Thus, in the Syangja model, groups of people (in both mixed and single-sex groups) form themselves into village or community organisations (VOs), which then undertake a system of thrift and credit provision. Credit is both from a revolving fund of received savings and from the VO which itself borrows from higher tiers. While the initial guidelines may be suggested by the external agency, basically the decisions about required savings from all members, amount of loan disbursed, timing of repayment, and so on, are made by the members of the VO themselves, who also appoint a Chairperson and a Manager.
 
In addition, the VO decides about the implementation of infrastructure grants which have been provided. A majority of these have gone into drinking water projects which are sorely needed in the countryside, and which are already estimated to have reduced the incidence of water-borne diseases in the relevant areas. Other infrastructure projects have included irrigation schemes and roads.
 
The VOs themselves are then organised into CMCs (Chairperson- Manager Conferences) which meet once a month, choose their own chair and decide about allocations across the village organisations. A higher tier is composed of the Local Trust Fund Board, an elected body with some bureaucratic representations as well.
 
All this may sound like simply the creation of more and more village bureaucrats, but the reality is rather different. First impressions suggest that most of the members of the VOs have a great sense of belonging to and being able to control the decisions of the VO, and view these different tiers of management as both necessary and important to create a link with other  villages in the area.
 
The CMCs in turn become more than simply a formal meeting of the constituent groups. One such meeting held recently in Keware village was heavily attended despite the difficulty of crossing hilly terrain to get to the meeting place. It was also lively and wide ranging in terms of discussions. The participants thought about new schemes, such as the possibility of providing livestock insurance, and exchanged notes about important matters and local and national news. Several people pointed out that this was an important means, especially in a mountainous area where communication is otherwise difficult, of getting information and working out common strategies to deal with problems.
 
There are two possible caveats to the currently functioning system. Most decisions are taken through consensus rather than vote, and this can often be a problem when power is asymmetrically held. Also, there are still problems of relative exclusion of the poorest households : while they are typically members of the VO who make the necessary (and relatively small amount) of required savings, they usually lack the confidence and repayment capacity to take loans. For this reason, they typically still remain dependent upon traditional moneylenders who are more flexible in timing and often adjust the loan in other ways such as labour services, and to that extent have been denied the possible benefits of this programme. Otherwise, however, for most of the rest of the membership, the significance of traditional moneylenders has declined.
 
The material benefits of such a programme - in living standards and changes in patterns of consumption and savings - are fairly easy to see, even if they are limited in scope. Thus, in the concerned villages there has been improvement in some important infrastructure areas, whether in the form of new roads, better access to drinking water, sanitation facilities, or irrigation for cultivation. But the real benefits of this programme are probably less material and more social in nature.
 
Thus, the now recognised role of such organisations in terms of empowering women is evident here as well. Not only do more women participate and get involved in these activities, but the groups then become vehicles for broader social mobilisation and consciousness raising. Several women pointed out how they have gained in confidence, feel more able to participate actively in public life, and may choose to benefit from various kinds of training. The process of creating, being involved in and running these organisations also requires various kinds of skill, not just bookkeeping but other skills, which are made evident and then developed by the programme. increasingly, the VOs have been showing initiative in asking for or organising training programmes that provide for skills that are felt to be in short supply, whether in animal husbandry or in agriculture or in other manufacturing and service activities.
 
One of the most important effects is probably in terms of the effects on the VO members in terms of increasing their capacity to respond and participate as citizens. Thus, not only is there greater recognition of the advantages within a village, of working together and co-operation, but the relationship with other public and private agents outside the village also becomes more active and informed. thus, some awareness of the issues involved in building local infrastructure allows for a more reasoned assessment of public activities in this regard, and also builds more community participation in assessing other economic activities of the state and other big players in the area.
 
This is a feature which is a fundamental requirement of true democracy, and any institutions which act as catalysts to enable people to demand more control over various aspects of their own quotidian life are therefore of great importance. This is why the significance of programmes such as this one in Nepal go well beyond the specific effects of certain loans, and extend into the conditions for ensuring more enduring democratic participation in economic decision-making. Surely there is an important lesson in this for the rest of South Asia.