{"records": { "D30672025": { "id": "30672025", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Congo, Democratic Republic of", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Child health,Health system performance,Nutrition and food security,Population and reproductive health,Injuries and non-communicable diseases", "docdt": "2018-12-06T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/412601544125241730/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/412601544125241730/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/412601544125241730/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555", "projectid": "P147555", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/412601544125241730/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES34663\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n HEALTH SYSTEM STRENGTHENING FOR BETTER MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH RESULTS PROJECT (PDSS)\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 18, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC DEMOCRATIC OF CONGO\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem\r\n Country Director: Jean-Christophe Carret\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Trina S. Haque\r\n Task Team Leader: Hadia Nazem Samaha\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP147555 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n18-Dec-2014 31-Dec-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Ministry of Health,Democratic Republic of\r\nRepublic Democratic of Congo\r\n Congo,Ministry Of Finances\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe proposed project development objective is to improve utilization and quality of maternal and child health services\r\nin targeted areas within the Recipients Territory.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-59980 31-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2017 13-Feb-2018 31-Dec-2021 120.00 60.00 63.14\r\nIDA-55720 18-Dec-2014 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 130.00 51.59 71.07\r\nIDA-D0210 18-Dec-2014 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 90.00 40.00 44.93\r\nTF-A6945 24-Jan-2018 14-Mar-2018 14-Aug-2018 31-Aug-2018 10.00 5.08 4.92\r\nTF-A5096 24-May-2017 24-May-2017 22-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019 3.50 3.49 .01\r\nTF-A4579 19-Apr-2017 19-Apr-2017 18-Aug-2017 31-Dec-2021 40.00 2.27 37.73\r\nTF-18375 20-Jan-2015 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 6.50 1.94 4.56\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nThe project was approved on December 18, 2014 and became effective on May 30, 2016 with a closing date of\r\nDecember 31, 2021. The project was designed to improve utilization and quality of maternal and child health services\r\nin targeted areas within the Recipient’s Territory. It is supported with two sources of funding: IDA and Trust Fund. The\r\nproposed restructuring is for Credit 59980-ZR.\r\n\r\nThe project continues to perform in a satisfactory manner. Progress towards achievement of the Project Development\r\nObjective (PDO) and overall Implementation Progress (IP) have been rated Satisfactory in the last Implementation\r\nStatus & Results Report (ISR). Preliminary results show an improvement in service utilization in health facilities where\r\nthe performance-based financing has been implemented. There is an increase in utilization of health service given the\r\nnegotiated lower fees and subsides provided. In addition, quality of care has also improved from an average score of\r\n20 percent at the beginning of the project to 65 percent, a full 13 points increase compare to the target of 52 percent.\r\nOut of the 5 PDO indicators, two have surpassed and good progress has been made for the remaining as well.\r\nFurthermore, projects components have been positively progressing in the 11 provinces targeted by the project.\r\n\r\nThe situation of the Emergency: On May 8, 2018, World Health Organization (WHO) was notified by the Ministry of\r\nHealth of the Democratic Republic of Congo of two lab-confirmed cases of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) occurring in\r\nBikoro health zone, Equateur province. Cases have also been found in nearby Iboko and Mbandaka. As of May 22,\r\n2018, 58 EVD cases have been reported of which 30 confirmed, 14 probable and 14 suspected cases. Twenty-seven\r\ndeaths have also been recorded giving a case fatality rate of 46.5 percent (27/58).\r\n\r\nMost of these cases have been in the remote Bikoro health zone, though over the past week 10 confirmed case have\r\nbeen identified in Mbandaka, a city of 1.2 million, which has implications for its spread as this makes the situation to\r\nbecome more serious and worrisome since the disease is now affecting an urban area in proximity to the Congo river,\r\nwhich has significant regional traffic across porous borders. Nine neighboring countries, including Congo-Brazzaville\r\nand Central African Republic, have been advised that they are at high risk of spread and are being supported with\r\nequipment and personnel.\r\n\r\nAs a result of the notification of the 9th Ebola Outbreak, the Government of DRC requested that the Contingency\r\nEmergency Response Component (CERC) be triggered. As such on May 25th 2018, the World Bank approved the\r\ntriggering of the CERC resulting in reallocating $80 million from Categories 1 and 2 to category 4 (CERC).\r\n\r\nWhile the 9th Ebola Outbreak was contained and declared over on July 24th, 2018, unfortunately on August 1st, the\r\nGovernment declared a 10th Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) outbreak in the health zone (ZS) of Mabalako, North-Kivu\r\nprovince, a strategic response plan was rapidly developed and implemented by the Ministry of Health, in collaboration\r\nwith all technical and financial partners.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAs of November 15, 2018, 344 cases have been reported (including 202 deaths) in ten Health zones: Malalako, Beni,\r\nOicha , Masereka, Butembo / Katwa, Kalunguta, Mandima, Tchomia, Komanda and Musienene. The risk of\r\ntransmission at the national level is very high because the affected provinces are connected to the rest of the country\r\nby air, river and road. The risk of transmission at the regional level is also high. Indeed, the epidemic affects border\r\nareas with Uganda and neighboring Rwanda, where there is a high cross-border migration flow for reasons of trade,\r\naccess to health care, family and humanitarian visits.\r\n\r\nThe overall security situation gradually deteriorated during the epidemic period with clashes between rebels and\r\nCongolese armed forces, street demonstrations by residents and the observation of so-called “dead cities”. The\r\nsecurity dimension, however, has not been comprehensively approached, thus impeding the implementation of\r\nresponse activities such as contact tracing, alert investigations, and secure burials. The pockets of community\r\nresistance often associated with urban delinquency continue to be reported, particularly in the Beni and Butembo SZs.\r\nAttacks on the staff responsible for the response have been noted several times. A regular evaluation of the causes of\r\nthese incidents is necessary in order to be able to provide targeted and specific control measures and improve\r\nrelations with the communities.\r\n\r\nImportant public health challenges are noted in the affected areas, characterized in particular by a low percentage of\r\nregular contacts, lost contacts, unsolved transmission chains, late arrival of patients to ETCs, low notification of\r\ncommunity alerts and deaths. These challenges are due to multiple causes, including those mentioned above. It should\r\nbe noted, however, the low commitment of traditional healers who are passing many confirmed cases of EVD.\r\n\r\nThe Ebola outbreak in the DRC has several characteristics that areof particular concern: the risk of more rapid spread\r\ngiven that Ebola has now spread to an urban area; that there are several outbreaks in remote and hard to reach areas;\r\nthat health care staff have been infected, which may be a risk for further amplification. There are huge logistical\r\nchallenges given the poor infrastructure and remote location of most cases currently reported; these factors affect\r\nsurveillance, case detection and confirmation, contact tracing, and access to vaccines and therapeutics.\r\n\r\nThe proposed restructuring is to reallocate fund from Component 1 (Cat. 1) and Components 2 and 3 (Cat. 2) to the\r\nContingent Emergency Response Component (CERC, Component 4/category 4) in the amount of SDR 57.2 million\r\n(US$80 million equivalent) to finance activities in the areas of: (a) coordinating the response; (b) enhanced\r\nsurveillance of the epidemic; (c) laboratory confirmation of the infection; (d) case management and follow-up of\r\ncontacts; (e) control and prevention of infection, (f) funerals organized in safety and dignity; (g) immunization; (h)\r\nsocial mobilization and community involvement, (i) logistics (j) risk communication, (k) immunization, (l) commitment\r\nof technical and financial partners; (m) research; and (n) resource mobilization.\r\n\r\nThere is no outstanding audit report and the scope of activities proposed under the CERC would be fully in line with\r\nthe project design.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Current\r\n Current Actuals + Proposed Disbursement %\r\nLn/Cr/TF Expenditure\r\n Allocation Committed Allocation (Type Total)\r\n Category\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\n\r\n IDA-59980- PBF GRANT\r\n 43,500,000.00 11,489,328.53 11,500,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n 001 PART 1 AND 2\r\n Currency: G/NCS/CS/OC/T\r\n XDR R/WKSHOP 21,000,000.00 0.00 5,000,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n PART 1, 2\r\n G/NCS/CS/OC/T\r\n R/WKSHOP 1,900,000.00 1,192,685.23 1,900,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n PART 3\r\n RETIREMENT\r\n BENEFITS PART 11,000,000.00 0.00 1,800,000.00 100.00 100\r\n 3(c)(i)\r\n GD, N/CS,OC,\r\n TR, WKSHOP PT 11,000,000.00 0.00 11,000,000.00 100.00 100\r\n 4(a)\r\n EMERGENCY\r\n EXPENDITURES 0.00 0.00 57,200,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n PART 4(b)\r\n Total 88,400,000.00 12,682,013.76 88,400,000.00\r\n\f" }, "D30567078": { "id": "30567078", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Congo, Democratic Republic of", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Child health,Health system performance,Nutrition and food security,Population and reproductive health,Injuries and non-communicable diseases", "docdt": "2018-10-31T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/359761541009330561/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/359761541009330561/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/359761541009330561/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555", "projectid": "P147555", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/359761541009330561/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Health-System-Strengthening-for-Better-Maternal-and-Child-Health-Results-Project-PDSS-P147555", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES30061\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n HEALTH SYSTEM STRENGTHENING FOR BETTER MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH RESULTS PROJECT (PDSS)\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 18, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n MINISTRY OF HEALTH\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Ahmadou Moustapha Ndiaye\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Trina S. Haque\r\n Task Team Leader: Hadia Nazem Samaha\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP147555 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n18-Dec-2014 31-Dec-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Ministry of Health,Democratic Republic of\r\nMinistry of Health\r\n Congo,Ministry Of Finances\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe proposed project development objective is to improve utilization and quality of maternal and child health services\r\nin targeted areas within the Recipients Territory.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-59980 31-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2017 13-Feb-2018 31-Dec-2021 120.00 59.44 63.52\r\nIDA-55720 18-Dec-2014 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 130.00 52.73 70.02\r\nIDA-D0210 18-Dec-2014 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 90.00 40.93 43.93\r\nTF-A6945 24-Jan-2018 14-Mar-2018 14-Aug-2018 31-Aug-2018 10.00 4.48 5.52\r\nTF-A5096 24-May-2017 24-May-2017 22-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019 3.50 3.39 .11\r\nTF-A4579 19-Apr-2017 19-Apr-2017 18-Aug-2017 31-Dec-2021 40.00 2.27 37.73\r\nTF-18375 20-Jan-2015 20-Jan-2015 30-May-2016 31-Dec-2021 6.50 2.04 4.46\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nThe project has been performing in a satisfactory manner for project implementation, PDO achievement and\r\nmonitoring and evaluation. In terms of implementation progress, the overall progress over the last twelve months has\r\nbeen rated satisfactory; all performance-based financing (PBF) contracts between the purchasing agencies in\r\nEquateur, Bandundu, and Maniema and the health facilities in these provinces have been signed (more than 2,873\r\ncontracts). A number of activities have been carried out, including: a) the quality baseline survey at the level of all the\r\nhealth facilities being contracted; b) a business plan to determine how the investment funds will be used to improve\r\nquality; c) the investment funds as a first PBF payment have been released from the health facility bank accounts to\r\nmore than 1,500 health facilities; d) the investment case for the GFF has been presented to the national health\r\ncommittee and adopted; e) the health financing strategy has been finalized and is awaiting validation by the minister\r\nof health; and f) the supply chain strategy has been validated by the minister of health in September 2017.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, progress on project components has been satisfactory to date as well. PBF was rolled out in several\r\nprovinces: first in Bandundu (February-March 2017), followed by Maniema (April-June 2017), Equateur (May-June\r\n2017) and then Kantaga (August-September 2017). As of October 2017, more than 2,873 contracts have been signed\r\nand essential health services are being provided to a larger population. Looking at the initial results of PBF, the project\r\nseems not to only have improved health service coverage but also advanced the governance and health financing\r\nsystem by strengthening transparency and reporting at all levels of the system. It has also facilitated the\r\nautonomation of health facilities. To ensure sustainability, the project invested in institution strengthening by setting\r\nup purchasing agencies (11 agencies) as part of the national system. The Etablissements d’Utilité Publique are\r\npurchasing agencies that oversee the contracting mechanisms between local authorities and health providers at the\r\nprovincial level and play a role in ensuring that health facilities are providing quality maternal and child health services\r\nto the population. The project also invested in people by training more than 6,000 providers by developing tools that\r\nare used by all parties (partners and government) in order to ensure efficiency, alignment, and harmonization among\r\nthe stakeholders.\r\n\r\nThe Additional Financing was approved March 31, 2017 and was discussed by the Parliament and Senate at the end of\r\nOctober 2017. Effectiveness is expected by end of November 2017. The GFF Trust fund was declared effective on\r\nAugust 18, 2017 and is starting to disburse.\r\n\r\nAs a result of the XDR and USD exchange rate fluctuations, as well as the amounts originally allocated to component 2\r\nfor the UNICEF contracts and yellow fever management, it is proposed to reallocate funds under IDA 5572-ZR to: (i)\r\nincrease the available amount under category 2 to meet the client’s revised forecasts; (ii) cancel the unused amount\r\nunder category 5; and (iii) adjust the amount under category 4 (PPA refinancing) to reflect the actual disbursed\r\namount against this category.\r\n\r\nThe government request didn’t consider the adjustments to be completed under category 4 and 5 since the PPA has\r\nbeen ref inanced and is actually closed. Therefore we’ve revised the table to reflect these changes as well.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Strengthening for Better Maternal and Child Health Results Project (PDSS) (P147555)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Current\r\n Current Actuals + Proposed Disbursement %\r\nLn/Cr/TF Expenditure\r\n Allocation Committed Allocation (Type Total)\r\n Category\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\n\r\n IDA-55720- PBF GRANT\r\n 65,446,154.00 17,135,297.91 65,446,154.00 60.00 60\r\n 001 PART 1 AND 2\r\n Currency: GD, N/CS, OP\r\n XDR COST, TR, 18,248,846.00 11,643,093.51 18,248,846.00 100.00 100\r\n WORKSHOP\r\n PPF\r\n 4,305,000.00 4,304,678.43 4,305,000.00\r\n REFINANCING\r\n PPF\r\n REFINANCING 0.00 0.00 0.00\r\n SUPPLEMENTAL\r\n Total 88,000,000.00 33,083,069.85 88,000,000.00\r\n\f" }, "D30444810": { "id": "30444810", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Health system performance,Nutrition and food security,Population and reproductive health", "docdt": "2018-09-24T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/186731537815021988/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/186731537815021988/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/186731537815021988/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472", "projectid": "P129472", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/186731537815021988/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES30619\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n SENEGAL HEALTH & NUTRITION FINANCING\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 11, 2013\r\n TO\r\n\r\n GOVERNMENT OF SENEGAL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Louise J. Cord\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Gaston Sorgho\r\n Task Team Leader: Maud Juquois\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nACMU Universal Health Insurance Agency (Agence pour la Couverture Maladie Universelle)\r\n\r\nANSD National Statistics and Demography Agency (Agence Nationale de Statistiques et Démographie\r\n\r\nCBHI Community-Based Health Insurance\r\nCLM Unit Against Malnutrition (Cellule de Lutte contre la Malnutrition)\r\nCMU Universal Health Insurance (Couverture Maladie Universelle)\r\nDAGE Fiduciary Unit MoH (Direction de l’Aménagement et de la Gestion des Equipements)\r\nDSME Maternal and Child Health unit at MoH (Direction de la Santé de la mère et de lenfant)\r\nGFF Global Financing Facility\r\nHNFP Health and Nutrition Financing Project\r\nHR Human Resources\r\nHRBF Health Results-Based Financing\r\nHRITF Health Results and Innovation Trust Fund\r\nIC Investment Case\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nISR Interim Status Report\r\nIVAs Independent Verification Agencies\r\nM&E Monitoring and Evaluation\r\nMDTF Multi-Donors Trust Fund\r\nMoHSA Ministry of Health and Social Action\r\nMTR Mid-Term Review\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPNBSF National Family Safety Net Program (Programme National de Bourses de Sécurité Familiale)\r\n\r\nPNFBR National Results-Based Financing Program (Programme National du Financement Basé sur les\r\n Résultats)\r\nRBF Results-Based Financing\r\nRMNCAH+N Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child and Adolescent Health and Nutrition\r\nTF Trust Fund\r\nUHC Universal Health Coverage\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP129472 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nNot Required (C) Not Required (C)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n11-Dec-2013 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nGovernment of Senegal Ministry of Health and Prevention\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe objective of the project is to increase utilization and quality of maternal, neonatal and child health and nutritional\r\nservices, especially among the poorest households in Targeted Areas in the Recipients territory.\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-53240 11-Dec-2013 28-Mar-2014 14-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 20.00 9.72 9.07\r\nTF-A0565 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 31-Dec-2016 .83 .78 .04\r\nTF-16618 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 31-Mar-2016 .19 .19 0\r\nTF-15872 28-Mar-2014 28-Mar-2014 29-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 20.00 5.15 14.85\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n Policy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\n Does this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\n No\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n I. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\nA. Introduction\r\n\r\nThe Health and Nutrition Financing Project (HNFP) has been under implementation for almost four years (effective since\r\nMay 2014) and its Project Development Objective is “to increase utilization and quality of maternal, neonatal and child\r\nhealth and nutritional services, especially among the poorest households in targeted areas of Senegal.” The project targets\r\nsix of the most underserved regions in Senegal: Kaffrine, Kolda, Tambacounda, Kedougou, Sedhiou and Ziguinchor.\r\n\r\nThrough three components, the project is supporting several aspects of the Senegal Universal Health Coverage (UHC)\r\nstrategy:\r\n\r\n  Component 1. Strengthening the supply-side of health system through Results-Based Financing for Health and\r\n Nutrition Services (US$$20. 8 million). This component supports the improvement of health and nutrition service\r\n delivery in Senegal in six selected regions, using a Results-Based Financing (RBF) mechanism.\r\n\r\n  Component 2. Demand side interventions for improving accessibility of health care services (US$14 million). This\r\n component supports several mechanisms whose main purpose is to subsidize demand for healthcare and nutrition\r\n services. These mechanisms are: (i) the Universal Health Insurance Scheme (i.e. Couverture Maladie Universelle\r\n or CMU); (ii) the national program for improving demand for nutrition services; and (iii) the maternal health\r\n vouchers.\r\n\r\n  Component 3. Strengthening capacities for better monitoring and evaluation, supervision, and Project\r\n Implementation (US$6 million). This component supports activities to increase the capacity of and reliance on\r\n national health systems. It is implemented nationwide and includes among others: capacity building for better\r\n regulation of the hospital sector, capacity building for better M&E of the overall health system (support to the\r\n National Statistical Agency, i.e. ANSD, for its “Senegal continuous survey”), and capacity building for better general\r\n and financial management within the health system.\r\n\r\nThe HNFP is funded with three sources: (i) an IDA credit (US$20 million equivalent); (ii) an MDTF TF (Health Results and\r\nInnovation Trust Fund-HRITF, US$20 million); and (iii) the HRBF TF (Health Results Based Financing-USAID, initially US$2.3\r\nmillion, but only the first tranche of US$ 0.8 million was disbursed before closing of the Grant in December 2016). The\r\nHNFP was restructured on April 2016 to strengthen institutional capacity and implementation arrangements as well as to\r\nincrease disbursement and the ultimate impact of the Project (changes included mainly: revision of Component 3\r\ndescription to reflect activities related to institutional strengthening for Ebola preparedness; Creation of two sub-accounts\r\nto improve project implementation for the CLM (Cellule de Lutte contre la Malnutrition) and for ANSD (Agence Nationale\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\nde Statistiques et Démographie); and change in disbursement arrangements (creation of specific disbursement categories\r\nfor the HRBF TF funded through a USAID grant) in order to facilitate its disbursements.\r\n\r\nB. Overall implementation progress and progress towards PDO\r\n\r\nOverall Implementation Progress remains rated as Moderately Unsatisfactorily (ISR January 2018) despite the significant\r\nprogress made since July 2017; This is because the performance of the project still needs to be strengthened, especially\r\nunder component 1 (Results-Based Financing), and recent improvement in financial management, facilitating\r\nimplementation of Project ‘s interventions, needs to continue. Disbursements have increased from 25% (32% IDA and 18%\r\nTF) in June 2017 to 40% (52% IDA and 29% TF) in April 2018.\r\n\r\nImplementation of Components 2 (Demand side interventions for improving accessibility of health care services) and 3\r\n(Strengthening capacities for better monitoring and evaluation, supervision, and Project Implementation) is ongoing, as\r\nplanned, but there were some initial delays and some fiduciary constraints. However, the main delays which have affected\r\nproject implementation are related to two critical issues which are currently being addressed:\r\n\r\n- Implementation of the supply-side Results-Based Financing intervention (Component 1). The HNFP funds were\r\nto continue financing the RBF approach in the 2 pilot regions (Kolda and Kaffrine, RBF pilot funded in 2012 and 2013 by\r\nUSAID) and extend it to four of the most vulnerable regions: Tambacounda, Sédhiou, Kédougou and Ziguinchor (out of the\r\n14 regions of Senegal), building on the existing scheme. One of the key requirements for the RBF approach to work was\r\nthe recruitment of two Independent Verification Agencies (IVAs). The procurement process to recruit the IVAs was\r\nsignificantly delayed, with contracts finally signed only in January 2016; thus the first verification happened in May 2016\r\nand the first payments in October 2016. Also, the Mid-Term review of the Project (February and May 2017) highlighted\r\nseveral issues with the implementation of the RBF approach, including: lack of national capacities for RBF and reactivity\r\nof the National RBF Program unit in the Ministry of Health (PNFBR) to improve the approach; design issues that were still\r\nnot addressed by the MoH and significant delays. Thus, in June 2017, a 3-months accelerated roadmap for RBF was agreed\r\nbetween the WB team and the Ministry of Health, with a focus on making changes in the technical and operational RBF\r\napproach in order to strengthen its impact, such as paying per number of services instead of percentage coverage,\r\nclarifying the functions between regulation, purchasing, verification. This included the revision of the RBF Manual and\r\ncapacity strengthening of staff of the National RBF program. The RBF model in Senegal needed to be revised to achieve\r\nthe expected results and strengthen the health system, accordingly with global evidence and good practices. However,\r\nthe new approach still needs to be implemented and to demonstrate results, with a strong leadership from the Ministry\r\nof Health.\r\n\r\n- Financial management and disbursements. There is no outstanding audit report. After almost four years of\r\nimplementation, disbursements are still low, reflecting implementation delays and not responding to the needs of the\r\nproject main stakeholders (especially Cellule de Lutte contre la Malnutrition-CLM, Agence pour la Couverture Maladie\r\nUniverselle-ACMU, Agence Nationale de Statistique Demographique-ANSD …). The reasons for the delays include\r\nineffective cash flow and fiduciary issues. Financial aspects of the project are managed by the DAGE (fiduciary unit of MoH)\r\nand capacities were insufficient and the workload significant. Thus, during the second semester of 2017, several measures\r\nwere taken to address these issues: additional staff within the project have been recruited to support the financial\r\nmanagement workload, a training on disbursements has been conducted by colleagues from the disbursements unit, the\r\nceiling of the Designated Account has been increased, and the Bank team is working closely with the Project coordination\r\nto ensure smoother disbursements.\r\n\r\nThese two issues have impacted progress in achieving the PDO as some of the indicators of the Results Framework are\r\nlinked to the RBF (such as Proportion of pregnant women having 4 antenatal care visits and assisted deliveries). Good\r\n\r\n v\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\nprogress on other indicators (New acceptors of modern contraceptive method and severe malnourished detected children\r\nwho are referred and received at the health center for all necessary visits) are due to interventions implemented by\r\nthe DSME (Direction de la Santé de la mère et de lenfant) and CLM (Cellule de Lutte contre la Malnutrition), funded also\r\nthrough the Project.\r\n\r\nC. Rationale for restructuring\r\n\r\nConsidering the different issues related to the overall implementation progress and delays at the start of the Project, the\r\nobjective of this restructuring is to ensure achievement of the Project Development Objective by: (i) reallocating funds\r\nbetween components and adding new interventions (supporting directly the PDO), (ii) revising the Results Framework, (iii)\r\nchanging disbursements categories (due to the closing of the HRBF TF); and (iv) extending the Closing Date by one year to\r\nenable the completion of project activities. Performance of the Project following this restructuring is also crucial for the\r\napproval of a new IDA-GFF TF operation in the health sector in Senegal.\r\n\r\nThus, as part of reallocation between components and addition of new interventions, this restructuring is integrating the\r\nresults of the significant analytical work conducted by the Government of Senegal, with support from the World Bank, the\r\nGlobal Financing Facility (GFF) Secretariat and other partners, with the finalization of the Reproductive, Maternal,\r\nNewborn, Child and Adolescent Health and Nutrition (RMNCAH+N) Investment Case (IC). Based on the bottleneck\r\nanalysis conducted by the GFF platform, the Investment Case focuses on the following five key priority areas: 1) Provision\r\nof a high-impact RMNCAH package; 2) Enhanced financial access to and socio-cultural acceptability of the RMNCAH\r\npackage through demand side financing; 3) Improve adolescent health through multi-sectoral approaches; 4)\r\nStrengthening supply-side of the health system by scaling up high-impact human resource and supply chain interventions\r\nto address low RMNCAH service coverage; and 5) Strengthening health system governance. The Senegal IC targets five\r\npriority regions based on a composite index comprised of the following indicators: poverty rate, neonatal mortality, under\r\nfive mortality, assisted delivery, contraceptive prevalence, proportion of adolescents with active sexual life and ANC\r\ncoverage. The regions in the South, e.g., Sedhiou, Kolda, Tambacounda, Kedougou and Kaffrine have the lowest index (five\r\nof the six regions targeted by the Health and Nutrition Financing Project). Consequently, new interventions included\r\nthrough this restructuring derive from the prioritized and evidence-based GFF Investment Case, especially to complement\r\nthe RBF intervention to improve the supply-side of health system (pharmaceutical, human resources for health, maternal\r\nhealth, priority 3 of the GFF IC).