Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Copy Public Disclosure Copy INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET RESTRUCTURING STAGE te: This ISDS will be considered effective only upon approval of the project restructuring Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 04-Sep-2014 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 04-Sep-2014 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Guinea-Bissau Project ID: P090712 Project Name: Rural Community-Driven Development Project (P090712) Task Team Philippe Auffret Leader: Estimated 31-Mar-2009 Appraisal Date: Managing Unit: GSPDR Estimated Board Date: Lending Instrument: Report.: ISDSR1039 24-Sep-2009 Specific Investment Loan Sector: General education sector (30%), General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (30%), Other social services (25%), Water supply (1 5%) Theme: Other social development (25%), Social Inclusion (25%), Other social protection and risk management (25%), Conflict prevention and p ost-conflict reconstruction (25%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Financing (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 25.00 Total Bank Financing: 20.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 IDA Grant 20.00 State and Peace Building Fund 5.00 Financing Gap 0.00 Total 25.00 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a Repeater project? Page 1 of 9
2. Current Project Development Objectives The proposed project development objective would be to empower individuals, households and communities in rural areas to plan, implement and manage priority soc ial and economic investments, through a transparent and participatory approach. To achieve this objective the project would seek to:? build capacity of beneficiaries and local institutions to effectively identify and implement their development priorities? finance beneficiary-identified priority investments such as basic social services (e.g.: primary schools and community health posts) and small-scale infrastr uctures (e.g.: wells, latrines and secondary rural roads);? create economic and employment opportunities in targeted communities; and? establish a participatory and effective monitoring and evaluation system Proposed New PDO (from Restructuring Paper) The proposed project development objective would be to empower individuals, households and communities in rural areas to plan, implement and manage priority soc ial and economic investments, through a transparent and participatory approach. To achieve this objective the project would seek to:? build capacity of beneficiaries and local institutions to effectively identify and implement their development priorities? finance beneficiary-identified priority investments such as basic social services (e.g.: primary schools and community health posts) and small-scale infrastr uctures (e.g.: wells, latrines and secondary rural roads);? create economic and employment opportunities in targeted communities; and? establish a participatory and effective monitoring and evaluation system 3. Project Description The proposed Level II restructuring would maintain the PDO of the original Project to increase access to priority basic social and economic infrastructures and services in participating communities in at least two regions of Guinea-Bissau. The proposed restructuring would maintain the four existing components of the Project: Component 1 -Capacity-Building for Community Development - to build the capacity of communities to prepare their development plans; Component 2 - Community-Based Micro-Project to finance community-based micro projects which are prioritized in the communitydevelopment plans; Component 3 -Project Coordination and Monitoring and Evaluation to finance project management and coordination costs, including consultant services, technical advisory services such as technical studies and assessments, training and operating costs, including those related to the implementation of activities included in component 4; and Component 4 - Delivery of Education and Health Services to finances the salary of teachers and health workers. The restructuring will allocate additional resources to scale-up component 1 of the current project and will introduce a new component (Component 5: prevention of Ebola epidemic). The scaled-up Component 1 will be implemented by the existing Project Coordination Unit (PCU) and Component 5 will be implemented by WHO. The proposed Level II restructuring seeks to prevent the spread of the Ebola epidemic as it would put at risk the Project's capacity to reach its objectives. More specifically, the spread of Ebola to Guinea- Bissau would prohibit working with communities to increase their access to basic priority social and economic infrastructures and services thereby severely jeopardizing Project implementation. The proposed restructuring would introduce the following changes to the Project: Page 2 of 9
(i) allocate additional resources to Component 1 (Capacity-Building for Community Development) to finance an information campaign on Ebola in coordination with WHO; Public Disclosure Copy Public Disclosure Copy (ii) addition of a new component (Component 5: Prevention of the Ebola epidemic) to support WHO for the implementation of a health contingency plan to prevent the spread of the Ebola epidemic to Guinea-Bissau; (iii) change the end-target value of some indicators to reflect the fact that $750k would be taken away from Component 2 (Community-driven micro-projects) to finance the incremental activities ($250k) included in Component 1 and the new component (Component 5) for $500k; (iv) revise the institutional arrangement so that WHO would be responsible for the implementation of Component 5 following its own procurement procedures; (v) allow for the contracting of WHO on a single-source basis to implement Component 5; (vi) create a new category of expenditures to finance the contract with WHO to finance Component 5; (vii) change the disbursement arrangements to use the UN Advance Procedures for Component 5. