical for a participant’s success in conversations about sensitive topics. sustaining economic activities. Therefore, staffing decisions should be driven by the 4. Give coaches agency to adapt the content roles that coaches are required to play to to participants’ needs. This remains support this success and the skills they consistent across programs, whether they need to achieve the intended program use standardized or flexible coaching. The objectives. programs analyzed in this paper used a range of approaches to standardization. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 31 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Yet, they included ways of ensuring that VSLAs) within the community and coaches could adapt to the situation as increases community ownership over the needed. program and its outcomes. 5. Limit the caseload, scope, and depth 9. Establish effective communication and of a coach’s workload to a manageable coordination systems. Programs should amount, enabling them to spend sufficient facilitate communication about the time with participants. The overworking program and its goals with all those of coaches has posed a notable challenge involved in the program and those who in many programs, leading to high staff are tangential to the program—from the turnover and lower-quality coaching. community it operates to the government Therefore, programs must intentionally services that occupy the same social spaces. assess how much time coaching will take, In relation to coaching, this includes considering practical factors such as announcing the role and requirements distance and terrain. of coaches and coordinating between coaches, households, external services, and 6. Embrace the role that digital technologies other program staff. can play in addressing coaching challenges and improving the quality of coaching. 10. Integrate or converge with government However, in doing so, programs must be systems where possible. Economic keenly aware of potential risks such as inclusion requires a multifaceted alienating those without digital devices or approach. Yet, realistically, the budget increasing the dependency of participants, and scope of programs are often limited. and include safeguards against these risks Using existing government programs, in their programming. Critically, digital staff, and systems helps programs save technologies should not be considered resources. Additionally, as discussed above, a replacement to the human element this removes the burden on programs to of coaching, but instead a means of provide services outside their scope, as supporting coaches in their roles. they can link participants to other existing services. 7. Include an inclusive and responsive feedback mechanism that allows all Finally, while there is widespread evidence stakeholders, including coaches, to of the combined effect of multiple program comment and reflect on program components, literature that isolates the implementation and adapt the coaching impacts of coaching or its various modalities component accordingly. This will enable is limited. We have referred to evidence where programs to engage in continuous learning available, but more research is needed to and adapt as needed based on the specific understand what type of coaching works for challenges their coaches face, as was the whom and under what conditions. Similarly, case for many programs in this study. evidence on cost-effectiveness is highly limited, pointing to the need for organizations 8. Consider designs that enhance the to better document costs associated with ability of the program to self-fund its key implementation and bring this information components, such as coaching. This will into the public domain. Both extensions of support the ability of programs to sustain the evidence base will be vital in supporting themselves when external funding ceases. programs moving to scale. It can also serve as a mechanism to embed the program activities (for example, The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 32 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Appendix The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 33 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Appendix Economic inclusion programs with a