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\nThe World Bank received a request from the Government of Senegal on March 28th, 2018 to restructure the Project on\r\nthe five following aspects:\r\n\r\n1- Reallocation of funds between components and addition of new activities;\r\n2- Modification of the results framework;\r\n3- Changes in the disbursements categories;\r\n4- Change in disbursements estimates; and\r\n\r\n\r\n vi\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n5- Extension of closing date from June 29, 2018 to June 28, 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n1- Reallocation of funds between components and addition of new activities\r\n\r\n\r\nThe proposed reallocation of funds between components is based on the following principle: transfer of funds to\r\ncomponents/interventions with demonstrated absorption capacity. In addition, a portion of the funding of the RBF\r\ncomponent 1 (MDTF TF), which has made little disbursement, will be reallocated to priority interventions identified in the\r\nGFF Investment Case (US$ 5.1 million).\r\n\r\nComponent 1. Strengthening the supply-side of health system through Results-Based Financing for Health and Nutrition\r\nServices\r\n\r\nConsidering delays and issues to implement the RBF approach, some funds (US$ 5.1 million1) will be reallocated from this\r\ncomponent to components two and three. With allocated amounts for sub components 1.1 and 1.2, the revised RBF\r\napproach will be implemented in 2018 (RBF contracts until end of December 2018) in the same targeted regions. A new\r\nsub-component (US$ 1 million) has been added to complementarily support the strengthening of service delivery: sub-\r\ncomponent 1.3 “Improving quality of health services (drugs, HR, maternal and child health)”. This sub-component will\r\nprovide funding for interventions of the GFF Investment Case related to Priority 4 (“Strengthening the Pillars of RMNACH\r\nsupply-side) with quality human resources, availability of drugs and quality service delivery). Activities to be funded are\r\nthe following: transition to scale of the pilot Itinerant Midwives strategy, support for the revision of the Human Resources\r\nfor Health National Strategy, support mechanisms for quality control of drugs, procurement of obstetrical and maternal\r\nhealth equipment, RMNACH training of health workers and community health workers, and strengthening the\r\ngeographical accessibility of essential medicines and supply-chain through supporting the transition of Yeksina Strategy\r\nto the National Pharmaceutical Agency (from the Informed-Pushed Model project support information system and\r\ncontracting of private operators for last mile delivery).\r\n\r\nComponent 2. Demand side interventions for improving accessibility of health care services\r\n\r\nAmount allocated to component 2 will increase from US$ 14 million to US$15.6 million.\r\n\r\nSubcomponent 2.1. Although the amount (US$ 7 million) is not changing, activities to be financed are slightly updated\r\nfrom what was originally planned, taken into account the evolution of the Universal Health Insurance in Senegal and the\r\nGFF investment case. Activities to be funded are still related to establishing and implementing the universal health\r\ninsurance system (communication, technical assistance, comprehensive and integrated information system, training, etc..)\r\nbut also supporting innovative strategies to strengthen the efficiency of the system and its equity. The ACMU will set up\r\npilot interventions to better address the management of free health care for children under 5 and support enrollment of\r\nbeneficiaries of the National Family Safety Net Program (Programme National de Bourses de Sécurité Familiale- PNBSF)\r\nthrough the Community-Based Health Insurance (CBHI) system. Amounts allocated for these pilot interventions and\r\ntransfer of funds to CBHIs is US$500,000. A CBHI Manual describing the procedures for the transfer of funds from the\r\nProject to the CBHIs and modalities of control is being finalized by the ACMU. Also, the activity related to the scale-up of\r\nthe National Unified Registry, through the provision of technical assistance, training and equipment to MoH, is removed\r\nunder this sub-component: indeed, this activity was proposed during preparation of the project, but soon after\r\n\r\n\r\n1 An additional US $ 1.5 million is decreased from this component due to the decreased amount from USAID grand: indeed, out of\r\nthe US$2.3 million initially planned from this Grant, only the first tranche (US$ 0.8 million) was disbursed at closing of the HRBF TF\r\n(after extension).\r\n\r\n vii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\neffectiveness, the responsibility to carry out the scale-up of the National Unified Registry was given to another institution\r\nand this activity is now supported by a Social Protection Project supported by the Bank.\r\n\r\nSub-component 2.2. Interventions of the CLM (community nutrition) remain the same but with an increased amount (from\r\nUS$5 to US$6.3 million) to continue the interventions during the one year extension of the Project. Community nutrition\r\ninterventions are key to achieve the overall Senegal objective to decrease stunting and the CLM has strong implementation\r\ncapacities (two-third of their envelope already disbursed).\r\n\r\nNo change has been introduced to sub-component 2.3 related to demand-side RBF (maternal health vouchers) to improve\r\naccess for the poorest pregnant women to antenatal care and assisted deliveries.\r\n\r\nFinally, a sub-component 2.4 related to promoting adolescent health (one of the five priorities of the GFF Investment Case)\r\nis being added (US$ 300,000). Activities under this new sub-component include behavioral change interventions,\r\ncommunication strategies to support demand for health services, especially reproductive health services for adolescent.\r\n\r\nComponent 3. Strengthening capacities for better monitoring and evaluation, supervision, and Project Implementation\r\n\r\n\r\nThe amount allocated to this component will increase from US$ 6 million to US$ 9.5 million.\r\n\r\nConsidering implementation delays different activities of the Hospital Directorate (component 3.1 about regulation of the\r\nhospital sector), the amount has been decreased from US$3 million to US$1.2 million). Indeed, with delays to launch and\r\nfinalized the Hospital Information System feasibility study, procurement of IT equipment and some trainings will not be\r\nimplemented.\r\n\r\nNo change has been introduced to sub-component 2.3 related to capacity building for monitoring and evaluation of the\r\noverall health system (surveys conducted by the ANSD).\r\n\r\nAmount under sub-component 3.3 “ Capacity building for better general and financial management within the health\r\nsystem” is being increased from US$1 million to US$5.5 million to finance major procurement for equipment of the\r\ndifferent implementing entities, and also the different capacity building interventions for maternal health directorate,\r\nplanning directorate and it also include costs of the coordination of the Project (which has increased due to the need to\r\nstrengthen the fiduciary capacities).\r\n\r\nSub-component 3.4 “Support to health financing reforms” is being introduced reflecting the adoption in June 2017 of the\r\nHealth Financing Strategy, also as part of the GFF process in Senegal. Under this new sub-component, studies, training\r\nand dissemination will be funded (such as on domestic resources mobilization, strategic purchasing mechanisms, the role\r\nof public-private partnership, etc.).\r\n\r\nFinally, it should be noted that the total amount of the project is now US$ 40.8 million while at approval it was US$ 42.3\r\nmillion. Indeed, initially the HRBF TF (USAID funded) was US$ 2.3 million with two tranches, the first one of US$ 828,000.\r\nThe Grant Agreement for this TF was signed only in January 2016 and by the closing of the Grant (December 2016), only\r\nthe first tranche was disbursed and it was not possible for USAID to extend it further. Delays to disburse this TF were due\r\nto the implementation delays of the RBF program as this TF was contributed to finance this component of the Project.\r\n\r\nThe table below summarizes the reallocations between components and the new sub-components:\r\n\r\n Table 1: Reallocation between components in $US million\r\n\r\n\r\n viii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n Initial Restructured\r\n Components\r\n allocation allocation\r\n\r\n Component 1: Result-Based Financing for health and nutrition services and capacity building 22.3 15.7\r\n\r\n 1.1. Financing of Result Based Financing 14.4 9.2\r\n 1.2 : Building capacities for RBF extension 7.9 5.5\r\n 1.3. Improving quality of health services (drugs, HR, maternal and child health) – (new) 1\r\n Component 2: Improvement of accessibility to maternal, nutrition, and children health\r\n 14 15.6\r\n services\r\n 2.1 Support to the implementation of the Universal Health Insurance\r\n 7 7\r\n scheme\r\n 2.2 Strengthening demand for nutrition services and behavior change 5 6.3\r\n 2.3 Setting up demand-side RBF (i.e. maternal health vouchers) to improve access to health care 2 2\r\n 2.4 Adolescent health - (new) 0.3\r\n Component 3: Institutional strengthening and project implementation 6 9.5\r\n 3.1 Capacity building for better regulation of the hospital sector 3 1.2\r\n 3.2 Capacity building for better M&E of the overall health system 2 2\r\n 3.3 Capacity building for better general and financial management within the health system 1 5.5\r\n 3.4 Support to health financing reforms - (new) 0.8\r\n TOTAL 42.3 40.8\r\nNB: Total amount of the Project decreased from US $42.3 to US $ 40.8 million because the allocation from the HRBF TF\r\nwas finally US$ 0.8 million and not US $ 2.3 million at closing in December 2016 of this TF (as detailed in the first section\r\nof this restructuring paper0.\r\n\r\n2- Modification of the Results Framework\r\n\r\nThe PDO remains the same and the Results Framework is modified to adjust indicators to available information, modify\r\ntargets to reflect the one-year extension to June 2019, and take into account the new activities funded by the Project.\r\nThe detailed changes are outlined in the table below.\r\n\r\n PDO INDICATORS\r\nIndicator Proposed changes\r\n1. Number of project beneficiaries identified as poor The definition of the indicator was clarified and changed from a\r\n percentage to a cumulative value\r\n2. New acceptors of modern contraceptive method No change in the indicator definition.\r\n As the target was achieved, a new higher target was identified for 2019\r\n3. Births (deliveries) attended by skilled health No Change.\r\npersonnel (number) The initial end target was maintained for 2019\r\n4. Percentage of pregnant women having 4 No change in the indicator definition.\r\nantenatal care visits (at standard quality) A new lower target was identified for 2019. The baseline identified in\r\n the PAD (50%) was incorrect\r\n5. Severely malnourished detected children who are The definition of the indicator was changed to reflect available data: the\r\nreferred the health center for all necessary visits percentage is replaced by a cumulative number.\r\n A new lower target was identified for 2019\r\n\r\n\r\n ix\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n6. Index of quality of health care (percentage) No change in the indicator definition.\r\n As the target was achieved, a new higher target was identified for 2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n INTERMEDIATE OUTCOME INDICATORS\r\nIndicator Changes\r\n1. Number of health facilities that have an RBF No change in the definition of the indicator.\r\ncontract A new lower target was identified for 2019\r\n2. Percentage of facilities with verified results and The definition was clarified to include more stringent conditions from\r\nhaving received their payments (%) the manual and as a result a new lower target was identified for 2019\r\n3. Pregnant women receiving antenatal care during No change.\r\na visit to a health provider (cumulative number) The initial end target was maintained for 2019\r\nDirect project beneficiaries (number), The indicator was deleted as it is not a core indicator anymore and is\r\nof which female (percentage) (IDA redundant with the new corporate results indicator for health\r\nCore Indicator)\r\n4. People who have received essential health, The definition of the indicator was updated and replaced by the new\r\nnutrition, and population (HNP) services (Corporate corporate indicator definition\r\nindicator)\r\n4. a. People who have received essential health, New indicator, included as part of the definition of the corporate results\r\nnutrition, and population (HNP) services - Female indicator\r\n(RMS requirement)\r\n No change.\r\n4.b. Number of children immunized\r\n The initial end target was maintained for 2019\r\n4. c. Number of women and children who have The definition was clarified to reflect available data.\r\nreceived basic nutrition services New higher targets were identified for 2019\r\n5. Children aged 0-23 months who attended at least The definition of the indicator was clarified to reflect available data. The\r\none growth monitoring and promotion service indicator was changed from a percentage to a cumulative number.\r\nduring the 3 precedent months New higher targets identified for 2019\r\n The definition was revised to reflect more reliable data on the number\r\n6. Number of maternal health vouchers distributed of allocations distributed.\r\n New lower targets identified for 2019\r\n7. Percentage of eligible women that have received No change in the definition of the indicator.\r\na maternal health financial incentive New lower targets were identified for 2019\r\n8. Health personnel receiving training (number) No Change\r\n\r\n9. Number of hospitals where the cost accounting No Change\r\nsystem has been implemented\r\n10. One continuous Demographic and Health Survey No change\r\n(DHS) report and one health Service Delivery report\r\nare produced every year\r\n11. Number of people effectively targeted by the New indicator included to reflect additional funding for the CMU’s\r\ncommunication activities of the CMU communication activities\r\n12. Number of operational SIGICMU modules New indicator included to reflect additional funding for the CMU’s\r\n Information system\r\n\r\n3- Changes in the expenditure categories\r\n\r\nChanges in the expenditure categories are due to the three following reasons:\r\n\r\n x\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n - Follow the reallocation of funds between interventions currently implemented and as part of this restructuring\r\n (for example, additional funding for nutrition interventions under component 2);\r\n\r\n - The HRBF TF was financing the RBF interventions in two regions (Kolda and Kaffrine), while the MDTF TF is\r\n financing them in the four other regions targeted by the Project (as part of the first restructuring of the Project in\r\n May 2016). Due to the closing of the HRBF TF (USAID Grant), it is needed need to reintegrate interventions funded\r\n with this TF (focusing on interventions under component 1 for Kaffrine and Kolda regions) into the other\r\n financings. Thus, under MDTF Grant (and as the category was before the first restructuring in May 2016), RBF\r\n Grants will be 100% financed for the six targeted regions of the Project;\r\n\r\n - Add a specific expenditure category for the intervention related to subsidies for enrollment of the poorest under\r\n five children (as a small scaled pilot) in community-based health insurances.\r\n\r\nThe table below summarizes these changes. The closed categories are marked in grey:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n xi\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n TABLE 2: PROPOSED DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES WITH RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n IDA CREDIT TF MDTF Comments\r\n (in SDR) (in USD) Changes\r\n %\r\n Amount of Amount of\r\n Expenditures % Expenditures\r\n Category the Grant the Grant\r\n to be to be Financed\r\n Allocated Allocated\r\n Financed\r\nCat 1 IDA/Cat 7 MTDF Total amount increased by\r\nNutrition Enhancement adding from the TF MDTF\r\n 3,300,000 70% 1,300,000 30%\r\nGrants under Part B.2 of 1.3 million\r\nthe Project\r\nCat 2 MDTF No change\r\nMaternal Health\r\n 2,000,000 100%\r\nVouchers under Part B.3\r\nof the Project\r\nCat 4 IDA/ Cat 8 MDTF New category\r\nGoods, non-consulting Adding A.3 and B.4 as new\r\nservices, and consultants sub-components of the\r\nservices Training, and 4,805,900 63% 4,894,788 37% Project, as well as\r\nOperating Costs for Parts separation B1 in a and b.\r\nA.2, A.3, B.l a, B4 and C of Changes in amounts\r\nthe Project\r\n New category, removing the\r\nCat 6 MDTF\r\n regional specificities (a and\r\nRBF Grants under Part 6,943,041 100%\r\n b with the USAID TF)\r\nA.1 of the Project\r\n Reduced amount\r\nCat 9 MDTF Community New category for transfers\r\nBased health insurance to CBHIs (part B1b of the\r\n 1,000,000 100%\r\ngrants under part B1b of Project)\r\nthe Project\r\nCat 1 MDTF Category froze with 1st\r\nRBF Grants under Part 125,955 86% restructuring\r\nA.1 of the Project\r\nCat 2 IDA/Cat 3 MTDF Category froze with 1st\r\nGoods, non-consulting restructuring\r\nservices, and consultants’\r\nservices, Training and 857,500 72% 381,152 27%\r\nOperating Costs for Parts\r\nA.2, B.1 and C of the\r\nProject\r\nCat 3 IDA/Cat 5 MTDF Category froze as new\r\nGoods, non-consulting activities added (categories\r\nservices, and consultants’ 4IDA and 8 MDTF)\r\nservices, Training and 4,136,600 73% 1,724,060 27%\r\nOperating Costs for Parts\r\nA.2 (a), A.2 (c), B.1 and C\r\nof the Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n xii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n Category froze to have a\r\n broader definition (ie,\r\n Cat 4 MTDF\r\n without regional\r\n RBF Grants under Part 1,631,004 100%\r\n specificities, new category 6\r\n A.1 (b) of the Project\r\n MDTF), as it was initially in\r\n the Project\r\n TOTAL AMOUNT 13,100,000 20,000,000\r\n\r\n\r\n4- Change in disbursements estimates\r\n\r\nTo reflect the one-year extension of the closing date as well as current disbursements of the Project, disbursements\r\nestimates have been revised, as detailed in Section IV of the Restructuring Paper.\r\n\r\n5. Extension of closing date\r\n\r\nIn order to achieve the PDO and implement key interventions while absorbing available resources from the Project, it is\r\nproposed to extend the Closing Date from June 29, 2018 to June 30, 2019, for the following reasons:\r\n\r\n- The project experienced significant delays at the beginning related to the establishment of the coordination team at the\r\nMinistry of Health and Social Affairs and to the procurement of certain key contracts (recruitment of the Independent\r\nVerification Agencies for the RBF contracted in January 2016);\r\n\r\n- After implementation issues with the RBF component and weak fiduciary management, significant progress has been\r\nmade recently to revise the RBF component (September 2017) with the implementation of the roadmap and the\r\nstrengthening of fiduciary management capacities (last quarter 2017). Now that the implementation is finally working, it\r\nis important to allow for this approach to work.\r\n\r\n- Significant resources remain available in the project to support the Ministry of Health in the implementation of its priority\r\nstrategies to achieve the PDO.\r\n\r\n\r\nThis would be the first extension of the project Closing Date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n III. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\n Change in Results Framework ✔\r\n Change in Components and Cost ✔\r\n Change in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\n\r\n xiii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Change in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\n Change in Implementing Agency ✔\r\n Change in DDO Status ✔\r\n Change in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\n Cancellations Proposed ✔\r\n Change in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\n Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\n Change of EA category ✔\r\n Change in Legal Covenants ✔\r\n Change in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Financial Management ✔\r\n Change in Procurement ✔\r\n Change in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\n Other Change(s) ✔\r\n Change in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Technical Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Social Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_RESULTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\nPDO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of poor people reached by the project\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 1990565.00 2800000.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n New acceptors of modern contraceptive method\r\n\r\n xiv\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 84936.00 107041.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 05-Jun-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Births (deliveries) attended by skilled health personnel (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 155397.00 271679.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Percentage of pregnant women having 4 antenatal care visits (at standard quality)\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 22.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Severly malnourished detected children who are referred and received at the health center for all necessary visits\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 4945.00 6745.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Index of quality of health care\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 72.66 70.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Indicators\r\n\r\n xv\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of health facilities that have an RBF contract\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 318.00 318.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Percentage of facilities with verified results and having received their payments\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 63.00 85.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n People who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Corporate\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 2331326.00 3016899.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n People who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services - Female (RMS requirement)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Corporate Supplement\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 1355728.00 1778108.00 New\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of children immunized\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Corporate Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 244653.00 445220.00 New\r\n\r\n\r\n xvi\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Number of women and children who have received basic nutrition services\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Corporate Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 1931276.00 2300000.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Number of deliveries attended by skilled health personnel\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Corporate Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 155397.00 271679.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nPregnant women receiving antenatal care during a visit to a health provider (cumulative number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 275605.00 468884.00 New\r\n\r\nDate 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nChildren aged 0-23 months who attended at least one growth monitoring and promotion service during the 3\r\nprecedent months (cumulative number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 316366.00 585456.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nNumber of maternal health vouchers distributed (cumulative number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\r\n\r\n xvii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nValue 0.00 15991.00 50245.00 New\r\n\r\nDate 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nPercentage of eligible women that have received a maternal health financial incentive\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 17.00 72.00 New\r\n\r\nDate 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nHealth personnel receiving training (number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 2916.00 3144.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nNumber of hospitals where the cost accounting system has been implemented\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 0.00 34.00 New\r\n\r\nDate 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nOne continuous Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) report and one health Service Delivery report are produced\r\nevery year (cumulative number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 6.00 10.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nNumber of people effectively targeted by the communication activities of the CMU (cumulative number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Amount(USD)\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\r\n\r\n xviii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 53571.00 165000.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Number of operationnal SIGICMU modules\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 5.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n OPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_COMPONENTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n COMPONENTS\r\n Current\r\n Current Proposed Proposed\r\n Cost Action\r\n Component Name Component Name Cost (US$M)\r\n (US$M)\r\n 1. Result-Based Financing for 1. Result-Based Financing for\r\n health and nutrition services and 22.30 Revised health and nutrition services 15.70\r\n capacity building and capacity building\r\n 2. Improvement of accessibility 2. Improvement of accessibility\r\n to maternal, nutrition, and 14.00 Revised to maternal, nutrition, and 15.60\r\n children health services children health services\r\n 3. Institutional strengthening and 3. Institutional strengthening\r\n 6.00 Revised 9.50\r\n project implementation and project implementation\r\n TOTAL 42.30\r\n\r\n\r\n OPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_LOANCLOSING_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n LOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\n Ln/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\n IDA-53240 Effective 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Oct-2019\r\n TF-15872 Effective 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Oct-2019\r\n 31-Mar-2016, 27-\r\n TF-16618 Closed 30-Jun-2015\r\n Oct-2016\r\n TF-A0565 Closed 31-Dec-2016\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_REALLOCATION _TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n xix\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Financing %\r\n Current Allocation Actuals + Committed Proposed Allocation\r\n (Type Total)\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\nIDA-53240-001 | Currency: XDR\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 1 Current Expenditure Category: Nutrition Enhancement Grants Pt B2\r\n\r\n 3,300,000.00 1,161,835.88 3,300,000.00 100.00 70.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 2 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2,B1 & C\r\n\r\n 857,488.00 857,487.59 857,500.00 72.00 72.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 3 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2ac,B1 & C\r\n\r\n 8,942,512.00 4,136,598.21 4,136,600.00 73.00 73.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 4 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2, A3,B1a, B4 & C\r\n\r\n 0.00 0.00 4,805,900.00 63\r\n\r\n\r\nTotal 13,100,000.00 6,155,921.68 13,100,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTF-15872-001 | Currency: USD\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 1 Current Expenditure Category: RBF Grants Pt A.1\r\n\r\n 125,955.00 125,954.35 125,955.00 86.00 86.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 2 Current Expenditure Category: Maternal Health Vouchers Pt B.3\r\n\r\n 2,000,000.00 204,891.95 2,000,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 3 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2,B1 & C\r\n\r\n 381,152.00 381,151.49 381,152.00 27.00 27.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n xx\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 4 Current Expenditure Category: RBF Grants Pt A.1 (b)\r\n\r\n 12,274,045.00 1,631,003.88 1,631,004.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 5 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2ac,B1 & C\r\n\r\n 5,218,848.00 1,724,059.81 1,724,060.00 27.00 27.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 6 Current Expenditure Category: RBF Grants Pt A.1\r\n\r\n 0.00 0.00 6,943,041.00 100\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 7 Current Expenditure Category: Nutrition Enhancement Grants Pt B2\r\n\r\n 0.00 0.00 1,300,000.00 30\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 8 Current Expenditure Category: GD,NCS,CS,TR & OC Pt A2, A3,B1a, B4 & C\r\n\r\n 0.00 0.00 4,894,788.00 37\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 9 Current Expenditure Category: CBH Grants under Part B1b of the Project\r\n\r\n 0.00 0.00 1,000,000.00 100\r\n\r\n\r\nTotal 20,000,000.00 4,067,061.48 20,000,000.00\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_DISBURSEMENT_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDISBURSEMENT ESTIMATES\r\n\r\nChange in Disbursement Estimates\r\nYes\r\n\r\n Year Current Proposed\r\n 2014 0.00 0.00\r\n\r\n 2015 1,579,211.00 1,579,210.99\r\n\r\n 2016 1,920,789.00 1,469,955.95\r\n\r\n 2017 7,700,000.00 3,249,998.12\r\n\r\n 2018 7,900,000.00 9,133,889.96\r\n\r\n\r\n xxi\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2019 900,000.00 4,566,944.98\r\n\r\n2020 0.00 0.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n xxii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n.\r\n\r\n\r\n.