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) Project location will be nationwide and will include both rural and urban areas in all nine regions of Guinea Bissau. Currently the project implements micro-projects in six regions in Guinea-Bissau. The salary payments under Component 4 cover teacher and health worker salaries in all nine regions. Similarly, the Ebola prevention efforts supported under components 1 and 5 will cover all nine regions of Guinea-Bissau. The safeguard arrangements for the activities scaled up under the restructuring (those which correspond to component 1) would remain identical to those used by the PCU for the implementation of the current Project: the Rural Community-Driven Development Project (P090712) and Rural Community-Driven Development Project Additional Financing (P146746), and will comply with the measures outlined in the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) prepared, cleared and disclosed in-country and at the WB InfoShop on 03-Mar-2009 and updated and re-disclosed in-country and at the InfoShop for the AF on 13-Mar-2014. The new Component 5: Prevention of Ebola Epidemic, will be implemented by the World Health Organization (WHO). 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Liba C. Strengerowski-Feldblyum (GENDR) Upulee Iresha Dasanayake (AFCF1) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Page 3 of 9
Environmental Assessment OP/ BP 4.01 Yes An ESMF was prepared and disclosed for component 2 (micro-projects supporting small scale basic social and economic infrastructures) of the original project and updated for the additional financing; the ESMF details the screening criteria and mechanisms to be used during micro-project appraisal and to ensure that appropriate management plans are prepared as needed. In addition there is a list of non-eligible micro-projects. Risk are typical for a rural CDD project and include soil degradation and erosion; decline in water quality; cutting of trees; use of pesticides and improper disposal of waste. The new component 5 which is added to the project as part of this restructuring is expected to generate medical waste, and the government has adopted WHO standards to address these impacts. large scale irreversible negative impacts are expected. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 Yes Environmental risks are the typical ones for a rural CDD project supporting small scale basic infrastructure and might include localized degradation of habitats; the ESMF includes a negative list, and micro-projects that would be in natural habitats or parks are ineligible. Forests OP/BP 4.36 Pest Management OP 4.09 Yes Micro-projects using non-eligible pesticides are on the negative list; the ESMF includes a screening tool and steps to ensure EMPs and appropriate mitigating measures are taken. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ Yes BP 4.11 Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 Yes For the event that micro-projects would trigger OP 4.12 a Resettlement Policy Framework has been prepared for the original project and was updated at the occasion of the Additional Financing. Page 4 of 9
Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 Public Disclosure Copy Public Disclosure Copy II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the Restructured project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: This restructuring would maintain the Project Development Objectives of the original Project (P090712 and the additional financing (P146746). It would scale up its activities under Components 1, and introduce a new component 5 to respond to the Ebola epidemic prevention efforts in Guinea-Bissau. With the exception of the new component 5, the environmental and social impacts of the activities under the proposed restructuring would be identical to those under the original Project and will be governed by the projects existing Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) that was prepared, reviewed, approved and disclosed incountry and at the Bank InfoShop prior to appraisal of the original project. The ESMF and RPF were updated for the project s additional financing (P146746) in 2013 and were re-disclosed incountry and at the Bank InfoShop in March 2014. The new component (Component 5: Prevention of the Ebola epidemic) in the amount of $500k would support WHO in the implementation of a health contingency plan to deal with the epidemic. The component would support: (a) communication activities to promote the adoption of good hygiene practices including hand washing by families to reduce the risk of spread of infectious diseases (Ebola, cholera, and others). This would target both (i) capacity building of key actors (health workers, media professionals, religious and traditional leaders, and community volunteers (ASC)); and (ii) awareness-raising for the population to adopt best practices of individual and collective health and disease prevention. The activities would complement those financed under Component 1. They would include orientation sessions for key actors, dissemination of messages by radio, production and dissemination of audiovisual material, visual communications (posters and brochures), and supervision and accompaniment of social mobilization and communication activities; (b) activities aiming to strengthen the capacity of health staff to respond effectively to a potential outbreak of EVD and to reduce mortality and morbidity attributed to this disease. As such, it would seek to equip health staff with sound knowledge for the clinical detection and early reporting of cases. Activities would include training of doctors, nurses, technicians in the National Hospital Simão Mendes (HNSM), training of technicians from CTEs (Centro de Tratamento da Ébola), training of health teams at 45 points of entry, and training of 2000 ASC, among others; (c) provision of tools for monitoring and management of clinical cases to health facilities. This would entail improving facilities and supplying equipment and other inputs for the detection and management of suspected cases at possible entry points. The new component (Component 5: Prevention of the Ebola epidemic) would be implemented by WHO and triggers OP 4.01 in that it would increase the production of Medical Wastes which Page 5 of 9