coaching component Program Type Bangladesh, Targeting the Ultra Poor Non-government Burundi, Terintambwe Program Non-government Colombia, Producing for My Future Mix Ecuador, Graduation Program Non-government Egypt, Bab Amal Graduation Program Non-government Ethiopia, Graduation Pilot and Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) IV Government Ghana, Graduation Pilot Non-government Haiti, Fonkoze’s Chemen Lavi Miyò Program Non-government India, Jharkhand State Livelihood Promotion Society Mix India, Odisha Pilot Non-government India, Satat Jeevikoparjan Yojana (SJY) Government India, Targeting the Hard-Core Poor Non-government Kenya, Kakuma Graduation Project Non-government Kenya, Program for Rural Outreach of Financial Innovations and Technologies (PROFIT) Non-government Kenya, Rural Entrepreneur Access Program (REAP) Non-government Malawi, Graduation program (Tiwoloke) Non-government Mexico, Empowering Women and Youth through the Graduation Approach and Financial Non-government Inclusion Project Niger, Adaptive Social Protection Program Mix Nigeria, Stronger Women, Stronger Nations Program Non-government Paraguay, Graduation Program Mix Peru, Graduation Pilot Non-government Peru, Haku Wiñay Government Philippines, Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) Graduation Project Government Philippines, Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) Padayon Sustainable Government Livelihoods Program (SLP) Program Rwanda, Minimum Package for Graduation (MPG) Mix Senegal, Adaptive Social Protection Program Mix Uganda, Building Self Reliance and Resilience Non-government Uganda, Graduating to Resilience Non-government Uganda, Women’s Income Generating Support (WINGS) Non-government Zambia, Graduation Approach for Refugees Non-government The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 34 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations References The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 35 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations References Andrews, Colin, Aude de Montesquiou, Inés Arévalo Sánchez, Puja Vasudeva Dutta, Boban Varghese Paul, Sadna Samaranayake, Janet Heisey, Timothy Clay, and Sarang Chaudhary. 2021. The State of Economic Inclusion Report 2021: The Potential to Scale. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1598-0. Banerjee, A., E. Duflo, N. Goldberg, D. Karlan, R. Osei, W. Pariente, J. Shapiro, B. Thuysbaert, and C. Udry. 2015. “A Multifaceted Program Causes Lasting Progress for the Very Poor: Evidence from Six Countries.” Science 348 (6236): 1260799–1260799. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1260799. Beiträge, Alle. 2023. “Graduation to Resilience: Interview with AVSI.” Poverty Alleviation Coalition (blog), October 9, 2023. https://alleviate-poverty.org/blog/f/graduation-to- resilience-interview-with-avsi. Bhari, Anoushka, and Sonia Laszlo. 2020. “Policies and Practices to Enhance the Gender Transformative Potential of Multi-Faceted Social Protection Programs.” McGill University. https://www.peiglobal.org/sites/pei/themes/pei/kc_files/Bhari%20and%20Laszlo%202020.pdf. Bossuroy, Thomas, Markus Goldstein, Dean Karlan, Harounan Kazianga, William Parienté, Patrick Premand, Catherine Thomas, Christopher Udry, Julia Vaillant, and Kelsey Wright. 2021. “Pathways out of Extreme Poverty: Tackling Psychosocial and Capital Constraints with a Multi-Faceted Social Protection Program in Niger.” Policy Research Working Papers, World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-9562. Cassio, Laura, and Georgia Efremova. 2023. Multidimensional Coaching for Socio- Economic Advancement of People in Poverty: Insights from Innovative Practices across the World. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/ doi/10.2760/417670. Chaudhary, Sarang, Hugo Brousset Chaman, and Jenny Swatton. 2022. “A Standardized Approach to Estimating the Cost of Economic Inclusion Programs.” PEI In Practice; Volume 6. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/ server/api/core/bitstreams/fa76bb45-0d89-5b3f-bbf8-b761f5df74a1/content. Conger, Lucy. 2016. “Peru Case Study.” Preserving the Essence, Adapting for Reach: Early Lessons from Large-Scale Implementations of the Graduation Approach. Ford Foundation. https:// doi.org/10.1163/2210-7975_HRD-0152-2016001. de Montesquiou, Aude, Syed Hashemi, Janet Heisey, and Ziad Ayoubi. 