\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nSenegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\f" }, "D30438645": { "id": "30438645", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Uganda", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Nutrition and food security", "docdt": "2018-09-21T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/392781537517354048/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Uganda-Multisectoral-Food-Security-and-Nutrition-Project-P149286.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/392781537517354048/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Uganda-Multisectoral-Food-Security-and-Nutrition-Project-P149286.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/392781537517354048/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Uganda-Multisectoral-Food-Security-and-Nutrition-Project-P149286", "projectid": "P149286", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/392781537517354048/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Uganda-Multisectoral-Food-Security-and-Nutrition-Project-P149286", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES33250\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n UGANDA MULTISECTORAL FOOD SECURITY AND NUTRITION PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON JANUARY 7, 2015\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF UGANDA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAGRICULTURE\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\nThis document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties.\r\nIts contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\nCFs Community Facilitators\r\nDPAs District Project Assistants\r\nGAFSP Global Agriculture and Food Security Program\r\nIMPIC Inter-Ministerial Project Implementation Committee\r\nLFs Lead Farmers\r\nLMs Lead Mothers\r\nMAAIF Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries\r\nMFSNP Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project\r\nMTR Mid-Term Review\r\nMOES Ministry of Education and Sports\r\nMOH Ministry of Health\r\nMOLG Ministry of Local Government\r\nPGs Parent Groups\r\nPCU Project Coordination Unit\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPIM Project Implementation Manual\r\nRF Results Framework\r\nTOT Training of Trainers\r\nVHTs Village Health Teams\r\nWASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem\r\n Country Director: Carlos Felipe Jaramillo\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Juergen Voegele\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Dina Umali-Deininger\r\n Task Team Leader: Ziauddin Hyder, Joseph Oryokot\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 1\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP149286 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n07-Jan-2015 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nRepublic of Uganda Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry & Fisheries\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\n Original PDO\r\n The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase production and consumption of micronutrient-rich foods and\r\n utilization of community-based nutrition services in smallholder households in project areas.\r\n OPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nTF-18896 07-Jan-2015 27-May-2015 07-Dec-2015 31-Dec-2019 27.64 15.13 12.51\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 2\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\nPROJECT CONTEXT\r\n\r\n1. Since January 15, 2015, the Ministries of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF, Lead Ministry),\r\nHealth (MOH), and Education and Sports (MOES) have been implementing the Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and\r\nNutrition Project (UMFSNP), which is financed through a US$27.64 million Global Agriculture and Food Security Program\r\n(GAFSP) grant. The Project is scheduled to close on December 31, 2019. To achieve the PDO, the project integrates and\r\ndeliver health, agriculture and education sector interventions to promote short-term changes in high-impact nutrition\r\nbehaviors and practices that are known to contribute to stunting reduction in the medium- and long-term. The project is\r\nexpected to reach 1.1 million primary beneficiaries including pregnant and lactating women and under-2 children. The\r\nproject is being implemented in a total of 15 districts (which were initially divided into two phases1). The district\r\nselection was based on a set of criteria including stunting prevalence in under-five children and low dietary diversity\r\nscore.\r\n\r\nPROJECT STATUS\r\n\r\n2. Progress towards achievement of the PDO and overall implementation progress are currently rated ‘Moderately\r\nSatisfactory’. These ratings reflect progress achieved as of June 2018. Progressive advancement in the implementation\r\nhas been noted in key areas, including district readiness to implement the project activities as per the approved Project\r\nImplementation Manual (PIM), and demonstration and adoption of agriculture, health and WASH good practices in the\r\ndistricts and primary schools. As of June 30, 2018, the project disbursed US$ 15.13 million, representing 54.7 percent of\r\nthe total grant amount. The project is now focusing on the delivery of a package of interventions at district, primary\r\nschool and community levels, including supporting the production and consumption of nutritious crops, and delivering a\r\nset of high impact nutrition specific interventions at target households through support from various community actors,\r\nincluding Parent Groups (PGs), Lead Farmers (LFs), Lead Mothers (LMs), and Village Health Teams (VHTs). Progress of the\r\nPDO and several intermediate results indicators is broadly on track. In addition, the notable progress against the three\r\nmajor project components that contributes to the development objectives and intermediate results, are provided\r\nbelow:\r\n\r\n3. Component-1: Delivery of multi-sectoral nutrition services at primary school and community levels (US$17.8\r\nmillion). Funds have been successfully transferred to each of the 15 districts and 1,500 primary schools. These primary\r\nschools established 3,000 PGs (2 per school), and identified and trained 3,000 LFs (1 per PG) and 3,000 LMs (1 per PG).\r\nAll primary schools have established demonstration gardens with bio-fortified and other African indigenous nutritious\r\ncrops to showcase year-round production and agricultural good practices. In addition, the production technology is\r\nbeing transferred to communities via LFs. Health Center II & III and associated Village Health Teams (VHTs) (3,000 in 15\r\nproject districts) have begun to provide nutrition support to the selected primary schools and communities. They have\r\nreached around 108,000 direct women beneficiaries with under-2 children through nutrition education and promotion\r\nsessions (target: 225,000).\r\n\r\n4. Component-2: Strengthening capacity to deliver nutrition interventions relevant to this project (US$5.20\r\nmillion). The MAAIF, MOES, MOH and MOLG continue to collaborate to achieve the common goal of stunting reduction\r\nthrough active participation by their sectoral focal points, and timely organization of Inter-Ministerial Project\r\n\r\n\r\n1Phase I five districts: Bushenyi, Maracha, Namutumba, Nebbi, and Ntungamo.\r\nPhase II ten districts: Arua, Bugiri, Iganga, Isingiro, Kabale, Kabarole, Kasese, Kiryandongo, Kyenjojo, and Yumbe\r\n\r\n 3\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Committee (IMPIC) meetings. Other capacity development achievements include recruitment of 15\r\nDistrict Project Assistants (DPAs), and 300 Community Facilitators (CFs), sensitizing various stakeholders in project\r\ndistricts, and organizing district level project planning and capacity building workshops. A local firm, DRASPAC at\r\nMakerere University, has been hired to conduct a massive nutrition capacity building training targeted to the three-\r\nsectoral staff at central, district, sub-county, primary school and community levels. The national Training of Trainers\r\n(TOT) has been completed, and the cascading down to community level will be completed by July-August 2018.\r\n\r\n5. Component-3: Project management, monitoring, evaluation, and knowledge generation (US$4.64 million).\r\nThe overarching PCU at MAAIF has been performing well in managing the project activities and supporting the\r\nconcerned ministries, including direct transfer of funds to districts and primary schools, fiduciary verification and\r\noversight to districts, coordinating across health, agriculture and education sectors, and implementation of the\r\nprocurement plan. Also, the PCU conducted Project Orientation and Work-plan Development Workshops for the 15\r\ndistricts (180 administrative & technical leaders and 90 subject matter specialists participated), and carried out district\r\nTOT on project management. A baseline survey has been completed and the final report is expected by the end of July\r\n2018. The midline survey will be done by early 2019. One operational research on African Indigenous Vegetable has\r\nbeen completed and the remaining five will be carried out to support knowledge generation.\r\n\r\nRATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n6. The World Bank approved the Project on 07 January 2015, and the Grant Agreement was signed between the\r\nWorld Bank and the Ministry of Finance on 27 May 2015. Following significant delays in meeting two effectiveness\r\nconditions i.e., establishment of the Project Coordination Unit (PCU) and finalization of a Project Implementation\r\nManual (PIM), the project became effective on 07 December 2015. To catch up with the delays that occurred between\r\nproject approval and effectiveness, the project’s procurement and implementation plans were promptly revised to\r\naccelerate the implementation. Consequently, the project commenced implementation activities in the phase II ten\r\ndistricts right after initiation of activities in the phase I five districts. Worthwhile to mention that some of the project\r\nactivities are dependent of the weather conditions, which also affected the Project progress since interventions could\r\nonly be implemented in the two rainy seasons a year. Nevertheless, a Mid-Term Review (MTR) of the project carried out\r\nfrom March 19-30, 2018 revealed that despite the start-up delay, the project has delivered some very positive actions\r\nand outputs (as outlined in previous section) towards attaining intermediate results indicators. Hence, the MTR mission\r\ndid not recommend changes in the project design or implementation arrangements, but it did recommend a request for:\r\n(i) a no-cost extension of project closing date by one year (from 31 December 2019 to 31 December 2020) to allow for\r\ncompletion of all remaining project activities; and (ii) revisions in the Results Framework (RF) to better capture progress\r\nand achievements in moving the implementation forward. In accordance with the MTR recommendation, the Ministry of\r\nFinance Planning and Economic Development sent a formal request to World Bank to extend the Project closing date to\r\nDecember 31, 2020.\r\n\r\n II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\nThe no-cost extension of project closing date by one year means that the revised closing date will be 31 December 2020\r\ninstead of 31 December 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 4\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n7. Revisions in the Results Framework (RF) include changes in PDO as well as IR indicators as provided in the\r\nfollowing table 1.\r\n\r\nTable 1: Proposed changes in PDO and IR indicators\r\n\r\nPDO Level Results Indicators\r\n Original Indicator in Revised/ New Indicator Explanation on changes Original End Revised\r\nPAD/ PIM Target End Target\r\n1. Net changes in 1.Percentage of Unit of measurement has been reworded 20% 20%\r\npercentage of households households reporting to percentage as the project team has increase increase\r\nreporting year-round year-round production of deemed that this articulation captures from from\r\nproduction of at least at least three more accurately what is measured. baseline baseline\r\nthree micronutrient rich micronutrient rich crops in Furthermore this unit is in line with\r\ncrops in project areas project areas national reporting (that also captures\r\n percentage).\r\n2. Net change in 2. Percentage of children Do 10% 10%\r\npercentage of children aged 6-23 months in increase increase\r\naged 6-23 months in households with minimum from from\r\nhouseholds with dietary diversity baseline baseline\r\nminimum dietary diversity\r\n3. Net change in 3. Percentage of women Do 50% 50%\r\npercentage of women participating in increase increase\r\nparticipating in community-based from from\r\ncommunity-based nutrition activities in baseline baseline\r\nnutrition activities in project areas\r\nproject areas\r\nIntermediate Results (IR) Indicators\r\nIR1.Number of parent IR.1 Number of Parent 3000 3000\r\ngroups (PGs) established Groups (PGs) established\r\n and functional\r\nIR2. Number of women - End target has been End target value has been revised 27,000 32,400\r\ntrained in nutrition- revised upwards from 27,000 to 32,400 (60% of\r\nsensitive agriculture total women beneficiaries in 15 Districts)\r\nthrough PGs in project\r\nareas\r\nIR4. Percentage increase Number increase in the Unit of measurement has been revised to Increase by 105,000\r\nin the quantity of quantity of seed/planting “number” from “percentage” to better 15% from\r\nseed/planting materials of materials of selected reflect the progress and target, since this baseline\r\nselected micronutrient micronutrient rich crops indicator is predicated on “lead farmer”\r\nrich crops multiplied or multiplied or produced by which is a construct of this project\r\nproduced by lead farmers lead farmers in project intervention itself, and value will be\r\nin project areas areas measured in kilograms (end target value\r\n has been set as 105,000 Kg)\r\nIR5. Percentage increase Number increase in Unit of measurement has been revised to Increase by 93,000\r\nin farmers accessing farmers accessing “number” from “percentage” to better 10% from\r\nmultiplied or produced multiplied or produced reflect the progress and target, since this baseline\r\nmicronutrient rich micronutrient rich indicator is based on dissemination by\r\nseed/planting materials in seed/planting materials in project lead farmers to other farmers (end\r\nproject areas project areas target value has been set as 93,000)\r\nIR6. Number of people The term “improved” to be defined to 600,000 600,000\r\n\r\n\r\n 5\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\nreceiving improved - The term “improved” has focus on “quality” (e.g. improved: VHTs\r\nnutrition services been re-defined only receiving training, Breastfeeding practices,\r\n(disaggregated by gender Health care demand, Post anti Natal Care\r\nand age) in project areas (PNC) Maternal Nutrition Care (MNC) etc.\r\nIR7. Number of primary - End target has been End target value has been revised upward 675,000 945,070\r\nschool children receiving revised from 675,000 to 945,070, since the\r\ndeworming tablets current value already exceeded the\r\nthrough primary schools previous end target at this mid-term\r\nin project areas\r\nIR 10. Number of - End target has been End target value has been revised 60 21\r\nmeetings of the Project revised downwards from 60 to 21, considering\r\nInter-ministerial that the frequency of the meetings has\r\nImplementation been changed from monthly to quarterly,\r\nCommittee and given the remaining period of project\r\n life.\r\n-- IR 11 Number of cooking New indicator: to capture more -- 30,000\r\n demonstrations carried community-based nutrition activities, and\r\n out at community level it will serve also as a proxy for measuring\r\n number of “Nutrition Forum” held.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 6\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n .\r\n\r\n Results framework\r\n COUNTRY: Uganda\r\n Uganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives(s)\r\nThe Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase production and consumption of micronutrient-rich foods and utilization of community-based\r\nnutrition services in smallholder households in project areas.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n .\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n vii\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nUganda Multisectoral Food Security and Nutrition Project (P149286)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n viii\r\n\f" }, "D30406479": { "id": "30406479", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Niger", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-09-08T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/692241536429233211/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-14.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/692241536429233211/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-14.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/692241536429233211/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-14", "projectid": "P123399", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/692241536429233211/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-14", "doc-text": " The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nNiger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Niger | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\n IBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2011 | Seq No: 14 | ARCHIVED on 08-Sep-2018 | ISR33717 |\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementing Agencies: Cellule Filets Sociaux, Cabinet du Premier Ministre, Republic of Niger\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date: 19-May-2011 Effectiveness Date: 11-Oct-2011\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date: 31-Dec-2014 Actual Mid-Term Review Date: 08-Dec-2014\r\n Original Closing Date: 30-Jun-2017 Revised Closing Date: 30-Jun-2019\r\n pdoTable\r\n\r\n Project Development Objectives\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective (PDO) is to establish and support an effective safety net system which will increase access of poor and food\r\n insecure people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)\r\n The project development objective is to establish and support an effective and adaptive safety net system that will increase access\r\n of poor and vulnerable people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\n\r\n\r\n Components Table\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Name\r\n Building an adaptive and scalable Safety Nets System:(Cost $8.55 M)\r\n Cash Transfers and accompanying measures:(Cost $59.70 M)\r\n Cash for Work for resilience:(Cost $18.90 M)\r\n Project Management:(Cost $13.85 M)\r\n\r\n Overall Ratings\r\n\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO Satisfactory Satisfactory\r\n Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Satisfactory Satisfactory\r\n Overall Risk Rating Substantial Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 1 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n The project overall performance remains satisfactory at the time of the last supervision mission in July 2018. The project continued to make\r\n substantial progress in the achievement of its key results indicators, which have been already met or exceeded. The overall disbursement rate is\r\n 91% (93% for IDA and 74% for the ASP TF).\r\n The cash transfer is ongoing according to plans. Almost 52,000 households are currently receiving their cash transfer. The number of monthly cash\r\n transfers received by each beneficiary household vary according to the region and the cash transfer phase. In July 2018, 8,730 households (phase\r\n 1 of the second cycle) received 23 out of the 24 expected payments in the Maradi and Zinder regions; 32,165 households (phase 2 of the second\r\n cycle) received 21 out of 24 payments in the Dosso regions, Maradi, Tahoua, Tillabéry and Zinder. In the new regions (Agadez, Diffa and Niamey)\r\n covered by the project under the additional financing which became effective in June 2016, 8,494 households received 6 payments out of 24\r\n planned. For the emergency cash transfer, in Agadez region, 2,235 households received 5 payments out of 12 planned. Based on the current\r\n planning, as of 31 July 2018, cash transfers will be completed in five regions including Dosso, Maradi, Tahoua, Tillabery and Zinder. There will\r\n remain only 15 payments to beneficiaries in the new regions and 3 payments to emergency beneficiaries in the region of Agadez.\r\n The activities related to the behavioral accompanying measures implemented in partnership with NGOs ended at the end of June 2018 in the\r\n Dosso, Maradi, Tahoua, Tillabéry and Zinder regions. In the new regions, out of the 14 modules scheduled, 5 were developed in Niamey and\r\n Agadez and 2 modules in the region of Diffa.\r\n Regarding the productive inclusion agenda, the sensitization activities on aspirations and social norms have been completed. Training in life skills\r\n and GERME (level 1, ILO’s entrepreneurship module) are being finalized. The PIU collects the deliverables and beneficiary participation data for\r\n transmission to the World Bank. Coach training on facilitating access to inputs is complete in all regions. The mission recommended to reinforce the\r\n supervision of the coaches in the field to ensure the realization of group coaching and individual coaching in accordance with established protocols.\r\n The coaching of the beneficiaries and the supervision of the productive activities are planned until December 2018.\r\n At the time of the supervision mission, physical work for the second phase of the 2017 cycle of the cash was completed. For the first phase 2018,\r\n the implementation situation varies from one region to another. In the regions of Tillabéry, Tahoua, Maradi and Zinder, physical work is in progress\r\n while at the Dosso region level, microproject files are being validated by the Sub-Regional Committees for Disaster Prevention and Management\r\n and Food Crisis.\r\n As delivery platform for other World Bank project, the safety nets project supported the implementation of the e-voucher within the Climate Smart\r\n Agriculture Project (P153420) and the West Africa Agricultural Productivity Program (P158983). The support of the project focused on the following\r\n activities: (i) Development of the data collection form as part of the e-voucher program; (ii) Training of collection agents and supervisors; (iii)\r\n monitoring of field collection; (iv) Development of the E-voucher platform with consideration of vulnerability criteria and household classification.\r\n The team has started the process of the preparation of the 2nd Adaptive Safety Net Project which will allow to continue the engagement of the\r\n Government of Niger in providing these important services to the poor and vulnerable people in the country. The Governments has confirmed its\r\n support with the establishment of a small team to prepare the second phase of the Adaptive Social Net Project.\r\n Since the new project will have components and activities like the parent project and will operate in the same areas as the parent project, it remains\r\n in Category B and the borrower will use the same safeguard tools as the parent project, namely the Environmental and Social Management\r\n Framework (ESMF) and Environmental and Social Management Plan. However, these instruments will be updated to adapt the new project to the\r\n current context and realities including the description of the project, the update of the needs assessment for capacity building, the need for new\r\n partnership and updating the costs of implementing the ESMF. Once the ESMF and the updated Pest Management Plan (PMP) are released, they\r\n will be republished both in the country and at the World Bank site prior to the implementation of the project activities\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 2 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies -- Low Low\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Fiduciary -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Environment and Social -- Low Low\r\n Stakeholders -- Low Low\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 3 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Other -- -- --\r\n Overall -- Substantial Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n PDO Indicators by Objectives / Outcomes\r\n\r\n\r\n Effective and adaptive SN system established\r\n IN00629286\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Capacity of Niger’s social protection systems to implement adaptive social protection programs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n Composite indicator with ratings from 1 to 6 [see results framework of the adaptive social protection TF for\r\n details on the rating system]. A country system will include a set of programs and following elements\r\n (available for certain programs or system wide): (i)Dedicated institutions and staff; (ii) Targeting system –\r\n Criteria established, list of potential beneficiaries available; (iii) MIS functioning – Capable of storing\r\n Comments: potential and actual beneficiaries, generate lists for registration, payment and follow-up; (iv) Existence and\r\n effectiveness of payment system; (v) Existence and effectiveness of the grievance mechanisms; (vi)\r\n Existence and effectiveness of monitoring and evaluation. A rating of 3 corresponds to the following:\r\n Some elements of the core SP system have been developed and are operational, but are not used\r\n correctly/efficiently\r\n IN00629285\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Effectiveness of national SP systems to address Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n Composite indicator with ratings from 1 to 6 [see results framework of the adaptive social protection TF for\r\n details on the rating system and scales]. A rating of 1 corresponds to the following: the SP system has no\r\n Comments:\r\n clear links with CCA and DRM and Government hasno plans for such links. No existing SP strategy with\r\n CCA and DRM aspects included.\r\n IN00629283\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Unified Social Registry is established (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n Four milestones will be listed as sub-indicators and will help assess progress towards achieving the final\r\n target. The milestones will be included in the list of sub-indicators, and will each be rated on a yes/no\r\n Comments:\r\n basis (0 for no, 1 for in progress, and 2 for yes). The final target of the main indicator will tally the grade\r\n IN00629294\r\n attributed to all sub-indicators, and a text will rate the success in achieving the target.\r\n A common database is functional and shared with at least 3 partners (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 4 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2018\r\n IN00629295\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The institution identified to manage the database is functional (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2018\r\n IN00629296\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The Government legally identifies the institutional anchorage of the national database (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2017\r\n IN00629273\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Target households who are poor (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 83.00 83.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629284\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Cash for work and DRF cash transfer beneficiaries in departments identified as vulnerable by the DN (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629250\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1,088,213.00 1,088,213.00 759,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n Direct beneficiaries are people or groups who directly derive benefits from an intervention (i.e., children\r\n who benefit from an immunization program; families that have a new piped water connection). Please note\r\n Comments: that this indicator requires supplemental information. Supplemental Value: Female beneficiaries\r\n (percentage). Based on the assessment and definition of direct project beneficiaries, specify what\r\n IN00629290\r\n proportion of the direct project beneficiaries are female. This indicator is calculated as a percentage.\r\n Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 51.00 51.00 50.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Access to cash transfers and accompanying measures\r\n IN00629248\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 5 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Households with access to the cash transfer system established by the Project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 149,003.00 149,003.00 126,500.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629282\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Households benefiting from accompanying measures (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 87,331.00 87,331.00 107,100.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jan-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n The target represents 90% of cash for work households and all households benefiting from the regular\r\n Comments:\r\n cash transfers (excluding beneficiaries from emergency and disaster risk financing interventions)\r\n IN00629271\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Percentage of villages receiving payments based on the frequency specified in the implementation manual (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629280\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Households receiving scaled up cash transfer assistance through the disaster risk financing mechanism (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 4,691.00 4,691.00 5,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Access to cash for work (CFW)\r\n IN00629281\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Households with access to the cash for work programs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 50,256.00 50,256.00 30,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Dec-2015 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Number of individuals targeted by the cash for work programs divided by 2, with the assumption being that\r\n Comments:\r\n the program may target up to 2 people per households\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators by Components\r\n\r\n\r\n System Building an adaptive and scalable safety nets system\r\n IN00629288\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►The monitoring and evaluation mechanism of the DNPGCCA is fully operational and processing the data of all the units of the\r\n DNPGCCA. (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 6 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No No No Yes\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629249\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►A management information system is developed (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Comments: Yes/No\r\n IN00629272\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►The impact evaluation is generating lessons (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629274\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Beneficiary households that have been identified and registered to receive monthly transfers for a 24-month period (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 91,538.00 91,538.00 89,100.