Solidarity, MAP’s first field of application
The Poto / Mon Ami Poto scheme puts MAP’s electronic money infrastructure at the service of earmarked solidarity contributions. This page describes how it works, what MAP is able to account for, and the limits of what this case study demonstrates.
Summary
The scheme organises contributions intended for a solidarity use. The funds provided give rise to the issuance of earmarked electronic money, usable within a defined scope. The operations carried out within that scope are recorded and reported to the roles concerned.
MAP acts as the infrastructure: issuance of the electronic money, application of the programme’s rules, keeping of the operations log. Assessing situations and supporting individuals remain the responsibility of the organisations that follow them.
Earmarked contributions
A controlled solidarity use, within the Poto / Mon Ami Poto universe.
Infrastructure
Issuance, application of rules, operations log.
In service
First operational use of the infrastructure.
The initial need
A solidarity contribution raises three simple questions that are rarely handled well: what exactly is it used for, how does it reach the person concerned, and what can be said about it afterwards to the contributor.
The usual channels answer only partially. Cash leaves no usable trace. A bank transfer carries no rule of use. In-kind aid requires heavy logistics and reduces the choice of the person being helped. The scheme seeks a middle way: a usable, controlled value whose circulation remains legible within the scope of the programme.
The journey, from the provision of funds to the operation
Provision of funds
A contributor provides funds in euros, intended for the use defined by the scheme.
Role: funder.
Earmarked issuance
MAP issues the corresponding electronic money and earmarks it for the programme.
Role: issuer, MAP.
Allocation
The organisation supporting the person decides on their entry into the scheme and on the allocation of the balance.
Role: organisation.
Documented operation
The person uses the balance with an authorised recipient; the operation is decided according to the rules, then recorded.
Role: end beneficiary.
The four roles remain distinct: the funder does not allocate aid, the organisation does not issue the electronic money, MAP does not assess individual situations.
The infrastructure involved
| Component | Use in this scheme |
|---|---|
| Electronic money issuance | Conversion of the funds received into a value earmarked for the programme. |
| Rules of use | Authorised holders, accepted categories of recipients, limits of use. |
| Operations log | Time-stamped record of decisions and postings. |
| Ledger | Keeping of the scheme’s entries, under the governance described on the Ledger and blockchain page. |
Available evidence
Staged image, separate from the real evidence and screenshots presented on request.
Press reference
VerifiableL’AGEFI devoted an article to the launch of Mon Ami Poto’s digital money dedicated to generosity, on 23 November 2024. This reference attests to a public presentation of the proposition on that date. It establishes neither volumes, nor results, nor a current commercial relationship.
Read the article on agefi.frJourney extracts and screenshots
On requestAnonymised journey extracts and authorised screenshots can be presented during a discussion, with a caption specifying their scope and date. They are not published on this page: their release requires the agreement of the parties concerned and the protection of the people being supported.
Request a presentationResults
What this case study demonstrates, and what it does not
Proven in this context
- Issuing earmarked electronic money from contributions in euros.
- Governing its use by rules written before the spend.
- Keeping and reporting the scheme’s operations log.
- Having four distinct roles coexist without confusing them.
Not demonstrated by this case study alone
- The capacity to absorb the volumes of another sector.
- Suitability for a public scheme governed by a specific text.
- An evaluated social effect: traced activity is not a measured impact.
- The availability of rules or integrations not employed here.
Considering another programme
A scoping discussion makes it possible to separate what can be transposed from what must be re-examined: origin of the funds, justification obligations, end users, systems to integrate.
A comparable scheme to organise?
Tell us about the contributions to be earmarked, the organisations concerned and what you need to be able to report.