1 How to use this document This document

1 How to use this document • This document, the 3 -D Client Value Assessment Report Template, aims to support the presentation of findings and recommendations in the context of a 3 -D Analysis of Client Value for agricultural index-based insurance products. • This template is meant to be customized and expanded, depending on products reviewed and assessments conducted. • Examples provided in the guide are fictional and do not reflect any previous finding or expected result. • More information on how to conduct a 3 -D Analysis of client value can be found in the 3 -D Technical Guide.

2 CLIENT VALUE ASSESSMENT OF [PRODUCT] Results of an assessment using the 3 -D Client Value Assessment Tool for Index Insurance Date Author

3 Contents [Insert picture] Background 3 The product 4 Information consulted 5 Overall score 6 Explanation of scoring on each of the 14 indicators 7 Recommendations 21

4 Background The Global Action Network and Value Assessment Supported by USAID, the Global Action Network (GAN) is a community of agriculture insurance experts managed by the International Labour Office’s Impact Insurance Facility and the BASIS/I 4 Index Insurance Innovation Initiative at the University of California Davis. It was formed in 2013, with the objective of addressing gaps that hinder the responsible scaling of agriculture insurance, including consumer education, bundling insurance with other services, reinsurance, and the role of governments. The tool described in this report is an output of the GAN’s working group on client value in index insurance. The Case for Measuring Value There is strong evidence that the informal tools that smallholder farmers use to manage risk are costly and insufficient, and great potential value from insurance products covering agricultural risks. A good insurance product can mitigate the welfare impacts in bad years, and can also create incentives for farmers to pursue riskier but more profitable activities. Index insurance in particular has great potential value, as this type of coverage can be cost-effective and feasible when other types of insurance protection are not, creating greater access to risk mitigation among smallholder farmers. However, poorly designed index insurance can create more risks than it mitigates, for a wide variety of reasons. As a result, assessing an index insurance product’s value requires a holistic understanding of the product, service, and context. A Tool to Measure Value The 3 -D Tool used in this assessment takes a broad view of an index insurance product’s value proposition, considering three dimensions of value: Design, Distribution, and Delivery.

5 [Product Presentation] [Insert information on product history, value proposition, key stakeholders, etc] [Insert supporting picture, graph or figure]

6 [Methodology] [Insert information on work done, scope of assessment, sources of information, limitations…]

7 Overall assessment score: [Poor / Average / Strong] Indicators receiving a "Poor" score [List indicators receiving a poor score] Indicators receiving an "Average" score Indicators receiving a "Strong" score [List indicators receiving an average [List indicators receiving a strong score] The following pages explain scoring for each indicator in turn

8 #1: Reliability of index Indicator Score 1. Index reliably predicts farmers’ experience Strong [Replace by appropriate color and score] Explanation

9 #2: Appropriate activities Indicator Score 2. Covers appropriate activities Poor [Replace by appropriate color and score] Explanation

10 #3: Appropriate risks Indicator Score 3. Covers appropriate risks Average [Replace by appropriate color and score] Explanation

11 #4: Enables investment decision-making Indicator 4. Enables productive investment decisionmaking Score Explanation

12 #5: Minimizes gaps in coverage Indicator 5. Minimizes gaps in coverage Score Explanation

13 #6: Information Indicator 6. Covered farmers are adequately informed of product details Score Explanation.

14 #7: Staff capacities Indicator 7. Staff and/or sales agents are adequately trained, incentivized, and supervised to inform clients and sell responsibly Score Explanation

15 #8: Premium payment Indicator 8. Premium payment processes minimize liquidity constraints Score Explanation.

16 #9: Inclusiveness Indicator 9. Product is inclusive Score Explanation

17 #10: Coverage for price paid Indicator 10. Product delivers adequate coverage for money Score Explanation

18 #11: Timeliness Indicator 11. Benefits are delivered in a timely manner Score Explanation

19 #12: Clarity and reliability of delivery processes Indicator 12. Procedure to deliver the benefits is reliability and understood Score Explanation

20 #13: Questions, problems, and complaints Indicator 13. Provider is responsive and proactive about questions, problems, and complaints Score Explanation

21 #14: Evidence of coverage Indicator 14. Covered farmers receive evidence of coverage Score Explanation

22 Recommendations for improving product value The following changes (some of which are already anticipated) will improve product value and could improve the program’s assessment results from [ Score obtained ] to [ Objective ] 1. Recommendation 1 2. Recommendation 2 3. …….

23 Appendix – Example: #2: Appropriate activities Indicator Score 2. Covers appropriate activities Explanation The covered crop is highly relevant to farmers’ livelihood in the region. It is one of their most important sources of income and requires costly inputs. Strong The covered crop is essential to the country’s agricultural sector. In 2014, 60% of farmers cultivated this crop at national level, and it represented 35% of total agricultural income [source]. The area where the insurance product is distributed is known to be specialized in the covered crop cultivation. Interviews with the management indicated that thorough investigations had been conducted to assess the relevance of this crop against alternatives. This investigation, conducted between 2012 and 2015, built on previous studies done by the government and multilateral organizations. All these studies indicated that the covered crop was highly relevant to the livelihood of smallholder farmers and required costly inputs. The final report, which we obtained, revealed that in the past, smallholder farmers had to use costly coping mechanisms after severe droughts destroyed their crop. Interviews with farmers confirmed that the covered crop represented an important part of their income. 94% of farmers surveyed indicated that it was one of their sources of income, and 71% indicate that it was their main source of revenue. 53% indicated that the investments required for this crop are higher than for other activities.