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629289\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►A Grievance Redress Mechanisms is in place in all communities targeted (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Cash transfers and accompanying measures\r\n IN00629276\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Households participating in the accompanying measures (participation rate) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 93.00 93.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629275\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Registered families who are receiving the transfers (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 7 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Cash for work for resilience\r\n IN00629287\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Micro-projects that are functional at the end of each calendar year (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 99.00 99.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Jul-2017 31-Jul-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629277\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Days of temporary employment (broken down by gender) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 3,240,335.00 3,240,335.00 3,600,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629291\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of days of work created for women (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1,168,926.00 1,168,926.00 1,800,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629292\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of days of work created for men (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 2,071,409.00 2,071,409.00 1,800,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629278\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Communal infrastructures rehabilitated per year (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 259.00 259.00 600.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629293\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n (a) land rehabilitated (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 213,696.00 213,696.00 250,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 8 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project management\r\n IN00629279\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Project management expenses ratio is inferior or equal to 10% (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes (8%) Yes (8%) Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Yes/No- project management expenses ration is defined as ratio between operating expenses and total\r\n Comments:\r\n annual expenditures (initial expenses investments, operating and other recurrent costs).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\n Disbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed\r\n\r\n P123399 IDA-49200 Closed USD 70.00 68.32 1.68 62.91 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n P123399 IDA-D1130 Effective USD 22.50 22.50 0.00 17.51 5.41 76%\r\n\r\n P123399 TF-A2304 Effective USD 8.50 8.50 0.00 6.96 1.54 82%\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P123399 IDA-49200 Closed 19-May-2011 14-Jul-2011 11-Oct-2011 30-Jun-2017 30-Jun-2017\r\n P123399 IDA-D1130 Effective 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 26-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n P123399 TF-A2304 Effective 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 28-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 9 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level Approved on 08-Feb-2012 ,Level Approved on 13-Jan-2016 ,Level 2 Approved on 13-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n P155846-Adaptive Social Safety Nets Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/8/2018 Page 10 of 10\r\n\f" }, "D30403107": { "id": "30403107", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Human development,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services", "docdt": "2018-09-06T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/201071536256042156/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-09.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/201071536256042156/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-09.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/201071536256042156/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-09", "projectid": "P129472", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/201071536256042156/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-09", "doc-text": " The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSenegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Senegal | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\n IBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 9 | ARCHIVED on 06-Sep-2018 | ISR33714 |\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementing Agencies: Ministry of Health and Prevention, Government of Senegal\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date: 11-Dec-2013 Effectiveness Date: 14-May-2014\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date: 09-Jan-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date: 01-Jun-2017\r\n Original Closing Date: 29-Jun-2018 Revised Closing Date: 30-Jun-2019\r\n pdoTable\r\n\r\n Project Development Objectives\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The objective of the project is to increase utilization and quality of maternal, neonatal and child health and nutritional services, especially among the\r\n poorest households in Targeted Areas in the Recipients territory.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n\r\n Components Table\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Name\r\n 1. Result-Based Financing for health and nutrition services and capacity building:(Cost $15.70 M)\r\n 2. Improvement of accessibility to maternal, nutrition, and children health services:(Cost $15.60 M)\r\n 3. Institutional strengthening and project implementation:(Cost $9.50 M)\r\n\r\n Overall Ratings\r\n\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory\r\n Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Moderately Unsatisfactory Moderately Satisfactory\r\n Overall Risk Rating Substantial Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n Significant progress has been made on Project progress towards achievement of the PDO and overall implementation progress, justifying an\r\n upgrade from previous Moderately Unsatisfactorily to Moderately Satisfactorily. Performance of the project has been further strengthened over the\r\n last 6 months, confirming the positive trend since July 2017.\r\n On overall implementation progress, disbursements have increased from 35% in December 2017 (32% IDA; 17% TF) to 51%(68% IDA; 41% TF) in\r\n August 2018. And implementation of interventions under the different components of the Project has speed up.\r\n Under Component 1 (Supply Side Results Based Financing), the revised approach initiated in July 2017 is now being implemented (training of\r\n beneficiaries on the new approach, contracts signed with health facilities of the six targeted regions of the project, functionality of the RBF web-\r\n based portal, etc..) with a close monitoring by the Ministry of Health. However, it is still necessary to accelerate the verification of the results of 2nd\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n semester 2017 (revised contracts with Independent Verification Agencies and Community Based Organizations to be finalized by end of August)\r\n and assess the results of the new approach. Some delays have been encountered and the reason why this sub-component is rated Moderately\r\n Unsatisfactorily.\r\n Interventions under Component 2 (Increased financial accessibility) are implemented as planned with an acceleration following the recent\r\n restructuring (for universal health insurance and nutrition activities). The pilot to integrate free health care initiative into health insurance still needs\r\n to be implemented (planned in October). Interventions under Component 3 (Institutional strengthening and project coordination) have been\r\n implemented satisfactorily.\r\n On progress towards achievement of the PDO, with the one-year extension of the Project and restructuring of the Results Framework, two out of the\r\n six PDO indicators have already been achieved (severely malnourished detected children and index of quality of care) and the four others are\r\n progressing and targets should be achieved by June 2019. Additionally, one intermediary indicator already achieved its target, one surpassed it.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Fiduciary -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Environment and Social -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Stakeholders -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Other -- Low Low\r\n Overall -- Substantial Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n PDO Indicators by Objectives / Outcomes\r\n\r\n\r\n Increase utilization of maternal, neonatal and child health services\r\n IN00629140\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of poor people reached by the project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1,990,565.00 2,200,773.00 2,800,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629141\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►New acceptors of modern contraceptive method (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 84,936.00 85,712.00 107,041.00\r\n\r\n Date 05-Jun-2013 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629147\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Severly malnourished detected children who are referred and received at the health center for all necessary visits (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 4,945.00 7,136.00 6,745.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Increase quality of RMNACH services\r\n IN00629145\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Percentage of pregnant women having 4 antenatal care visits (at standard quality) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 22.00 22.00 35.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n Due to the ongoing strike of health workers in Senegal, there is a retention of health information which\r\n Comments: prevents to update this indicator with comprehensive data.\r\n IN00629143\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Births (deliveries) attended by skilled health personnel (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 155,397.00 176,495.00 271,679.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n Due to the ongoing strike of health workers in Senegal, there is a retention of health information which\r\n Comments: prevents to update this indicator with comprehensive data.\r\n IN00629148\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Index of quality of health care (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 72.66 72.66 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Due to the revision of the RBF approach, the index of quality of care should be available in October 2018.\r\n Comments:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators by Components\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 1. Result-Based Financing for health and nutrition services and capacity building\r\n IN00629142\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of health facilities that have an RBF contract (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 318.00 318.00 318.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629150\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Percentage of facilities with verified results and having received their payments (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 63.00 63.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629152\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►People who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services (Number, Corporate)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 2,331,326.00 2,331,326.00 3,016,899.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629157\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n People who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services - Female (RMS requirement) (Number,\r\n Corporate Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1,355,728.00 1,355,728.00 1,778,108.00\r\n IN00629158\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of children immunized (Number, Corporate Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 244,653.00 266,455.00 445,220.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629159\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of women and children who have received basic nutrition services (Number, Corporate Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 1,931,276.00 2,402,774.00 2,300,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629160\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of deliveries attended by skilled health personnel (Number, Corporate Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 155,397.00 155,397.00 271,679.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629151\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Pregnant women receiving antenatal care during a visit to a health provider (cumulative number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 275,605.00 309,413.00 468,884.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629139\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Health personnel receiving training (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 2,916.00 2,916.00 3,144.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 2. Improvement of accessibility to maternal, nutrition, and children health services\r\n IN00629144\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Children aged 0-23 months who attended at least one growth monitoring and promotion service during the 3 precedent\r\n months (cumulative number) (Number, Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 316,366.00 316,366.00 585,456.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629149\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of maternal health vouchers distributed (cumulative number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 15,991.00 21,025.00 50,245.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629155\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Percentage of eligible women that have received a maternal health financial incentive (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 17.00 36.00 72.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629154\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of people effectively targeted by the communication activities of the CMU (cumulative number) (Amount(USD),\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 53,571.00 53,571.00 165,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629156\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of operationnal SIGICMU modules (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00\r\n\r\n Date 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 3. Institutional strengthening and project implementation\r\n IN00629153\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of hospitals where the cost accounting system has been implemented (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 34.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n IN00629146\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►One continuous Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) report and one health Service Delivery report are produced every\r\n year (cumulative number) (Number, Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 6.00 6.00 10.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 22-Dec-2017 01-Aug-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n 2017 DHS full reports not yet available\r\n Comments:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\n Disbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed\r\n\r\n P129472 IDA-53240 Effective USD 20.00 20.00 0.00 12.56 5.97 68%\r\n\r\n P129472 TF-15872 Effective USD 20.00 20.00 0.00 7.52 12.48 38%\r\n\r\n P129472 TF-16618 Closed USD 0.45 0.19 0.26 0.19 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n P129472 TF-A0565 Closed USD 0.83 0.78 0.04 0.78 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P129472 IDA-53240 Effective 11-Dec-2013 28-Mar-2014 14-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n P129472 TF-15872 Effective 28-Mar-2014 28-Mar-2014 29-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 28-Jun-2019\r\n P129472 TF-16618 Closed 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 30-Jun-2015 31-Mar-2016\r\n P129472 TF-A0565 Closed 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2016\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 04-May-2016 ,Level 2 Approved on 10-Apr-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n There are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9/6/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n\f" }, "D30388706": { "id": "30388706", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Ethiopia", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-08-31T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/672781535726150236/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Promoting-young-women-s-livelihoods-and-nutrition-project-P157716-Sequence-No-01.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/672781535726150236/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Promoting-young-women-s-livelihoods-and-nutrition-project-P157716-Sequence-No-01.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/672781535726150236/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Promoting-young-women-s-livelihoods-and-nutrition-project-P157716-Sequence-No-01", "projectid": "P157716", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/672781535726150236/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Promoting-young-women-s-livelihoods-and-nutrition-project-P157716-Sequence-No-01", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n\r\nPromoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Ethiopia | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nRecipient Executed Activities | Investment Project Financing | FY 2017 | Seq No: 1 | ARCHIVED on 31-Aug-2018 | ISR32382 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Concern Worldwide, Concern Worldwide Ethiopia\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:18-Apr-2017 Effectiveness Date:20-Apr-2018\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Apr-2021 Revised Closing Date:30-Apr-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to improve access to community-based nutrition and livelihoods services among selected young\r\n women in Sasie Tsaeda Emba and Seharty Samre, Tigray.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  --  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  --  Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n The project became effective on April 20, 2018. The project activities have already began and the fund transfer process from World Bank to Concern\r\n Worldwide is underway.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 1 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Overall Risk Rating\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Overall  --  --  Low\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Net changes in the proportion of beneficiary model farmers reporting year-round production of at least three micronutrient rich\r\n crops (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Net changes in the proportion of beneficiary young women aged 15-24 years reporting consumption of five or more food groups\r\n in previous 24 hour period (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 15.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of targeted young women aged 15-24 years who completed the life skills, health and nutrition training package in full\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 19,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 2 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Farmer Training Centers equipped for demonstration of nutrition-sensitive agriculture (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Young Women s Clubs established (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 200.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of beneficiaries aged 15-24 participating in Young Women s Clubs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 19,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of service providers trained on health, nutrition, and livelihood development (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 1,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 3 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of young women aged 15-24 years who received input packages to support nutrition and livelihood activities (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 2,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of young women aged 15-24 years completing three rounds of intermittent iron supplementation (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 19,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Model Farmers trained to deliver nutrition, agriculture, and livelihoods promotion activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 2,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Model Farmers established productive home gardens or livelihood promotion activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 2,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 4 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Model Farmers who train at least 8 other young women in nutrition-agriculture approach (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 2,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of young women beneficiaries reporting livelihood activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 19,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of cooperatives established (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 20.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of young women participating in cooperatives (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 500.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 5 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Promoting young women’s livelihoods and nutrition project (P157716)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of knowledge-sharing events held at national and provincial levels (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 5.00\r\n\r\n Date 08-Feb-2017 -- -- 24-Apr-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP157716 TF-A6688 Effective USD 2.75 2.75 0.00 0.00 2.75 0%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\nP157716 TF-A6688 Effective 18-Apr-2017 23-Mar-2018 20-Apr-2018 30-Apr-2021 30-Apr-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 6 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30389378": { "id": "30389378", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Malawi", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social dev/gender/inclusion,HIV/AIDS,Population and reproductive health,Nutrition and food security,Child health,Participation and civic engagement,Human development", "docdt": "2018-08-31T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/804511535743393140/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Nutrition-and-HIV-AIDS-Project-P125237-Sequence-No-13.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/804511535743393140/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Nutrition-and-HIV-AIDS-Project-P125237-Sequence-No-13.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/804511535743393140/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Nutrition-and-HIV-AIDS-Project-P125237-Sequence-No-13", "projectid": "P125237", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/804511535743393140/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Nutrition-and-HIV-AIDS-Project-P125237-Sequence-No-13", "doc-text": " The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nMalawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Malawi | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\n IBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2012 | Seq No: 13 | ARCHIVED on 31-Aug-2018 | ISR33820 |\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementing Agencies: Government of Malawi, DNHA (PART 1)CR5068-MW, NAC (NATL AIDS COMMISSION), Government of Malawi\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date: 27-Mar-2012 Effectiveness Date: 17-Oct-2012\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date: 13-Apr-2015 Actual Mid-Term Review Date: 13-Apr-2015\r\n Original Closing Date: 31-Aug-2017 Revised Closing Date: 31-Aug-2018\r\n pdoTable\r\n\r\n Project Development Objectives\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective is to increase access to, and utilization of, selected services known to contribute to thereduction of child stunting,\r\n maternal and child anemia, and the prevention of HIV and AIDS in children and sexually active adults.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)\r\n To increase coverage of selected nutrition, HIV and AIDS services and strengthen disease outbreak preparedness in project areas.\r\n\r\n\r\n Components Table\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Name\r\n Component A: Support for Nutritional Improvement:(Cost $57.37 M)\r\n Component B: Support for the National HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan:(Cost $51.33 M)\r\n Component C - Support for Ebola Preparedness:(Cost $7.00 M)\r\n\r\n Overall Ratings\r\n\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory\r\n Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory\r\n Overall Risk Rating Moderate Moderate\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n The final implementation support mission for the project took place between August 15-17, 2018 and the project is set to close as scheduled on\r\n August 31, 2018 and fully disburse. The mission noted progress in concluding outstanding activities prior to project closure. Routine HIV/AIDS and\r\n nutrition administrative data suggest that the project has achieved end of project targets for 3 out of 5 Project Development Objective (PDO)\r\n indicators (Male circumcision conducted according to national standards in the 20 selected districts; Infants born to HIV positive women enrolled in\r\n PMTCT services who receive a DNA PCR test for HIV within two months of birth; Isolation Centers established for Ebola case investigation and\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n management) and will nearly achieve targets for the other two indicators (caregivers of children under 2 benefiting from monthly CG services in\r\n intervention districts and children 6-23 months of age who receive minimum diet diversity). For the intermediate results indicators, the project will\r\n achieve targets in 13 out of 16 intermediate results indicators. One area of concern is the delays observed in equipping and operationalizing the six\r\n isolation centers and incinerators under the Ebola component.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance -- High High\r\n Macroeconomic -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Fiduciary -- Substantial Substantial\r\n Environment and Social -- Low Moderate\r\n Stakeholders -- Moderate Low\r\n Other -- -- --\r\n Overall -- Moderate Moderate\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n PDO Indicators by Objectives / Outcomes\r\n\r\n\r\n Nutritional Improvement\r\n IN00515871\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Children 6 to 23 months of age who receive minimum diet diversity in the Component A intervention districts (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 29.00 38.80 36.40 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n Children 6-23 months of age who receive minimum diet diversity\r\n Comments:\r\n IN00515852\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Caregivers of children under 2 benefiting from monthly CG services in intervention districts (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 74.50 78.00 82.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 30-Sep-2010 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Support for the National HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan\r\n IN00515877\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Infants born to HIV positive women enrolled in PMTCT services who receive a DNA PCR test for HIV within two months of\r\n birth (Percentage, Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 25.00 70.00 73.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515875\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Male circumcision conducted according to national standards in the 20 selected districts (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 10,000.00 194,179.00 272,189.00 264,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Support for Ebola Preparedness\r\n IN00515854\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Isolation Centers established for Ebola case investigation and management (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 5.00 6.00 6.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Jul-2015 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments PDO\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n All PDO indicators surpassed or met targets expect the two indicators linked to nutrition outcome area which\r\n were updated on June 30, 2018. These two indicators would be updated further based on the national\r\n nutrition endline survey data which is expected to be completed by November 2018 and will be incorporated\r\n into the ICR.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Although all the 6 isolation centers have been constructed/established, 4 out 6 of them are not yet fully\r\n equipped with bed and personal Protective Equipment (PPE); thus, not fully operational. The required\r\n equipment has been delivered to the respective district hospitals, and it is expected that the equipping would be\r\n completed by the first week of September 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators by Components\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Component A: Support for Nutritional Improvement\r\n IN00515873\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 970,123.00 1,104,612.00 1,088,470.