2017. “Economic Inclusion of the Poorest Refugees: Building Resilience through the Graduation Approach.” United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Trickle Up, and CGAP. https://www.findevgateway.org/paper/2017/03/economic-inclusion-poorest-refugees- building-resilience-through-graduation-approach. de Montesquiou, Aude, Tony Sheldon, Frank F. DeGiovanni, and Syed M. Hashemi. 2014. “From Extreme Poverty to Sustainable Livelihoods: A Technical Guide to the Graduation Approach.” CGAP, Ford Foundation. https://www.peiglobal.org/resources/extreme- poverty-sustainable-livelihoods-technical-guide-graduation-approach. Devereux, Stephen, and Roberte Isimbi. 2020. Understanding Graduation Outcomes in Rwanda: Coaching, Relationships and Empowerment in Concern Worldwide’s Graduation Programme. Institute of Development Studies, Centre for Social Protection, FATE Consulting. Accessed July 19, 2023. https://admin.concern.org.uk/sites/default/files/ documents/2020-11/Understanding%20Graduation%20Outcomes%20in%20Rwanda%20 -%20Coaching%2C%20Relationships%20and%20Empowerment%20in%20Concern%20 Worldwide%E2%80%99s%20Graduation%20Programme%202019_241.pdf. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 36 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Devereux, Stephen, and Roberte Isimbi. 2018. “Understanding Graduation Trajectories in Rwanda.” Institute of Development Studies, Centre for Social Protection, FATE Consulting. https://concernusa.org/reports/understanding-graduation-trajectories-in- rwanda-2019.pdf. Devereux, Stephen, Keetie Roelen, Ricardo Sabates, Dimitri Stoelinga, and Arnaud Dyevre. 2015. “Final Evaluation Report: Concern’s Graduation Model Programme in Burundi.” https:// admin.concern.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/migrated/graduation_model_programme_ in_burundi_-_evaluation_report_227.pdf. Dharmadasa, Harshani, Syed M. Hashemi, Sadna Samaranayake, and Lauren Whitehead. 2015. “PROPEL Toolkit: An Implementation Guide to the Ultra-Poor Graduation Approach.” https://issuu.com/bracultrapoor/docs/brac_propel_toolkit. Hashemi, Syed M., and Aude de Montesquiou. 2011. “Reaching the Poorest: Lessons from the Graduation Model.” https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/818891468331772094/ pdf/633360BRI0Reac00Box0361513B0PUBLIC0.pdf. IPA. 2023. “The Impact of a Graduation Program on Livelihoods in Refugee and Host Communities in Uganda.” Accessed November 8, 2023 https://poverty-action.org/impact- graduation-program-livelihoods-refugee-and-host-communities-uganda. JEEViKA. 2021. “The ChangeMakers.” Transforming Rural Bihar. Kingsly, Atemnkeng, and Alexi Bernagros. 2019. Graduation and Refugee Standards: A Guide for UNHCR Operations & Implementing Partners. First Edition. New York: Trickle Up. https://refugees.trickleup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Graduation-and-Refugee- Standards_A-Guide-for-UNHCR-Operations-Implementing-Partners.pdf. Lewis, Erin, and Yéréfolo Mallé. 2020. “Mentoring and Coaching: Supporting Graduation from Social Safety Nets through Savings Groups.” Accessed July 3, 2023. https://seepnetwork.org/ files/galleries/Mentoring_Coaching_200728v8.pdf. Mahmood, Omar. 2016. “Ethiopia Case Study.” Preserving the Essence, Adapting for Reach: Early Lessons from Large-Scale Implementations of the Graduation Approach. Ford Foundation. https://www.fordfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/pdf1-english- final-24-oct-14h30.pdf. Moen, Alissa. 2016. “Colombia Case Study.” Preserving the Essence, Adapting for Reach: Early Lessons from Large-Scale Implementations of the Graduation Approach. Ford Foundation. https://www.fordfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/pdf1-english-final-24-oct- 14h30.pdf Moqueet, Nazia, Jo Zaremba, and Isabel Whisson. 2019. “Ultra-Poor Graduation Handbook.” Second Edition. BRAC and World Vision International. https://www.wvi.org/sites/default/ files/2019-07/WV-BRAC%20Ultra-Poor%20Graduation%20Handbook%20V2%20-%20July%20 19.pdf. Parida, Bishnu C. 2015. “Introducing the Graduation Approach in India’s Jharkhand State.” CGAP (blog), December 9, 2015. https://www.cgap.org/blog/introducing-graduation- approach-in-indias-jharkhand-state. Roelen, Keetie, and Catherine Müller. 