would be eliminated following WHO's Medical Waste Management Protocols which the Government has adopted as the standard applicable to this component. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: long term or indirect negative environmental or social impacts are anticipated to arise due to the scaling-up of activities under component 1. The environmental and social screening procedures that are in place to identify and ensure appropriate mitigation for the current project will apply to the proposed new activities (i.e. Ebola information campaign) under Component 1. The proposed new Component 5: Prevention of the Ebola epidemic will be implemented by the WHO following WHO protocols for handling of medical waste [see the 2014 WHO: Safe Management of Wastes from Health-Care Activities / edited by Y. Chartier et al. 2nd ed.] Implementation will be closely monitored to ensure that these are effective. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. During preparation of the original Project (P090712), the Government prepared an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) to govern the parent project. These instruments were updated for the additional financing (P146746) in 2013 and were re-disclosed both in-country and at the World Bank InfoShop in March 2014. The processes and procedures defined within the ESMF and the RPF are an integral part of the Project Implementation Manual (PIM). The PIM developed under the Rural Community-Driven Development Project ensures that micro-projects are fully compliant with safeguard policies and that mitigation measures are implemented during the micro-projects cycle. These measures include: (i) a checklist of possible environmental and social impacts; (ii) detailed Safeguards Procedures for inclusion in the technical specifications of contracts; and (iii) specific environmental and social mitigation measures. The specific environmental mitigation measures for each sub-project would be systematically integrated in all bidding documents, including the preparation of ESMPs and RAPs. The parent project s compliance with environmental and social safeguards policies has consistently been rated as Satisfactory. The PCU also has a fully dedicated safeguards specialist. In addition, recognizing the weaknesses of public institutions to ensure Project compliance with the environmental and social safeguards, PCU staff as well as central and local government representatives will continue to be sensitized and trained on safeguard policies. Furthermore, general sensitization of beneficiaries forms part of the formal project communication strategy. With regards to the proposed new Component 5: Prevention of the Ebola epidemic, WHO would be responsible for the implementation of this component. WHO is in a unique position to implement the activities proposed under this component. It is the agency responsible for the implementation of the health contingency plan to deal with the epidemic and it has the unique capacity to implement the necessary measures under emergencies. Consequently, WHO would be contracted on a sole source basis to implement the set of measures included in Component 5 aiming at preventing the spread of the epidemic to Guinea-Bissau. Page 6 of 9
5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Key stakeholders include: (i) beneficiary communities, which would continue to identify, prepare and implement the micro-projects; (ii) local authorities (regional and sectoral government, traditional authorities and civil society organizations), which would be participating in the identification and definition of the LDP; (iii) technical sectoral ministries implicated in the implementation and ongoing operation of the selected micro-projects, as appropriate, (iv) teachers and health workers, and (v) Hospitals, clinics, patients, care givers and health staff affected by the Ebola epidemic. Development partners (donors, NGOs, religious organizations, etc.) active at the local level are also considered important stakeholders. Preparation of the ESMF and RPF included consultation with representatives of each of these stakeholder groups and discussion of the safeguard processes and procedures. Particular attention was paid to identifying vulnerable groups and potentially affected people (based upon the expected micro-project types). As part of the preparation of the Additional Financing for the project in 2013, both the ESMF and the RPF prepared for the parent project were updated (following comprehensive public consultations) and disclosed in-country and in the World Bank InfoShop in March 2014. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 02-Mar-2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 03-Mar-2009 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Guinea-Bissau 13-Mar-2014 Comments: The ESMF was updated (to accommodate changes made to the project by an additional financing in 2013) and re-disclosed in-country and at the WB InfoShop in March 2014. Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process Date of receipt by the Bank 02-Mar-2009 Date of submission to InfoShop 03-Mar-2009 "In country" Disclosure Guinea-Bissau 13-Mar-2014 Comments: The RPF for the parent project was updated (to accommodate an AF in 2013) and redisclosed in-country and at the WB InfoShop in March 2014. Pest Management Plan Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? NA Date of receipt by the Bank Date of submission to InfoShop "In country" Disclosure Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the Page 7 of 9
respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management issues? Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] safeguards specialist or PM? Are PMP requirements included in project design?if yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to cultural Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] potential adverse impacts on cultural property? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/ Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Practice Manager review the plan? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Page 8 of 9
Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Approved By Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Practice Manager/ Manager: Philippe Auffret Name: Johanna van Tilburg (RSA) Name: Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Yes [ ] [ ] NA [ ] Date: 04-Sep-2014 Date: Page 9 of 9