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515886\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 56.10 56.10 26.00\r\n IN00515880\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►District Councils reporting on key nutrition indicators to DNHA on a quarterly basis (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 14.00 14.00 14.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515876\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Backyard gardens established in the intervention districts (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 17,556.00 17,558.00 13,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515878\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Children 0-59 mo from households with ITNs who slept under ITNs last night in the intervention districts (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 59.00 57.10 57.10 69.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515874\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Care Groups formed and trained (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 4,586.00 5,064.00 5,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515879\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Children 0-59 mo who had diarrhea and were given increased fluids in the intervention districts (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 22.00 32.00 32.00 38.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515853\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Children 0-59 months successfully treated with SAM (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 46.00 75.40 75.40 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-May-2016 31-Jul-2018 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515881\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►National Nutrition Policy and Strategic Plan (2007-2012) reviewed and updated (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 24-Nov-2017 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Component B: Support for the National HIV/AIDS Strategic Plan\r\n IN00515882\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Circumcised males who were tested for HIV as part of VMMC service (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 50.00 99.60 100.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515885\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►HIV positive pregnant women who receive ARV to reduce the risk of mother to child transmission (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 32,000.00 57,381.00 55,902.00 40,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515884\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Pregnant women attending ANC who are tested for HIV (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 74.00 98.00 98.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515883\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Public health facilities that are able to provide minimum package for VMMC (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 63.00 63.00 47.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 24-Nov-2017 31-Jul-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Component C - Support for Ebola Preparedness\r\n IN00515855\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Costed HSSP2 M&E masterplan finalized and endorsed (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 06-May-2016 24-Nov-2017 24-Nov-2017 31-Aug-2018\r\n IN00515872\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Number of health facilities provided with Ebola preparedness equipment and supplies (including hand-washing,\r\n thermometers and PPEs) (Number, Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 35.00 35.00\r\n\r\n Date 03-Nov-2014 24-Apr-2016 24-Oct-2017 31-Aug-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments IR\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The target for three out of seven IRIs have not been met. However, the values are based on June 2018\r\n report which will be updated by end of August 2018 and will be incorporated into the ICR.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\n Disbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed\r\n\r\n P125237 IDA-50680 -- USD 32.00 32.00 0.00 29.15 0.16 99%\r\n\r\n P125237 IDA-D1330 -- USD 22.60 22.60 0.00 20.87 1.24 94%\r\n\r\n P125237 IDA-H7610 -- USD 48.00 48.00 0.00 44.82 0.02 100%\r\n\r\n P125237 TF-12631 Closed USD 12.35 12.35 0.00 12.32 0.04 100%\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P125237 IDA-50680 -- 27-Mar-2012 17-Jul-2012 17-Oct-2012 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2018\r\n P125237 IDA-D1330 -- 23-Jun-2016 05-Aug-2016 27-Jan-2017 31-Aug-2018 31-Aug-2018\r\n P125237 IDA-H7610 -- 27-Mar-2012 17-Jul-2012 17-Oct-2012 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2018\r\n P125237 TF-12631 Closed 10-Sep-2012 10-Sep-2012 17-Oct-2012 31-Dec-2015 28-Feb-2017\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project (P125237)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 24-Dec-2014 ,Level 2 Approved on 01-Oct-2015\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n P156129-Additional Financing to Nutrition and HIV/AIDS Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/31/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n\f" }, "D30324428": { "id": "30324428", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Uganda", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Human development,Nutrition and food security", "docdt": "2018-08-03T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/156811533296926707/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-An-Innovative-Integrated-Approach-to-Enhance-Smallholder-Family-Nutrition-P143324-Sequence-No-08.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/156811533296926707/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-An-Innovative-Integrated-Approach-to-Enhance-Smallholder-Family-Nutrition-P143324-Sequence-No-08.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/156811533296926707/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-An-Innovative-Integrated-Approach-to-Enhance-Smallholder-Family-Nutrition-P143324-Sequence-No-08", "projectid": "P143324", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/156811533296926707/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-An-Innovative-Integrated-Approach-to-Enhance-Smallholder-Family-Nutrition-P143324-Sequence-No-08", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n\r\nAn Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Uganda | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nRecipient Executed Activities | Investment Project Financing | FY 2013 | Seq No: 8 | ARCHIVED on 03-Aug-2018 | ISR33499 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: BRAC Uganda, BRAC UGANDA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:13-Feb-2013 Effectiveness Date:15-Jul-2013\r\n Original Closing Date:11-Jun-2017 Revised Closing Date:11-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n To improve nutrition of an estimated 19200 vulnerable and poorest smallholder households in Mabara and Masaka districts, by promoting the\r\n cultivation and consumption of nutrient-rich crops and improving nutrition care practices of under- 2 children, adolescents girls, and pregnant\r\n women.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n The Enhanced Smallholder Food and Nutrition (ESFN) Project was funded through a grant amount of US$ 2.8 million from the Japan Social\r\n Development Fund (JSDF). BRAC Uganda has been implementing the ESFN project aimed at creating an innovative linkage of community-based\r\n nutrition and agricultural interventions to increase cultivation and consumption of nutrient-rich crops among smallholder families and improve care\r\n practices of children under two years of age (U2), adolescent girls and pregnant women. The project has successfully exceeded the target for all the\r\n project development objective (PDO) indicators, specifically: adoption of OFSP has increased to 24.7% (exceeded the target of 20%); infants 0-5\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 1 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n\r\n months who are exclusively breastfed has increased to 78% (exceeded the target of 67%); and children aged 6-23 months with minimum dietary\r\n diversity has increased to 68% (exceeded the target of 67%). The project has been implemented successfully in southwestern Uganda in four (4)\r\n districts namely: Kalungu, Rakai, Sheema and Ibanda covering 180 villages in 17 sub-counties. The project operated through community-based\r\n agents called Community Agriculture Promoters (CAPs), Vine Producers (VPs), Community Health Promoters (CHPs) and Adolescent Health\r\n Promoters (AHPs) who were the core implementers of the project activities. The project was implemented through a close collaboration with frontline\r\n workers from the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Agriculture. The project became effective on July 15, 2013, and closed on June 11, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 2 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Overall Risk Rating\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Overall  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 3 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of participating farmers adopting orange-fleshed sweet potato (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 24.75 24.75 20.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2017 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of infants 0-5 months exclusively breastfed (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 57.00 78.00 78.00 67.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of children 6-23 months with minimum dietary diversity (Percentage, Custom) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 10.00 68.00 68.00 67.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n All the three PDO indicators have been achieved, and the measurements were based on an independent endline survey.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 4 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Children 0-24 months participating in monthly growth monitoring and promotion sessions (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 14,305.00 14,305.00 8,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Adolescent girls participating in education sessions (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 5,284.00 5,284.00 960.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Community-based agriculture promoters trained (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 120.00 120.00 120.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Community based health promoters trained (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 160.00 160.00 160.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 5 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Community-based adolescent heatlh promoters trained (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 160.00 160.00 160.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Vine producers trained (1 vine producer per 4 villages) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 43.00 43.00 43.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Marketing agents trained (1 marketing agent per 2 villages) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 20.00 20.00 20.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Pregnant women targeted for conditional nutrient-rich food transfer (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 815.00 815.00 600.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 6 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Health workers trained on ANC (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 40.00 40.00 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Smallholder farmers trained on financial products (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,843.00 1,843.00 900.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n women, adolescent girls and/or children under age five-reached by basic nutrition services (number)\r\n Pregnant/lactating\r\n (Amount(USD), Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 6,400.00 6,400.00 6,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Sep-2013 10-Oct-2017 30-May-2018 01-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n All Intermediate Progress Indicator targets were either achieved or surpassed.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP143324 TF-14232 Closed USD 2.80 2.80 0.00 2.64 0.16 94%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 7 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n An Innovative, Integrated Approach to Enhance Smallholder Family Nutrition (P143324)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P143324 TF-14232 Closed 06-Jun-2013 11-Jun-2013 15-Jul-2013 11-Jun-2017 11-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 17-Feb-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n There are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8/3/2018 Page 8 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30271573": { "id": "30271573", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Zambia", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Human development,Nutrition and food security", "docdt": "2018-07-19T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/918161531986558865/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Zambia-Livelihood-and-Nutrition-Project-P147745-Sequence-No-04.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/918161531986558865/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Zambia-Livelihood-and-Nutrition-Project-P147745-Sequence-No-04.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/918161531986558865/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Zambia-Livelihood-and-Nutrition-Project-P147745-Sequence-No-04", "projectid": "P147745", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/918161531986558865/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Zambia-Livelihood-and-Nutrition-Project-P147745-Sequence-No-04", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n\r\nZambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Zambia | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nRecipient Executed Activities | Investment Project Financing | FY 2015 | Seq No: 4 | ARCHIVED on 19-Jul-2018 | ISR33403 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Concern Worldwide, Concern Worldwide Zambia\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:29-Jun-2015 Effectiveness Date:29-Jun-2015\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2018 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to improve access to livelihood opportunities and nutrition among selected female\r\n youths in targeted project areas.\r\n\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n The Zambia Female Youths Livelihood and Nutrition Enhancement Project was closed on June 30, 2018. The Project Development Objective (PDO)\r\n was to improve access to livelihood opportunities and nutrition among selected female youths in targeted project areas. The project was\r\n implemented in ten wards in two districts (Kaoma and Limulunga) in Western Province for three years by Concern Worldwide. At project closing, 94\r\n percent of the original amount of a US$2.75 million grant from the Japan Social Development Fund (JSDF) has been disbursed. Although the project\r\n suffered from initial implementation delays, progress towards the PDO and implementation progress has been rated consistently Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 1 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n\r\n throughout project implementation. At project closing, the project has achieved all the PDO indicators between 87-96 percent of the set targets.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Overall Risk Rating\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Overall  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of female youths aged 15-24 years reporting consumption of four or more micronutrient rich foods in previous 24\r\n hours. (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2,017.00 2,388.00 2,500.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Proportion of eligible beneficiary female youths (aged 10-24) consuming weeklly iron and folic acid (IFA) supplements provided\r\n through Girls Clubs. (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 14.00 24.00 25.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of beneficiary female youths aged 10-24 years participating in monthly girls clubs meetings. (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4,095.00 4,095.00 4,700.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 2 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of community members participating in community forums (male and female). (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 8,820.00 24,130.00 8,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Girls Clubs established (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 249.00 249.00 200.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of community health volunteers trained in nutrition-promoting activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 80.00 80.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 3 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Agriculture Extension officers trained in homestead production of micronutrient rich foods (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 24.00 28.00 25.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of female youths aged 15-24 years who received inputs for livelihood activities. (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3,105.00 3,105.00 3,280.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of Peer Leaders established operational livelihood demonstration sites (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 246.00 246.00 200.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of participants aged 15-24 reporting operational livelihood activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,845.00 2,382.00 2,460.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 4 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of target communities with functional participatory monitoring. (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 97.00 97.00 75.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2015 30-Oct-2017 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P147745 TF-19238 Closed USD 2.75 2.75 0.00 2.59 0.16 94%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P147745 TF-19238 Closed 29-Jun-2015 29-Jun-2015 29-Jun-2015 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 5 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Zambia Livelihood and Nutrition Project (P147745)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/19/2018 Page 6 of 6\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30239879": { "id": "30239879", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Zambia", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Malaria,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Participation and civic engagement,Administrative and civil service reform", "docdt": "2018-07-06T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/653581530914988618/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-09.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/653581530914988618/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-09.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/653581530914988618/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-09", "projectid": "P145335", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/653581530914988618/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-09", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\nHealth Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Zambia | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 9 | ARCHIVED on 06-Jul-2018 | ISR32805 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Ministry of Finance (Republic of Zambia), Ministry of Health\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:21-Mar-2014 Effectiveness Date:31-Mar-2015\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:30-Apr-2018 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:30-Apr-2018\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2019 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective is to improve health delivery systems and utilization of maternal, newborn and child health and nutrition services\r\n in project areas.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nComponent 1: Strengthening capacity for primary and community level MNCH and nutrition services:(Cost $27.50 M)\r\nComponent 2: Strengthening utilization of primary and community level MNCH and nutrition services through results based financing ap\r\nproaches:(Cost $24.00 M)\r\nComponent 3: Strengthening project management and policy analysis:(Cost $15.50 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The project is under implementation for the last three years, after one-year delay in project effectiveness. Overall, after a slow start, the project has\r\n gained momentum over the past 1.5 years and made good progress. The project has put in place a good platform for results-based management\r\n through (i) disbursement linked indicators (DLIs) at the national level; (ii) the results based financing (RBF) scheme at the facility level; and (iii) the\r\n community RBF scheme being piloted in project areas.\r\n The World Bank undertook the Mid-Term Review from April 30 to May 10, 2018 in collaboration with the Government of Zambia. The implementation\r\n status and progress towards the PDO has markedly improved since the last implementation support mission. However, the disbursement is lagging at\r\n 45% after three years of implementation. To further enhance project implementation, it was agreed during the MTR between the MoH and the World\r\n Bank team that project restructuring will be required to introduce the changes in the results framework, component & cost, reallocation between\r\n disbursement categories, and implementing agency\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Fiduciary  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Deliveries attended by skilled health providers (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 27.00 48.00 52.00 57.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Under-2 children received monthly growth monitoring and promotion (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 62.50 48.00 53.80 82.80\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health Centers offering integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 44.00 62.00 64.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health Centers with essential medicines and commodities in stock (percent) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 33.30 28.10 53.30 53.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 0-11 months fully immunized (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 80.00 83.00 88.20 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n Performance towards achievement of DPO has improved markedly. Four out of five PDO indicators have been achieved or are on track to be\r\n achieved. Only the nutrition-related PDO indicator for children under-2 years who received growth monitoring and promotion (GMP) is back\r\n tracking. Incidentally, only weight on this indicator has been consistently measured.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health workers trained in MNCH and nutrition competencies (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 933.00 1,852.00 2,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of trained health workers deployed to facilities in the five provinces. (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 48.20 53.50 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities (health centers and district hospitals) using electronic inventory control and logistics management system\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 60.00 60.00 734.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Regional hubs and staging posts equipped in target areas (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 2.00 8.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Protocols and guidelines at community and primary care levels updated and disseminated (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3.00 3.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Districts with community information system integrated DHIS-2 (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities (health centers and district hospitals) implementing the RBF approach (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 70.00 621.00 864.00 545.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health policy analysis conducted and results disseminated (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 4.00 3.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2,963,536.00 2,980,938.00 3,300,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 30-Nov-2017 31-May-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 70.00 82.00 55.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P145335 IDA-53940 Effective USD 52.00 52.00 0.00 23.07 24.46 49%\r\n\r\n P145335 TF-16639 Effective USD 15.00 15.00 0.00 5.80 9.20 39%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P145335 IDA-53940 Effective 21-Mar-2014 11-Feb-2015 31-Mar-2015 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n P145335 TF-16639 Effective 11-Feb-2015 11-Feb-2015 31-Mar-2015 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n7/6/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30227849": { "id": "30227849", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Cameroon", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Child health,Population and reproductive health,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Other communicable diseases", "docdt": "2018-06-30T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/978671530371517408/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-P156679-Sequence-No-05.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/978671530371517408/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-P156679-Sequence-No-05.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/978671530371517408/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-P156679-Sequence-No-05", "projectid": "P156679", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/978671530371517408/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-P156679-Sequence-No-05", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Cameroon | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2016 | Seq No: 5 | ARCHIVED on 30-Jun-2018 | ISR32077 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: MINEPAT, Ministry of Public Health, MINSANTE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:03-May-2016 Effectiveness Date:13-Dec-2016\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:30-Jun-2019 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:--\r\n Original Closing Date:31-May-2021 Revised Closing Date:31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n

The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase utilization and improve the quality of health services with a particular focus\r\n on reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health and nutrition services.