2018. “Fonkoze’s CLM Ultra Poverty Programme: Understanding and Improving Child Development and Child Wellbeing.” Institute of Development Studies, Centre for Social Protection, Development Research Institute. https://www.ids.ac.uk/publications/fonkozes-clm-ultra-poverty-programme-understanding- and-improving-child-development-and-wellbeing/. Roelen, Keetie, Dilmurad Yusupov, Emmanuel Nshimirimana, and Gloria Sigrid Uruna. 2019. “Implementing Coaching and Support in Graduation Programmes: A Case Study of the Terintambwe Programme in Burundi.” Institute of Development Studies - The Impact Initiative.. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/327123679.pdf. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 37 Introduction Coaching Design Implementation Recommendations Appendix References Parameters Considerations Roelen, Keetie. 2015. “The Two-Fold Investment Trap: Children and their Role in Sustainable Graduation.” IDS Bulletin 46 (2): 25–34. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/ handle/20.500.12413/7281. Sanson, Jo, Daniel Alfaro, and Bethany Ahlenius. 2021. “Empowering Women and Youth through the Graduation Approach and Financial Inclusion in Mexcio.” New York: Trickle Up. https://www.peiglobal.org/sites/pei/themes/pei/kc_files/Sanson,%20Alfaro,%20Ahlenius%20 2021.pdf. Schelzig, Karin, and Amir Jilani. 2021. “Assessing the Impact of the Graduation Approach in the Philippines.” ADB Briefs. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. https://doi. org/10.22617/BRF210088-2. Sengupta, Anasuya. 2013. “Bandhan’s Targeting the Hard Core Poor Program: A Qualitative Study on Participants’ Ascent out of Extreme Poverty.” https://www.findevgateway.org/ sites/default/files/publications/files/bandhan-thp-_a_qualitative_study_on_participants_ ascent_out_of_extreme_poverty_.pdf. Sengupta, Anasuya. 2016. “India Case Study.” Preserving the Essence, Adapting for Reach: Early Lessons from Large-Scale Implementations of the Graduation Approach. Ford Foundation. https://doi.org/10.1163/2210-7975_HRD-0152-2016001. Sanchez, Ines. 2019. “Adapting the Graduation Approach for Refugees in Ecuador.” Trickle Up. https://refugees.trickleup.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Adapting-Graduation-for- Refugees-in-Ecuador_Case-Study_FINAL.pdf. Simanowitz, Anton. 2019. “Adapting the Graduation Approach for Refugees in Zambia.” Trickle Up. https://www.peiglobal.org/sites/pei/themes/pei/kc_files/Simanowitz%202019.pdf. ThinkPlace and USAID. n.d. “REAP Implementation Guide.” https://www.advancingnutrition. org/sites/default/files/2023-07/HCD_REAP_FOR_NUTRITION_IMPLEMENTATION_ GUIDE.pdf. Tiwari, Jaya, Emily Schaub, and Naziha Sultana. 2019. “Barriers to ‘Last Mile’ Financial Inclusion: Cases from Northern Kenya.” Development in Practice 29 (8): 988–1000. https://doi.org/10.1 080/09614524.2019.1654432. Trickle Up. 2023a. “COACHING: Experiences from Graduation Projects in Displaced Contexts.” https://trickleup.org/coaching-in-displaced-contexts/. Trickle Up. 2023b. “Project MPOWERED.” MPOWERED - Trickle Up USAID and AVSI. 2021. Graduating to Resilience Annual Report: FY 2021. https://pdf.usaid.gov/ pdf_docs/PA00Z81K.pdf. USAID and AVSI. 2022. Graduating to Resilience Annual Report: FY 2022. https://pdf.usaid.gov/ pdf_docs/PA00ZRXX.pdf. Women for Women International, Tufts University, Nielsen Foundation, and Hanovia Limited. 2022. The Impact of Mentorship and VSLAs on Women Micro-Entrepreneurs in Northern Nigeria. https://www.womenforwomen.org/sites/default/files/2022-05/NigeriaRCT-8pager. pdf. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion 38 The Partnership for Economic Inclusion (PEI) is a global partnership with a mission to support the adoption of national economic inclusion programs that increase the earnings and assets of extremely poor and vulnerable households. PEI brings together global stakeholders to catalyze country-level innovation, advance innovation and learning, and share global knowledge. PEI is hosted by the Social Protection and Jobs Global Practice of the World Bank. The Partnership for Economic Inclusion | In Practice | Coaching in Economic Inclusion In Practice