\r\n\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)PHRPDODEL\r\n The new Project Development Objective (PDO) is to: (i) increase utilization and improve the quality of health services with a particular focus on\r\n reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health, and nutritional services for the population of Cameroon, including refugees and refugee host\r\n communities, and (ii) in the event of an Eligible Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible Emergency\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nStrengthening of Health Service Delivery:(Cost $130.00 M)\r\nInstitutional Strengthening for Improved Health System Performance:(Cost $23.00 M)\r\nStrengthening emergency, sexual and reproductive health services, and water, sanitation and hygiene and nutrition service delivery for refugee and\r\nhost populations in the northern and East regions:(Cost $10.00 M)\r\nContingent Emergency Response Component\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 1 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n The PDO is on track to be achieved. Four of the six PDO level indicators are progressing well, and the remaining two indicators will be updated once the\r\n results of the INS survey are received towards the end of 2018. Scaling up of PBF is also progressing well and it is expected that 75 percent of the\r\n Cameroon population and at least 8 directorates of the Ministry of Public health will be covered by PBF towards the end of 2018. An additional financing\r\n to the project was approved by the Board of Executive directors on 1 May 2018 in an amount of US$36 Million through the IDA18 Refugee Sub-Window\r\n (RSW). The project was prepared in close collaboration between the Government of Cameroon, the World Bank and UNHCR, and this close\r\n collaboration will be maintained during implementation.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  Moderate  High  High\r\n Macroeconomic  Moderate  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  Substantial  Substantial  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  Substantial  Substantial  Moderate\r\n Fiduciary  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  Low  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Overall  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  People who have received essential HNP services (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 2 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,194,615.00 1,815,542.00 6,020,987.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 12-23 months fully immunized in the 3 Northern regions and the East (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 68.00 68.00 68.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator will be updated once the INS survey is complete in October 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Births attended by a skilled professional in the 3 Northern regions and the East (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 37.60 37.60 37.60 55.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator will be updated once the INS survey is complete in October 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Average score of the quality of care checklist (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 30.00 36.00 58.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 3 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children under 24 months being weighed for growth monitoring in the 3 northern regions (Adamaoua, North, Far north) and the\r\n East (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 16,501.00 30,491.00 1,646,480.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,211,116.00 1,846,033.00 8,267,467.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Number, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 617,669.00 941,477.00 4,216,408.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Refugees who have received healthcare (curative and preventative) at health facilities in northern and East regions (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 600,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 02-Jul-2018 -- -- 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator relates to the recently approved additional financing, which is yet to become effective. Therefore, data on this indicator will\r\n only be available in 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 4 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n There has been significant progress made on the PDO. Out of 6 PDO indicators, 4 are progressing very well, and data on the remaining 2\r\n indicators will be updated once the INS survey results are available in October 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Pregnant women receiving at least 4 antenatal care visits in the 3 Northern regions and the East (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 42.80 42.80 42.80 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator will be updated once the INS survey results are available in October 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Adolescent girls 10-19 years benefiting from multisectoral services supported by the GFF Investment Case (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 150,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This data will be updated once the INS results become available in October 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Women 15-49 using modern contraceptive methods in the 3 Northern regions and the East (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 12.80 12.80 12.80 22.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2019 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator will be updated once the INS survey results become available in October 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 5 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children aged 6-59 months who received a vitamin A supplement in the last six months (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 166,205.00 173,081.00 504,286.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of facilities with 100% tracer drugs available in targeted health facilities on the day of the visit (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 20.00 21.00 17.00 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of consultations provided to the poor and vulnerable free of charge (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 199,428.00 233,149.00 1,502,057.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 6 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Patients/people referred to the health facilities by community health workers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 58,821.00 95,866.00 343,890.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of reported maternal deaths audited in PBF districts (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 38.00 25.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Mar-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of the national population covered by the PBF program (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 25.00 38.00 47.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Jun-2016 29-Sep-2017 19-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of children and pregnant women dewormed (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,542,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 02-Jul-2018 -- -- 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator relates to the recently approved additional financing, which is yet to be effective. Results will be available in 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 7 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of refugee children and pregnant women dewormed (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 637,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 02-Jul-2018 -- -- 31-Dec-2022\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n This indicator relates to the recently approved additional financing, which is yet to be effective. Results will be available in 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P156679 IDA-57900 Effective USD 100.00 100.00 0.00 12.40 89.43 12%\r\n\r\n Not\r\n P156679 IDA-62250 USD 6.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 5.96 0%\r\n Effective\r\n\r\n Not\r\n P156679 IDA-D3000 USD 30.00 30.00 0.00 0.00 29.35 0%\r\n Effective\r\n\r\n P156679 TF-A2177 Effective USD 27.00 27.00 0.00 6.01 20.99 22%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P156679 IDA-57900 Effective 03-May-2016 14-Sep-2016 13-Dec-2016 31-May-2021 31-May-2021\r\n Not\r\n P156679 IDA-62250 01-May-2018 -- -- 31-Dec-2022 31-Dec-2022\r\n Effective\r\n Not\r\n P156679 IDA-D3000 01-May-2018 -- -- 31-Dec-2022 31-Dec-2022\r\n Effective\r\n P156679 TF-A2177 Effective 03-May-2016 14-Sep-2016 13-Dec-2016 31-May-2021 31-May-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 8 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nP164954-Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 9 of 9\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30227906": { "id": "30227906", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Tanzania", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Human development,Population and reproductive health,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Child health", "docdt": "2018-06-30T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/795761530375509868/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Strengthening-Primary-Health-Care-for-Results-P152736-Sequence-No-06.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/795761530375509868/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Strengthening-Primary-Health-Care-for-Results-P152736-Sequence-No-06.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/795761530375509868/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Strengthening-Primary-Health-Care-for-Results-P152736-Sequence-No-06", "projectid": "P152736", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/795761530375509868/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Strengthening-Primary-Health-Care-for-Results-P152736-Sequence-No-06", "doc-text": " The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nStrengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Tanzania | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice | Requesting Unit: AFCE1 | Responsible Unit: GHN01\r\n IBRD/IDA | Program-for-Results | FY 2015 | Team Leader(s): Shunsuke Mabuchi\r\n\r\n\r\n Seq No: 6 | ARCHIVED on 30-Jun-2018 | ISR32567 | Created by: Shunsuke Mabuchi on 14-May-2018 | Modified by: Shunsuke Mabuchi on 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Program Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Program Development Objective (from Program Appraisal Document)\r\n The Program Development Objective is to improve the quality of primary health care (PHC) services nationwide with a focus on maternal, neonatal\r\n and child health (MNCH) services.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Ratings\r\n\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO Satisfactory Satisfactory\r\n Overall Implementation Progress (IP) Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n The mid-term review (MTR) of the Strengthening Primary Healthcare for Results (PHCforR) Program took place in May 2018. The Program is in\r\n its third year of implementation and is making progress towards achieving its Program Development Objective (PDO). Three of the five PDO\r\n indicators already outperformed end of Program targets (i.e. antenatal care attendees receiving at least 2 doses of intermittent preventive treatment\r\n for malaria; institutional deliveries; and the proportion of children 12-59 months receiving at least one dose of Vitamin A supplementation during the\r\n previous year). Other notable progress includes: (i) the percentage of 3-star rating facilities increased from 1% to 20% in two years; (ii) dispensaries\r\n and health centers in result-based financing (RBF) regions showed consistent increases in quality score to 80-100% in 16 of 18 quality indicators;\r\n and (iii) coverage of essential services in RBF health facilities also increased 2-5-fold in 18/19 quantity indicators. The MTR identified several areas\r\n such as quality and use of data where implementation could be improved and the mission discussed and agreed upon corrective actions. The\r\n mission also agreed to restructure the Program to revise several disbursement linked indicators and the financing formula. The mission also\r\n discussed the potential additional financing to the Program and initial proposals were exchanged between the government of Tanzania and the\r\n World Bank.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\n Disbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed % Disbursed\r\n\r\n P152736 IDA-56430 Effective USD 200.00 200.00 0.00 130.68 73.18 64%\r\n\r\n P152736 TF-A0261 Effective USD 20.00 20.00 0.00 4.48 15.52 22%\r\n\r\n P152736 TF-A0270 Effective USD 40.00 40.00 0.00 19.27 20.73 48%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 1 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n P152736 TF-A1567 Effective USD 4.50 4.50 0.00 2.25 2.25 50%\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Program Action Plan\r\n Action Description Appoint Internal Auditor General as the independent verification entity.\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n Client No 25-Nov-2015 Completed\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Action Description Submit basic reporting requirements for the sector as per the HBF requirement.\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n Client No 30-Dec-2016 Completed\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Implement the ESSA through the following:\r\n Action Description i) Inclusion of HCWM in the CCHP\r\n ii) Monitor and report on the implementation of HCWM activities in the CCHP.\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n Client Yes Yearly Completed\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Action Description Review the existing procurement vetting mechanisms with a view to reducing backlog\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n Client No 30-Jan-2017 Completed\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Operationalize MSD system that issues out stock notices to facilities within one day as prescribed in the 2013 Public\r\n Action Description\r\n Procurement Regulation Act (Section 140) and the 2013 Public Procurement sub-regulations (Subsections 1 to 6).\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 2 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Client No 31-May-2018 Completed\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Action Description Conduct annual procurement audits of the program as well as Value for Money (VFM) audits by PPRA and CAG\r\n\r\n Responsibility Recurrent Frequency Due Date DLI# Status\r\n\r\n Client Yes Yearly In Progress\r\n\r\n TOR has been developed and procurement process is in progress for the audit of contracts procured in the preceding\r\n Comments\r\n fiscal year. Data collection is started for a Value for Money Audit. Both audits will be complete by June 30, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Macroeconomic -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies -- Low Low\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Fiduciary -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Environment and Social -- Moderate Moderate\r\n Stakeholders -- Low Low\r\n Other -- -- --\r\n Overall -- Moderate Moderate\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n PDO Indicators by Objectives / Outcomes\r\n\r\n\r\n To improve the quality of PHC services nationwide with a focus on MNCH services\r\n\r\n ►PHC facilities with 3- Star Ratings and Above (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 23.00 50.00\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 3 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Pregnant women attending 4 or more ante-natal care (ANC) visits (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 41.20 42.30 41.80 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►ANC attendees receiving at least 2 doses of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT2) for malaria (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 42.52 60.00 60.50 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Institutional deliveries (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 44.72 65.00 69.40 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Proportion of children 12-59 months receiving at least one dose of Vitamin A during the previous year (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 51.00 100.00 100.00 65.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators by Results Areas\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n ►Share of health in total government budget (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 8.50 8.10 9.40 9.75\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2016 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 4 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Councils with unqualified opinion in the annual external audit report (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 80.00 81.00 77.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Completion of “Star rating assessment of PHC facilities as per the two-year cycle (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►RBF facilities receiving timely RBF payment on the basis of verified results every quarter (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►LGAs with functional Council Health Service Boards (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 86.30 90.00 90.00 100.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Annual employment permits for PHC given to the 9 critical regions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 32.00 5.00 5.00 30.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Health facilities with continuous availability of 10 tracer medicines in the past year (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 30.60 57.00 60.00 55.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Health facilities with CEmOC (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 5 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 -- 44.00 104.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Completeness of quarterly HMIS data entered in DHIS by LGA (by the end of month after quarter ends) (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 89.50 97.00 97.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►RHMT’s required biannual data quality audits (DQA) for LGAs that meets national DQA standards (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 19.20 19.20 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Completion of annual capacity building activities compared to agreed annual plans (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►Dispensaries with skilled HRH (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 91.00 81.00 81.00 100.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n ►RHMTs required annual supportive supervision visits for LGAs that meets national supervision standards (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n Value 0.00 85.00 85.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Disbursement Linked Indicators\r\n DLI_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 6 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 1: Recipient has completed foundational activities (Output, 20,000,000.00, 100%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value N -- Y --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n DLI 1 RESULTS\r\n Update is as of April, 30, 2018.\r\n 8 Completed/Achieved (DLR 1.1, 1.2; 1.3; 1.4; 1.5; 1.6;1.7).\r\n 1 Partially completed/Partially Achieved (DLR; 1.8)\r\n\r\n DETAILED ASSESSMENT:\r\n 1 A 5year capacity building plan for the program has been completed.\r\n 2 Data Quality Audit tool prepared: COMPLETED. National DQA guidelines and tool have been developed,\r\n tested and disseminated to all 26 regions in the country has been done. Dissemination to the second\r\n administrative level – 184 local government authorities is the next step.\r\n 3 Financial instructions for health facility accounts prepared and disseminated to all LGAs: COMPLETED.\r\n Comments Financial Management Guidelines for Public Health Facilities have been developed and disseminated.\r\n 4 Verified baseline data (for 2014) and targets for performance indicators: COMPLETED. Report is available.\r\n 5 List of operational health facilities and GPS locations prepared: COMPLETED (7,356 facilities have been\r\n mapped which includes public, private and faith-based organizations). The data are publicly available at\r\n www.hfrportal.ehealth.go.tz.\r\n 6 Completion of BeMONC and CeMONC assessment in the five BRN RMNCAH regions: COMPLETED.\r\n BeMONC and CeMONC assessment in the 5 BRN RMNCH regions has been completed.\r\n 7 Eight selected health centres in the five BRN RMNCAH regions meeting CeMONC standards: ACHIEVED.\r\n Target: 8; Actual: 8.\r\n 8 At least 70 percent of health centres in the five BRN RMNCAH regions meeting BeMONC standards:\r\n PARTIALLY ACHIEVED. Target: 70%; Actual: 54% (Source: Star rating reassessment).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 2: Recipient has achieved all of the Program annual results in institutional strengthening at all levels (Process,\r\n 75,000,000.00, 47%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value N -- Y --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n DLI 2 RESULTS\r\n Update is as of April, 30, 2018.\r\n 4 Completed/Achieved (DLR 2.1; 2.2; 2.3;2.5).\r\n 1 Not completed/Not achieved (DLR 2.4).\r\n\r\n DETAILED ASSESSMENT:\r\n 1 Percentage of council whose annual comprehensive Council Health Plan (CCHP) passes the first round of\r\n assessment: ACHIEVED. Target: 80%; Actual: 83.7%.\r\n Comments 2 Action Plans of Audits of PORALG and MOH received within 2 months of the official release of the controller\r\n and Auditor General(CAG) report: ACHIEVED, Action plans shared by both MOH and PORALG.\r\n 3 Percentage of PHC facilities with bank accounts opened according to guidelines from Ministry of Finance\r\n and Planning (MOFP)/CAG: ACHIEVED. Target: 100%; Actual: 100%.\r\n 4 Percentage of annual employment permits for PHC staff given to the 9 critical regions: NOT ACHIEVED.\r\n This target is not measured because of hiring freeze by the government.\r\n 5 Percentage of completion of “Star Rating Assessment of PHC facilities: COMPLETED. Target: 100%;\r\n Actual: 100%.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 7 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 3: PHC facilities have improved maternal, neonatal and child health services delivery and quality as per verified\r\n results and received payments on that basis each quarter (Intermediate Outcome, 100,000,000.00, 34%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n\r\n As of April 30, 2018. 1,713 facilities in eight regions (Mwanza, Shinyanga, Pwani, Tabora, Kagera, Kigoma,\r\n Comments\r\n Geita and Simiyu) out of 9 planned regions are now implementing RBF.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 4: LGAs have improved annual maternal, neonatal and child health services delivery and quality as measured by\r\n the LGA Balance Score Card . (Outcome, 82,000,000.00, 62%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n DLI 4 RESULTS\r\n 9 Completed/Achieved (DLR 4.1; 4.2; 4.3; 4.4; 4.6; 4.8; 4.9; 4.10; 4.11).\r\n 3 Partially completed/Partially achieved (DLR 4.5; 4.7; 4.12).\r\n\r\n DETAILED ASSESSMENT:\r\n This is the second year of measuring this DLI the aggregated indicator is calculated and measure against\r\n 2016 targets. Below is an update on the DLI sub-indicators as of April, 30, 2018.\r\n\r\n 1 Percentage of pregnant women attending four or more antenatal care visits (ANC4): ACHIEVED: Target:\r\n 42%; Actual: 41.8%.\r\n 2 Proportion of mothers who received 2 doses of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT2) for malaria during\r\n last pregnancy: ACHIEVED. Target: 41%; Actual: 60.5%.\r\n 3 Percentage of institutional deliveries: ACHIEVED. Target: 70%; Actual: 69.4%.\r\n 4 Percentage of women of reproductive age (15-49 years) using modern family planning methods:\r\n ACHIEVED: Target: 35%; Actual: 40.5%.\r\n 5 Percentage of pregnant women who receive adequate quantity of iron and folate tablets during their current\r\n Comments\r\n ANC visit: PARTIALLY ACHIEVED: Target: 70%; Actual: 65%.\r\n 6 Proportion of children 12-59 months receiving at least one dose of Vitamin A supplementation during the\r\n past year: ACHIEVED. Target: 74%; Actual: 100%.\r\n 7 Percent of PHC facilities with “3 stars” rating or higher: PARTIALLY ACHIEVED. Target: 40%; Actual: 23%.\r\n 8 Number and percentage of Public primary health facility with at least one skilled staff: ACHIEVED. Target:\r\n 95%; Actual: 81%.\r\n 9 Percentage of PHC facilities with continuous availability of 10 tracer medicines (medicines, vaccines,\r\n medical devices) in the past year: ACHIEVED. Target: 40%; Actual: 60%.\r\n 10 Percentage of LGAs with functional Council Health Service Boards (meeting quarterly): ACHIEVED. Target:\r\n 72%; Actual: 90%.\r\n 11 Percentage of completeness of quarterly DHIS 2 entry by LGA (MTUHA phase one forms by Day 30 after\r\n the end of each quarter): ACHIEVED. Target: 91%; Actual: 97%.\r\n 12 Percentage of LGAs with unqualified opinion in the external audit report. PARTIALLY ACHIEVED. Target:\r\n 84%; Actual: 77%. PARTIALLY ACHIEVED.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 5: Regions have improved annual performance in supporting PHC services as measured by Regional Balance Score\r\n Card. (Outcome, 2,400,000.00, 0%)\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 8 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n DLI 5 RESULTS\r\n\r\n 1 Not achieved (DLR 5.1).\r\n 1 achieved (DLR 5.2).\r\n\r\n DETAILED ASSESSMENT:\r\n DQA training has been done to all regions throughout the country. Below is an update on the DLI sub-\r\n Comments\r\n indicators as of November 30, 2017. .\r\n\r\n 1 RHMTs required biannual data quality audits (DQA) for LGAs that meets national DQA standards. NOT\r\n ACHIEVED. Baseline: 0%; Target: 60%; Actual:19.2%.\r\n 2 RHMTs Required annual supportive supervision visits for LGAs that meets national supervision standards.\r\n ACHIEVED. Target: 60%; Actual: 85%.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 6: MOHSW and PMO-RALG have improved annual PHC service performance as measured by National Balance\r\n Scorecard (Process, 5,600,000.00, 22%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n DLI 6 RESULTS\r\n Update is as of April, 30, 2018.\r\n 2 Completed/Achieved (DLR6.2; 6.3).\r\n 1 Partially completed/Partially achieved (DLR 6.4).\r\n 1 Not achieved/completed (DLR6.1).\r\n\r\n DETAILED ASSESSMENT:\r\n Comments\r\n 1 Average of LGA performance score: NOT COMPLETED. Target: 80%; Actual: 51%.\r\n 2 Average of Regional performance scores: COMPLETED. Target: 50%; Actual: 48.6%.\r\n 3 Percentage of unsupported expenditure in MOH/PORALG in their annual audit. ACHIEVED. Target: 0%;\r\n Actual: 0.1%.\r\n 4 Percentage of LGAs receiving CHF matching funds: PARTIALLY COMPLETED. Target: 57%; Actual: 47%.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ►DLI DLI 7: Completion of annual capacity building activities at all levels as per the agreed annual plans. (Process,\r\n 15,000,000.00, 0%)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) 2019-20\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y --\r\n\r\n Date 25-Aug-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Apr-2018 --\r\n\r\n Comments The Capacity Building Plan (under DLI #1) has been implemented as agreed in the plan as of April 30, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 9 of 10\r\n\f The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Strengthening Primary Health Care for Results (P152736)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/30/2018 Page 10 of 10\r\n\f" }, "D30218697": { "id": "30218697", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-29T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598431530236210856/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-08.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598431530236210856/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-08.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598431530236210856/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-08", "projectid": "P133597", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/598431530236210856/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-08", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\nSenegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Senegal | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 8 | ARCHIVED on 28-Jun-2018 | ISR32808 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Delegation Generale a la Protection Sociale et la Solidarite Nationale, Delegation a la protection sociale DGPSN, Ministere\r\nde l’Economie et des Finances et du Plan\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:29-Apr-2014 Effectiveness Date:07-Aug-2014\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:20-Feb-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:20-Feb-2017\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2019 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The development objectives of the proposed Project are to support the establishment of building blocks for the social safety net system and to\r\n provide targeted cash transfers to poor and vulnerable households.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)PHRPDODEL\r\n TThe objectives of the Project are to: (a) support the establishment of building blocks for the social safety net system; and (b) increase the access of\r\n poor and vulnerable households to targeted and adaptive cash transfers programs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nSupport to the Development of the Social Safety Net System:(Cost $8.80 M)\r\nSupport to Targeted Cash Transfer Programs for Poor and Vulnerable Households:(Cost $42.75 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 1 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n Project implementation has been underway for 38 months. The progress towards PDO achievement is satisfactory and the implementation of both\r\n components continue to be satisfactory. However, the roll out of the Management Information System (MIS) by the cash transfer program (PNBSF)\r\n continues to be behind schedule. The overall implementation progress, the financial management, procurement and monitoring and evaluation continue\r\n to be assessed as being moderately satisfactory.\r\n The DGPSN restructured the regional coordinator function and reduced their number from 14 to 6. Each regional coordinator covers 2 to 3 regions.\r\n The Registre National Unique (RNU) is preparing to do the survey in the four regions where the community targeting was done to update and extend the\r\n RNU data and is preparing to do the community targeting in 10 other regions. The RNU trained 12 social operators out of 14 on its MIS. Social\r\n operators started using it.\r\n The PNBSF has not started to increase the number of beneficiaries to 400 000 after the President’s request. The contract of PNBSF social operators is\r\n coming to an end in June and should be renewed quickly. The PNBSF trained only 7 social operators out of 14 on the MIS. Also, the PNBSF did not\r\n finish the initialization phase of the MIS and social operators have to enroll 300 000 beneficiaries manually in the MIS. The existing process creates\r\n space for a lot errors. In addition, the PNBSF runs the risk of demotivating main users to use and update the MIS.\r\n The evaluation of the pilot for the seasonal food security response was conducted and presented to many stakeholders. The government adopted the\r\n key findings and is recommending the 2018 seasonal food security response to use the RNU to target the beneficiaries and to use cash transfers to\r\n distribute benefits instead of rice distribution.\r\n Also, All the trainings have been done for the response to fire pilot and the pilot should start in the coming weeks. The productive safety nets (Yook Kom\r\n Kom) started and will soon be at full implementation speed.\r\n The strategic alliance (partnership between the DGPSN and other resilience programs to offer opportunities to RNU households and PNBSF\r\n beneficiaries to develop income generating activities) are yet to start. The DGPSN faces challenge to make it happen on a large scale. There are 700\r\n 000USD available in the budget to finance cash grants to beneficiaries.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 2 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households enrolled in the RNU (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 60,000.00 442,000.00 442,000.00 600,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of PNBSF beneficiary households who live below the poverty line (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 93.00 93.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 20-Oct-2016 20-Oct-2016 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n a survey was conducted in the 4 regions where the community targeting for the total update of the RNU took place to analyze the level of\r\n poverty of the households pre-identified to be in the Registry. This indicator will be updated once the analysis is finalized.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of female among beneficiaries of the PNBSF (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 50.00 50.00 63.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Dec-2016 28-Dec-2016 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n Percentage of women receiving the cash transfer\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 3 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of MOUs signed between the DGPSN and sectorial actors to define sectoral involvement in the PNBSF. (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 1.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 -- -- 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of households in the unique registry with complete and coherent information for all the variable collected (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 65.00 -- -- 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 -- -- 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n the data of the registry is being updated. This indicator will be updated once the survey of the Unique Registry is done (once after the\r\n update in 4 regions, and a second time after the update in the 10 other regions)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of modules of the MIS PNBSF that are operational: beneficiary management, conditionality monitoring, payment,\r\n promotion and communication, grievance management, and adaptive intervention (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 6.00 6.00 6.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of modules of the MIS of the RNU that are operational: geographic segmentation, geographic targeting, community\r\n targeting, categorical targeting, promotion and communication, grievance manageme (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 7.00 7.00 7.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 4 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Utilization of a module of the RNU MIS for sectoral department to request data (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 YES\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of complaints and grievances of the PNBSF resolved without delay (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n 60% cases\r\n Value 0.00 85% 71% resolved\r\n without delay\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Apr-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of complaints and grievances of the RNU resolved without delay (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 -- 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Data not available\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of local committees who understand the objectives of the RNU (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 66.00 26.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 27-Jul-2017 27-Jul-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Results coming from the last community score card. Difference could be explained by the difference way of calculating the indicator. Last\r\n semester the answers Understand and understand more or less were counted together as share of local committees who understand\r\n the RNU.This time, only the answers understand are included in the share of local committees who understand the RNU.\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 5 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of PNBSF beneficiary households (who have signed their moral contract) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 48,000.00 218,194.00 218,194.00 300,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of PNBSF beneficiaries who know the program s parameters as mentioned in the community scorecard (on\r\n their rights and responsibilities with regard to conditionalities, program rules, and (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 70.00 75.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 27-Jul-2018 27-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n results from the last community scorecard. Different set of data available. This one include the percentage of beneficiaries who know the\r\n objective of the cash transfer program\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of PNBSF beneficiary households for which the conditionality on attendance to the sensitization sessions was monitored\r\n during the last four sessions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 50.00 68.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 09-Oct-2017 09-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 6 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of PNBSF beneficiary households who attended the last four sensitization sessions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 50.00 58.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 09-Oct-2017 09-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of annual evaluations of the PNBSF on the basis of community score cards (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 3.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households benefiting from temporary transfers in response to shocks (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 8,147.00 8,147.00 8,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households in the RNU benefiting from productive transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 7 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households in the RNU benefiting from productive accompanying measures to increase their resilience. The\r\n measures include (a) the preferential inclusion of poor households in existing resil (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 9,400.00 50,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Utilization of tools from the safety nets system (RNU and cash transfers) in the programmes to respond to shocks implemented\r\n in the project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 2.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 13-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 27-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Quarterly payment implemented without major problems (5= no problem, 4= one problem, etc.) (Amount(USD), Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 5.00 11.00 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The January 2018 and April 2018 paiements were late in the Orange Money Zone\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of data updated annually in the RNU during the cycle of total update of the Registry (30% every year) (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 18-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n in the process of updating 30% of the households, but not finalised\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 8 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P133597 IDA-54330 Effective USD 40.50 40.50 0.00 27.03 10.23 73%\r\n\r\n P133597 TF-A2849 Effective USD 11.05 11.05 0.00 3.27 7.78 30%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P133597 IDA-54330 Effective 29-Apr-2014 30-May-2014 07-Aug-2014 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n P133597 TF-A2849 Effective 24-Aug-2016 08-Oct-2016 08-Oct-2016 29-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 9 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 16-Nov-2017 ,Level 2 Approved on 07-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nP156160-Social Safety Net ,P162354-Senegal - Additional Financing to the Social Safety Net Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Page 10 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30223948": { "id": "30223948", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Niger", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-29T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/719951530299225833/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-13.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/719951530299225833/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-13.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/719951530299225833/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-13", "projectid": "P123399", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/719951530299225833/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399-Sequence-No-13", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\nNiger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Niger | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2011 | Seq No: 13 | ARCHIVED on 29-Jun-2018 | ISR32300 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Cellule Filets Sociaux, Cabinet du Premier Ministre, Republic of Niger\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:19-May-2011 Effectiveness Date:11-Oct-2011\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:31-Dec-2014 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:08-Dec-2014\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2017 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective (PDO) is to establish and support an effective safety net system which will increase access of poor and food\r\n insecure people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)PHRPDODEL\r\n The project development objective is to establish and support an effective and adaptive safety net system that will increase access of poor and\r\n vulnerable people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nBuilding an adaptive and scalable Safety Nets System:(Cost $8.55 M)\r\nCash Transfers and accompanying measures:(Cost $59.70 M)\r\nCash for Work for resilience:(Cost $18.90 M)\r\nProject Management:(Cost $13.85 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 1 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n This is an interim ISR which will be updated in the next month to incorporate an update of the results framework and contribution from our colleagues.\r\n The project overall performance remains satisfactory at the time of the last supervision mission in May 2018. The project continued to make substantial\r\n progress in the achievement of its key results indicators, which have been already met or exceeded. The overall disbursement rate is 89% (91% for IDA\r\n and 60% for the ASP TF).\r\n The team has started the process of the preparation of the 2nd Adaptive Safety Net Project which will allow to continue the engagement of the\r\n Government of Niger in providing these important services to the poor and vulnerable people in the country. The Governments has confirmed its\r\n support with the establishment of a small team to prepare the second phase of the Adaptive Social Net Project.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 2 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Low  Low\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 3 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n Stakeholders  --  Low  Low\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to the cash transfer system established by the Project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 143,542.00 143,542.00 126,500.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households receiving scaled up cash transfer assistance through the disaster risk financing mechanism (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 2,456.00 5,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to the cash for work programs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 10,000.00 47,030.00 30,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Dec-2015 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households benefiting from accompanying measures (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 44,888.00 78,824.00 107,100.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 4 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jan-2011 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,024,576.00 1,024,576.00 759,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 51.00 51.00 50.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of villages receiving payments based on the frequency specified in the implementation manual (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Target households who are poor (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 5 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 83.00 83.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Unified Social Registry is established (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A common database is functional and shared with at least 3 partners (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  The institution identified to manage the database is functional (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  The Government legally identifies the institutional anchorage of the national database (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 6 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Cash for work and DRF cash transfer beneficiaries in departments identified as vulnerable by the DN (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Effectiveness of national SP systems to address Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Management (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 1.00 2.00 2.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Capacity of Niger’s social protection systems to implement adaptive social protection programs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 3.00 3.00 4.00 5.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 7 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Micro-projects that are functional at the end of each calendar year (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 99.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  The monitoring and evaluation mechanism of the DNPGCCA is fully operational and processing the data of all the units of the\r\n DNPGCCA. (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N N N Y\r\n\r\n Date 25-Feb-2016 16-Mar-2016 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A management information system is developed (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  The impact evaluation is generating lessons (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value No Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 8 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiary households that have been identified and registered to receive monthly transfers for a 24-month period (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 91,538.00 91,538.00 89,100.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households participating in the accompanying measures (participation rate) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 93.00 93.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Registered families who are receiving the transfers (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Days of temporary employment (broken down by gender) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3,095,089.00 3,095,089.00 3,600,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 9 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of days of work created for women (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,112,489.00 1,112,489.00 1,800,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of days of work created for men (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,982,600.00 1,982,600.00 1,800,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Communal infrastructures rehabilitated per year (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 233.00 233.00 600.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  (a) land rehabilitated (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 212,555.00 212,555.00 250,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 10 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Project management expenses ratio is inferior or equal to 10% (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value No Yes (8%) Yes (8%) Yes\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A Grievance Redress Mechanisms is in place in all communities targeted (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2011 31-Aug-2017 31-Aug-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP123399 IDA-49200 Closed USD 70.00 68.32 1.68 62.91 0.00 100%\r\n\r\nP123399 IDA-D1130 Effective USD 22.50 22.50 0.00 15.47 7.49 67%\r\n\r\nP123399 TF-A2304 Effective USD 8.50 8.50 0.00 5.13 3.37 60%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\nP123399 IDA-49200 Closed 19-May-2011 14-Jul-2011 11-Oct-2011 30-Jun-2017 30-Jun-2017\r\nP123399 IDA-D1130 Effective 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 26-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\nP123399 TF-A2304 Effective 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 28-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 11 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level Approved on 08-Feb-2012 ,Level Approved on 13-Jan-2016 ,Level 2 Approved on 13-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n P155846-Adaptive Social Safety Nets Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/29/2018 Page 12 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30217198": { "id": "30217198", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Guinea", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Education for all,Gender,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development,Social dev/gender/inclusion", "docdt": "2018-06-28T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/276751530210350600/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900-Sequence-No-12.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/276751530210350600/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900-Sequence-No-12.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/276751530210350600/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900-Sequence-No-12", "projectid": "P123900", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/276751530210350600/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900-Sequence-No-12", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\nProductive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Guinea | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\n IBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2012 | Seq No: 12 | ARCHIVED on 28-Jun-2018 | ISR33278 |\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementing Agencies: The Republic of Guinea, Cellule Filets Sociaux, Ministry of Economy and Finance\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:19-Jun-2012 Effectiveness Date:14-Feb-2013\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:30-Jun-2015 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:12-Oct-2015\r\n Original Closing Date:02-Oct-2017 Revised Closing Date:30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objectives\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to provide income support to vulnerable groups and to lay the foundations of a socialsafety net\r\n strategy by testing some of the building blocks necessary for a larger system.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nLabor intensive public works program with a focus on women and youth, and life skills development:(Cost $12.05 M)\r\nPilot transfer programs to protect human capital:(Cost $4.50 M)\r\nProject management:(Cost $4.32 M)\r\nResponse to the Ebola Epidemic:(Cost $6.00 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n Overall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n Overall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 1 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n Project performance has been maintained as Satisfactory. Just under 70,000 beneficiaries have been reached through Labor Intensive Public Works,\r\n school feeding and cash transfers activities. 266 micro-projects, the majority of which focus on sanitation and reforestation, have been successfully\r\n completed. Eight out of eight conditional cash transfers have been completed to an estimated 1,882 households. Almost 2 million people are the\r\n direct and indirect beneficiaries from improved infrastructures and services, the majority being women. The project was restructured on the 29th May\r\n 2018 to allow the reallocation of funds left over from category 1 (over-budgeted) to category 2 (under-budgeted) of the Ebola Recovery Trust Fund, to\r\n reinforce the accompanying measures. The reallocation ensured that the Trust Fund, which closes June 30, 2018, disburses all of its remaining\r\n balance before closing. Additionally, to ensure administrative compliance, the project was successfully restructured to extend the closing date of the\r\n original IDA grant to September 30, 2019, reallocate proceeds and categories, and transfer the institutional anchorage of the Project to the Ministry of\r\n Planning and International Cooperation. The operating costs of the implementing partner (Cellule Filets Sociaux) remain below the agreed 18 percent.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Low  Low\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  --  Low  Low\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Four key building blocks of a safety nets system are tested (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 24-Mar-2016 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 2 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Social assistance beneficiaries receiving nutrition/parenting/early learning/stimulation education (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 12,537.00 10,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 04-Jul-2017 04-Aug-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of poor households among safety nets beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 82.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 23-Feb-2016 28-Aug-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of complaints registered in the grievance redress system that have been addressed in line with established\r\n procedures (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 100.00 95.00\r\n\r\n Date 04-Jul-2017 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries of social safety net programs (Number, Corporate)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 300,000.00 358,630.00 503,808.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 3 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries of social safety net programs - Female (Number, Corporate Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 19,741.00 41,834.00 25,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households benefiting from cash transfers and LIPW (Number, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 74,020.00 74,020.00 83,968.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of Person days of work provided (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 978,829.00 1,682,122.00 1,787,580.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 4 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Wages distributed to workers (Amount(USD), Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3,749,877.00 8,688,750.00 7,240,070.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of microprojects transferred to the authorities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 219.00 266.00 322.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiary households of the CCT (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3,235.00 3,235.00 9,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 04-Jul-2017 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children benefiting from the CCT (Number, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 27,890.00 27,890.00 12,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 5 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  CCT Beneficiaries complying with conditions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 98.00 98.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Operating ratio (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 25.00 15.00 15.00 18.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  System based mechanisms for beneficiary identification are tested (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 28-Aug-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Rapid annual beneficiary satisfaction surveys conducted (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 17-Oct-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 6 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Findings from the impact evaluation of the pilot are discussed and incorporated in the social safety nets strategy (Yes/No,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 29-Jun-2012 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Roads rehablitated (Kilometers, Corporate)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 47.00 333.00 137.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Drainage cleaned (Kilometers, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 386.00 533.00 425.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Certified payment mechanisms are tested (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 31-Mar-2016 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 7 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A management information system is tested (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 31-Mar-2016 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  An electronic beneficiary registration system is tested (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 31-Mar-2016 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Amount transfered through the cash transfers under component 2 (Amount(USD), Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 7,550,000.00 5,000,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 -- 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children benefiting from school feeding- number of children (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 7,940.00 7,940.00 3,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Mar-2017 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 8 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct beneficiaries of the accompanying measures (including financial literacy)- number of people (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 8,390.00 13,571.00 35,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 26-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct beneficiaries of the LIPW activities- number of people (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 32,850.00 32,850.00 41,118.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 04-Jul-2017 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Women benefiting from LIPW (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 19,741.00 19,741.00 25,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Feb-2013 04-Jul-2017 04-Jul-2017 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct beneficiaries of non conditional cash transfers (number of people collecting the grant)- EERTF (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 6,975.00 6,975.00 7,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Mar-2016 04-Jul-2017 04-Jul-2017 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 9 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P123900 IDA-D1210 Effective USD 12.00 12.00 0.00 6.85 5.25 57%\r\n\r\n P123900 IDA-H7820 Effective USD 25.00 25.00 0.00 23.06 0.17 99%\r\n\r\n P123900 TF-18255 Closed USD 1.87 1.85 0.01 1.85 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n P123900 TF-A2454 Effective USD 4.35 4.35 0.00 4.35 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P123900 IDA-D1210 Effective 31-May-2016 27-Jun-2016 03-Aug-2016 30-Sep-2019 30-Sep-2019\r\n P123900 IDA-H7820 Effective 19-Jun-2012 19-Jul-2012 14-Feb-2013 02-Oct-2017 30-Sep-2019\r\n P123900 TF-18255 Closed 18-Nov-2014 18-Nov-2014 18-Nov-2014 31-Oct-2015 31-Oct-2015\r\n P123900 TF-A2454 Effective 31-May-2016 27-Jun-2016 03-Aug-2016 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 10 of 11\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 14-Oct-2017 ,Level 2 Approved on 22-May-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nP145117-Additional Financing to Productive Social Safety Nets Project ,P156484-Additional Financing Productive Social Safety Nets Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/28/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 11 of 11\r\n\f" }, "D30341790": { "id": "30341790", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Burkina Faso", "docty": "Project Performance Assessment Report", "theme": "Decentralization,Public expenditure, financial management and procurement,Rural policies and institutions,Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise support,Nutrition and food security,Public expenditure, financial management and procurement,Other public sector governance,Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise support,Nutrition and food security,Rural markets,Public expenditure, financial management and procurement,Trade facilitation and market access,Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise support,Nutrition and food security,Rural markets,Public expenditure, financial management and procurement,Trade facilitation and market access,Micro, Small and Medium Enterprise support,Nutrition and food security,Rural markets", "docdt": "2018-06-26T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/494031533935601565/pdf/127424-PPAR-P126207-P132210-P146640-P151275-PUBLIC-on-8-13-18-PPAR-Burkina-Faso-Growth-and-Competitiveness.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/494031533935601565/text/127424-PPAR-P126207-P132210-P146640-P151275-PUBLIC-on-8-13-18-PPAR-Burkina-Faso-Growth-and-Competitiveness.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/494031533935601565/Burkina-Faso-First-Second-Third-and-Fourth-Growth-and-Competitiveness-Credits-Projects", "projectid": "P151275,P126207,P132210,P146640", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/494031533935601565/Burkina-Faso-First-Second-Third-and-Fourth-Growth-and-Competitiveness-Credits-Projects", "doc-text": " BURKINA FASO\r\n\r\nGrowth and Competitiveness\r\n Credits (1–4)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Report No. 127424\r\n JUNE 26, 2018\r\n\f© 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction This work is a product of the staff of The World RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS\r\nand Development / The World Bank Bank with external contributions. The findings, The material in this work is subject to copyright.\r\n1818 H Street NW interpretations, and conclusions expressed in Because The World Bank encourages\r\nWashington DC 20433 this work do not necessarily reflect the views of dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be\r\nTelephone: 202-473-1000 The World Bank, its Board of Executive reproduced, in whole or in part, for\r\nInternet: www.worldbank.org Directors, or the governments they represent. noncommercial purposes as long as full\r\n attribution to this work is given.\r\nAttribution—Please cite the work as follows: The World Bank does not guarantee the\r\nWorld Bank. 2018. Burkina Faso—Growth and accuracy of the data included in this work. The Any queries on rights and licenses, including\r\nCompetitiveness Credit (1-4). Independent boundaries, colors, denominations, and other subsidiary rights, should be addressed to\r\nEvaluation Group, Project Performance information shown on any map in this work do World Bank Publications, The World Bank\r\nAssessment Report 127424. Washington, DC: not imply any judgment on the part of The Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC\r\nWorld Bank. World Bank concerning the legal status of any 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail:\r\n territory or the endorsement or acceptance of pubrights@worldbank.org.\r\n such boundaries.\r\n\f Report No.: 127424\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PROJECT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT\r\n\r\n BURKINA FASO\r\n\r\n First Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P126207)\r\n (IDA-H6820, IDA-H7850)\r\n\r\n Second Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P132210)\r\n (IDA-H7850, IDA-H8300)\r\n\r\n Third Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P146640)\r\n (IDA-53270, IDA-H8300, IDA-H8950)\r\n\r\n Fourth Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P151275)\r\n (IDA56090, IDA-D0440, IDA-H8950)\r\n\r\n July 31, 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nHuman Development and Economic Management\r\n\r\nIndependent Evaluation Group\r\n\fCurrency Equivalents (annual averages)\r\n\r\nCurrency Unit = CFA Franc (CFAF)\r\n\r\n2012 $1.00 CFAF 510.52\r\n2013 $1.00 CFAF 494.04\r\n2014 $1.00 CFAF 494.45\r\n2015 $1.00 CFAF 591.45\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAbbreviations\r\nAICB Association Interprofessionnelle des Cotonculteurs du Burkina Faso\r\nCAS country assistance strategy\r\nCPS country partnership strategy\r\nCSO civil society organization\r\nDGCOOP director general in charge of cooperation\r\nDPF development policy financing\r\nEITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative\r\nFAARF Support Fund for Women’s Income-Generating Activities\r\nG&C Growth and Competitiveness\r\nGDP gross domestic product\r\nICR Implementation Completion and Results Report\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nIEG Independent Evaluation Group\r\nIMF International Monetary Fund\r\nISR Implementation Status and Results Report\r\nPDO project development objective\r\nPEFA Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability\r\nPFM public financial management\r\nPPAR Project Performance Assessment Report\r\nPRSCG Poverty Reduction Support Credit and Grant\r\nSCADD Stratégie pour une Croissance Accélérée et pour le Développement Durable\r\nSCD Systematic Country Diagnostic\r\nSONAGESS Société Nationale de Gestion du Stock de Sécurité Alimentaire\r\n\r\nAll dollar amounts are U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated.\r\n\r\n\r\nFiscal Year\r\n\r\nGovernment: January 1 – December 31\r\n\r\n Director-General, Independent Evaluation Ms. Caroline Heider\r\n Director, Human Development and Economic Management Mr. Auguste Tano Kouame\r\n Manager, Country Programs and Economic Management Mr. Pablo Fajnzylber\r\n Task Manager Mr. Felix Oppong\r\n\r\n ii\r\n\fContents\r\nPreface ............................................................................................................................................................... vii\r\nSummary .......................................................................................................................................................... viii\r\n1. Background and Context ........................................................................................................................ 1\r\n Evolution of World Bank Development Policy Financing, 2001–15 ............................................. 3\r\n Macroeconomic and Other Developments ........................................................................................ 3\r\n2. Strategic Underpinning and Relevance of Growth and Competitiveness Grants and\r\nCredits .................................................................................................................................................................. 6\r\n Relevance of Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 6\r\n Relevance of Design ................................................................................................................................... 8\r\n3. Implementation ........................................................................................................................................ 12\r\n4. Achievement of the Objectives ........................................................................................................... 14\r\n Objective 1. Catalyze Private Sector Growth and Employment ................................................................14\r\n Objective 2. Improve Governance and Public Resource Management ................................................ 19\r\n Objective 3. Increase Resilience and Reduce Vulnerability to Shocks .................................................. 27\r\n\r\n5. Ratings ......................................................................................................................................................... 30\r\n Outcome....................................................................................................................................................... 30\r\n Risk to Development Outcome..............................................................................................................31\r\n Bank Performance ......................................................................................................................................31\r\n Quality at Entry ......................................................................................................................................................... 31\r\n Quality of Supervision ........................................................................................................................................... 35\r\n\r\n Borrower Performance............................................................................................................................. 36\r\n Monitoring and Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 37\r\n6. Lessons......................................................................................................................................................... 39\r\nBibliography..................................................................................................................................................... 40\r\n\r\n\r\nFigures\r\nFigure 1. Evolution of Country Context in Burkina Faso ....................................................................... 2\r\nFigure 2. Production and Prices of Gold and Cotton............................................................................ 4\r\nFigure 3. Mining Revenue in Burkina Faso, 2011–16 ............................................................................. 21\r\nFigure 4. Average Time for Making a Decision in the Courts .......................................................... 23\r\n\r\n\r\n iii\r\n\fTables\r\nTable 1. Macro and Fiscal Position of Burkina Faso, 2008–16 (percent of GDP) .......................... 5\r\nTable 2. Selected Financial Sector Indicators ......................................................................................... 15\r\nTable 3. Achievement of Agricultural Sector Outcome Targets ....................................................... 16\r\nTable 4. Status of Results Indicators for Subobjective 1.2 .................................................................. 18\r\nTable 5. Results Indicators on the Mining Sector................................................................................. 20\r\nTable 6. Status of Results Indicators on the Justice Sector ............................................................... 22\r\nTable 7. Status of Results Indicators Related to Public Financial Management ......................... 24\r\nTable 8. Status of Results Indicators on Decentralization ................................................................. 27\r\nTable 9. Indicators Covering the Microfinance Sector ....................................................................... 28\r\nTable 10. Status of Indicators on Food Security.................................................................................... 29\r\n\r\n\r\nAppendixes\r\nAppendix A. Basic Data Sheet ................................................................................................................... 48\r\nAppendix B. Figures and Tables ............................................................................................................... 55\r\nAppendix C. List of Department Contacted ......................................................................................... 68\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n iv\r\n\fPrincipal Ratings\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: Growth and Competitiveness Credit Series (I-IV)\r\n\r\n Indicator ICR* ICR Review* PPAR\r\n Outcome Moderately unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory\r\n unsatisfactory\r\n Risk to Moderate Substantial Moderate\r\n development\r\n outcome\r\n Bank Moderately unsatisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory\r\n performance unsatisfactory\r\n Borrower Moderately unsatisfactory Moderately Moderately\r\n performance unsatisfactory unsatisfactory\r\nNote: The Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICR) is a self-evaluation by the responsible Global Practice. The\r\nICR Review is an intermediate Independent Evaluation Group product that seeks to independently validate the findings of\r\nthe ICR. PPAR = Project Performance Assessment Report.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Staff Responsible\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: First Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P126207)\r\n\r\n Project Task Manager/Leader Sector Manager Country Director\r\n Appraisal Samba Ba Miria A. Pigato Madani M. Tall\r\n Completion Ali Zafar Lars Christian Moller Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: Second Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P132210)\r\n\r\n Project Task Manager/Leader Sector Manager Country Director\r\n Appraisal Samba Ba Miria A. Pigato Madani M. Tall\r\n Completion Ali Zafar Lars Christian Moller Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: Third Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P146640)\r\n\r\n Project Task Manager/Leader Sector Manager Country Director\r\n Appraisal Samba Ba Miria A. Pigato Madani M. Tall\r\n Completion Samba Ba Lars Christian Moller Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: Fourth Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P151275)\r\n\r\n Project Task Manager/Leader Sector Manager Country Director\r\n Appraisal Samba Ba Blanca Moreno-Dodson Ousmane Diagana\r\n Completion Samba Ba Lars Christian Moller Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n v\r\n\f IEG Mission: Improving World Bank Group development results through excellence in\r\n independent evaluation.\r\n\r\n\r\nAbout This Report\r\nThe Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) assesses the programs and activities of the World Bank for two purposes: first, to ensure\r\nthe integrity of the World Bank’s self-evaluation process and to verify that the World Bank’s work is producing the expected\r\nresults, and second, to help develop improved directions, policies, and procedures through the dissemination of lessons drawn\r\nfrom experience. As part of this work, IEG annually assesses 20–25 percent of the World Bank’s lending operations through\r\nfieldwork. In selecting operations for assessment, preference is given to those that are innovative, large, or complex; those that\r\nare relevant to upcoming studies or country evaluations; those for which Executive Directors or World Bank management have\r\nrequested assessments; and those that are likely to generate important lessons.\r\n To prepare a Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR), IEG staff examine project files and other documents, visit\r\nthe borrowing country to discuss the operation with the government, and other in-country stakeholders, interview World Bank\r\nstaff and other donor agency staff both at headquarters and in local offices as appropriate, and apply other evaluative methods\r\nas needed.\r\n Each PPAR is subject to technical peer review, internal IEG panel review, and management approval. Once cleared\r\ninternally, the PPAR is commented on by the responsible World Bank country management unit. The PPAR is also sent to the\r\nborrower for review. IEG incorporates both World Bank and borrower comments as appropriate, and the borrowers’ comments\r\nare attached to the document that is sent to the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors. After an assessment report has been\r\nsent to the Board, it is disclosed to the public.\r\n\r\n\r\nAbout the IEG Rating System for Public Sector Evaluations\r\nIEG’s use of multiple evaluation methods offers both rigor and a necessary level of flexibility to adapt to lending instrument,\r\nproject design, or sectoral approach. IEG evaluators all apply the same basic method to arrive at their project ratings. Following is\r\nthe definition and rating scale used for each evaluation criterion (additional information is available on the IEG website:\r\nhttp://ieg.worldbankgroup.org).\r\n Outcome: The extent to which the operation’s major relevant objectives were achieved, or are expected to be\r\nachieved, efficiently. The rating has three dimensions: relevance, efficacy, and efficiency. Relevance includes relevance of\r\nobjectives and relevance of design. Relevance of objectives is the extent to which the project’s objectives are consistent with\r\nthe country’s current development priorities and with current World Bank country and sectoral assistance strategies and\r\ncorporate goals (expressed in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, Country Assistance Strategies, sector strategy papers, and\r\noperational policies). Relevance of design is the extent to which the project’s design is consistent with the stated objectives.\r\nEfficacy is the extent to which the project’s objectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, taking into account their\r\nrelative importance. Efficiency is the extent to which the project achieved, or is expected to achieve, a return higher than the\r\nopportunity cost of capital and benefits at least cost compared with alternatives. The efficiency dimension is not applied to\r\ndevelopment policy operations, which provide general budget support. Possible ratings for outcome: highly satisfactory,\r\nsatisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, highly unsatisfactory.\r\n Risk to Development Outcome: The risk, at the time of evaluation, that development outcomes (or expected\r\noutcomes) will not be maintained (or realized). Possible ratings for risk to development outcome: high, significant, moderate,\r\nnegligible to low, and not evaluable.\r\n Bank Performance: The extent to which services provided by the World Bank ensured quality at entry of the\r\noperation and supported effective implementation through appropriate supervision (including ensuring adequate transition\r\narrangements for regular operation of supported activities after loan or credit closing, toward the achievement of\r\ndevelopment outcomes). The rating has two dimensions: quality at entry and quality of supervision. Possible ratings for Bank\r\nperformance: highly satisfactory, satisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, and highly\r\nunsatisfactory.\r\n Borrower Performance: The extent to which the borrower (including the government and implementing agency or\r\nagencies) ensured quality of preparation and implementation, and complied with covenants and agreements, toward the\r\nachievement of development outcomes. The rating has two dimensions: government performance and implementing\r\nagency(ies) performance. Possible Ratings for borrower performance: highly satisfactory, satisfactory, moderately satisfactory,\r\nmoderately unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, and highly unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n vi\r\n\fPreface\r\nThis Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR) evaluates the Growth and\r\nCompetitiveness Credit Development Policy Financing series (I–IV) implemented in\r\nBurkina Faso between 2012 and 2015. The total cost of the four operations was\r\n$359 million equivalent. The first operation was approved by the Board of the\r\nInternational Development Association (IDA) on June 26, 2012, and the last on April 2,\r\n2015. The series closed on December 31, 2015.\r\n\r\nThe development objectives of the four operations were to catalyze private sector\r\ngrowth and generate employment; improve transparency and accountability in public\r\nresource mobilization and management; and increase resilience and reduce vulnerability\r\nto shocks.\r\n\r\nThe Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) prepared the report based on interviews, a\r\nreview of World Bank files, and documents and data collected during a field visit to\r\nBurkina Faso in November 2017. The mission met with World Bank staff, government\r\nofficials, beneficiaries of the reforms, donors, academia, and civil society groups. The\r\nevaluation also draws from interviews with the task team leaders and country manager\r\nof Burkina Faso. The series followed 11 budget support operations of the Poverty\r\nReduction Support Credits and Grants 1–11 in Burkina Faso and was the only type of\r\ndevelopment policy operation financed by IDA resources during the period.\r\n\r\nThe cooperation and assistance of all stakeholders as well as the support of the World\r\nBank Country Office in Burkina Faso are gratefully acknowledged.\r\n\r\nFollowing standard IEG procedures, a copy of the draft PPAR was sent to the borrower\r\nfor comments. No comments were received.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n vii\r\n\fSummary\r\nThis Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR) assesses the extent to which the\r\nGrowth and Competitiveness series of four operations between 2012 and 2015 achieved\r\nits development policy objectives. The series involved a total disbursement of\r\nSDR239.8 million (about $359 million) in the form of grants and credits. The first\r\noperation was approved by the Board of the International Development Association\r\n(IDA) on June 26, 2012, and the last on April 2, 2015. The series closed on December 31,\r\n2015.\r\n\r\nThe development objectives of the series were to catalyze private sector growth and\r\ngenerate employment; improve transparency and accountability in public resource\r\nmobilization and management; and increase resilience and reduce vulnerability to\r\nshocks.\r\n\r\nThe outcome of the series is rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\nThe development objectives were substantially relevant. The series broadly supported\r\nthe strategy presented in the government’s Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (Stratégie\r\npour la Croissance Accélérée et le Développement Durable [Durable (Strategy for\r\nAccelerated Growth and Sustainable Development; SCADD]). The SCADD program\r\nwas realigned by the transitional government following an economic and political crisis,\r\nbut the nature of the realignment and its impact on the program are not fully explained\r\nin the project documents. The sector strategies within the SCADD were not fully fleshed\r\nout and action plans had not always been developed. Some policy priorities emerged\r\nonly in the Letters of Development Policy. In other cases, such as cotton, the program\r\nseems to have relied much more on the World Bank’s 2010 Country Economic\r\nMemorandum than the subsequent government’s program, calling into question\r\ngovernment ownership.\r\n\r\nThe development objectives were broadly relevant to World Bank strategy for Burkina\r\nFaso. The 2010–12 country assistance strategy underpinned the first two operations and\r\nthe 2012–16 country partnership strategy the two subsequent ones.\r\n\r\nRelevance of design is rated modest. The choice of a programmatic DPF instrument was\r\ninappropriate in a challenging environment characterized by significant political\r\nturbulence. The design was insufficiently flexible to react to shocks and attempted to\r\ncover too many areas. The series supported the completion of reforms from previous\r\nendeavors at a time when the country context had begun to deteriorate and earlier gains\r\nhad been eroded. Objectives were formulated differently under each operation. This,\r\ntogether with the breadth of the objectives, made it difficult to establish a clear chain of\r\n\r\n\r\n viii\r\n\fcausality. Many of the prior actions supported were too weak to achieve the broad\r\nobjectives. Some prior actions were reversed and repeated.\r\n\r\nEfficacy is assessed as negligible for the first objective and modest for the second and\r\nthird. There is no evidence that the series catalyzed private sector growth or generated\r\nemployment. Enhancement of public transparency and accountability was limited and\r\nuneven. There is little evidence of reduced vulnerability to shocks. Many outcome\r\ntargets were not met. Some of those that were met were inadequate to ensure the\r\nattainment of the objectives. Some previous achievements were reversed.\r\n\r\nThe risk to development outcome is rated moderate. The limited achievements are\r\nunlikely to be reversed.\r\n\r\nBank performance is rated unsatisfactory. Quality at entry was undermined by\r\nattempting to support too many unrelated policy areas, in direct opposition to the\r\nrecommendation of the country assistance strategy. Risks were identified but\r\ninadequately mitigated. Supervision did not address pertinent issues in a timely\r\nmanner. The technical assistance provided was not sufficient to address capacity\r\nweaknesses.\r\n\r\nBorrower performance is rated moderately unsatisfactory. The government maintained\r\nmacroeconomic and fiscal stability despite severe shocks. However, resources made\r\navailable for reform implementation were inadequate, as was reporting of results.\r\nInstitutional and political turmoil undermined the implementation of reforms. Internal\r\ncoordination was weak.\r\n\r\nLessons\r\n\r\n • When political risks are high and capacity is strained, design is better focused\r\n on a few key priorities. This series covered too many areas, and some key\r\n binding constraints were not addressed. The series might have been more\r\n successful with a sharper focus on more realistic objectives accompanied by a\r\n simpler design.\r\n\r\n • The success of budgetary support depends on the suitability of the\r\n instrument to the country environment. In a context of political turbulence\r\n and uncertainties about the government’s ability to undertake long term\r\n reforms, the World Bank could have ended the programmatic series after the\r\n third operation and made the fourth operation a stand-alone. Alternatively,\r\n the World Bank could have implemented a series of stand-alone operations\r\n after the second programmatic series when it became apparent that the\r\n political and policy environment was rapidly changing.\r\n\r\n\r\n ix\r\n\f• Lack of clarity on the respective roles and responsibilities of central and local\r\n governments and of the private sector undermines policy actions. It is\r\n important to ensure that there is a shared vision and that the need for reform\r\n is recognized and accepted by all parties. In this case, there was a lack of\r\n clarity among different stakeholders during implementation of the reforms\r\n on decentralization and fertilizer distribution.\r\n\r\n• When monitoring and evaluation is not adequately resourced or\r\n implemented, there can be delays in the identification of problems and the\r\n application of remedies. Monitoring and evaluation weaknesses can be\r\n compensated by leveraging information available elsewhere, or through\r\n specific impact assessments and perceptions surveys.\r\n\r\n• There may be a trade-off between the promise of continuous and predictable\r\n financing, urgently needed in times of crisis, and the strength of the reform\r\n program. In Burkina Faso the emphasis was on continuous financing even\r\n when reform performance was waning.\r\n\r\n• The lack of broad consultations with stakeholders when the World Bank is\r\n designing a complex reform program could lead to unsatisfactory results. In\r\n this case, the lack of consultations with an important stakeholder association\r\n (the Confederation Paysanne du Faso) on fertilizer distribution affected the\r\n achievement of results of one of the first objectives. Also, some development\r\n partners and civil society organizations had limited knowledge of the\r\n reforms pursued in the Growth and Competitiveness series.\r\n\r\n• Inadequately resourced implementing agencies will likely be unable to carry\r\n out agreed reforms. Under-resourcing may indicate low government\r\n commitment, which needs to be addressed through policy dialogue. It is also\r\n important to ensure that agencies have appropriate technical capacity and\r\n systems in place, and that potential political obstacles at the local level are\r\n being addressed.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Auguste Tano Kouame\r\n Director\r\n Human Development and Economic Management\r\n Independent Evaluation Group\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n x\r\n\f1. Background and Context\r\n1. Burkina Faso is a low-income, landlocked country with about 16.7 million\r\ninhabitants. It is prone to large external shocks, resulting in part from the primary nature\r\nof its major exports (gold and raw cotton). Growth is hampered by natural and\r\ndemographic factors, as well as its governance framework. In addition, poor policy\r\nchoices and institutional weaknesses constrain economic performance. Almost\r\n40 percent of the population lives in poverty and lacks productive jobs. The World Bank\r\nhas provided development support to the Government of Burkina Faso for several\r\ndecades. In total, the International Development Association (IDA) lent about $4.1\r\nbillion between 1980 and 2017, of which $1.45 billion was provided as development\r\npolicy financing (DPF). In addition, the country benefited from $1.15 billion of IDA debt\r\nrelief under the Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt\r\nRelief Initiative. Overall, the World Bank’s investment lending has constituted a larger\r\nshare of the portfolio than DPF, although the latter has become increasingly important\r\nover the past decade (see appendix B, table B.6).\r\n\r\n2. The country was politically stable for over two decades until 2011. The period\r\nbefore 2011 was characterized by political and economic stability, during which Burkina\r\nFaso moved away from a centralized model toward market-oriented reforms and re-\r\nengagement with the international community. The government pursued reforms to\r\naddress low agriculture productivity, limited expansion of productive nonfarm jobs,\r\npoor educational outcomes, lack of basic infrastructure, and insufficient human capital\r\nto escape the traps of poverty. After 2011, a series of domestic protests and political\r\nunrest complicated implementation of policy reforms (World Bank 2012a). The country\r\nsuffered a political crisis that led to the removal of the president in October 2014 and\r\ninstallation of a transition government, which faced an attempted military coup in\r\nSeptember 2015. Following popular protests against the transition government, a new\r\npresident was democratically elected in November 2015. The new government\r\ncontinued to face agitation by labor unions demanding higher salaries through 2016 and\r\n2017.\r\n\r\n3. Domestic and external shocks periodically affected the economy and the fiscal\r\nbalance. The location of the country made it prone to “Sahelian attacks,” especially after\r\n2011. The government increased its security budget to address this menace (estimated\r\nincrease of 40 percent). In addition, the 2012 Sahelian food crisis led to an inflow of\r\nabout 100,000 Malian refugees to Burkina Faso. These shocks, alongside the political\r\ninstability, contributed to a decline in real gross domestic product (GDP) growth from\r\n9 percent in 2012 to 6.6 percent in 2013 and 5 percent in 2014. The trend in GDP growth\r\nis volatile and averages about 5.5 percent between 2007 and 2016. Development partners\r\n\r\n\r\n 1\r\n\fsupported the government with $100 million of additional budget support (2012–14),\r\nbut the impact of the crises lingered on throughout the series.\r\n\r\nFigure 1. Evolution of Country Context in Burkina Faso\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: Publicly available information.\r\n\r\n4. Corruption was a significant contextual issue in Burkina Faso during the\r\npreparation of the series (World Bank 2012a). The program documents (program\r\ndocuments) indicated government acknowledgment of deep challenges concerning\r\ngovernance and openness, especially the perception of corruption. The judiciary had not\r\nbeen independent and had been perceived as being prone to political interference,\r\nthough Burkina Faso had signed or ratified various regional and international\r\ninstruments on the prevention of corruption, including the United Nations Convention\r\nAgainst Corruption. The government had created entities to help implement\r\nanticorruption policies and laws, but their implementation had been ineffective. The\r\nperception of corruption had persisted. In the Letter of Development Policy of the\r\nGrowth and Competitiveness (G&C) first program document, the government\r\ncommitted to fight corruption.\r\n\r\n5. The World Bank had no country manager for six months during the preparation\r\nof the series. The absence of the country manager adversely affected policy dialogue and\r\nthe responsiveness of the World Bank to the crisis. Many donors indicated that their\r\ncohesion was weakened given the World Bank’s convening power as the head of\r\ndevelopment partners in Burkina Faso.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 2\r\n\fEvolution of World Bank Development Policy Financing, 2001–15\r\n6. The G&C series represents a continuation of IDA support in an increasingly\r\ndifficult and complex national context. The World Bank provided continuous multiyear\r\nbudget support through development policy financing operations (DPFs) totaling\r\n$1,174 million from 2001 to 2015. This includes Poverty Reduction Support Credits and\r\nGrants (PRSCGs) 1–6 of $310 million, PRSCG 7–11 of $505 million and to G&C 1–4\r\n($359 million). In addition, the country benefited from 100 percent multilateral debt write-\r\noff from the Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief\r\nInitiative, amounting to $1,154 million as debt relief after July 2006.\r\n\r\n7. The PRSCG 1–6 of 2001–06 had moderately satisfactory results. The Project\r\nPerformance Assessment Report (PPAR) by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) of\r\nthe series reports modest achievements of the objective of accelerating broad-based\r\ngrowth and employment and disappointing progress on private sector development.\r\nAlso, achievements under the objective of ensuring access to basic social services were\r\nvery limited. Reforms of the civil service had negligible impact. Some progress was\r\nmade on budget management and fiduciary frameworks. However, the 2017 Public\r\nExpenditure Financial Accountability (PEFA) indicates that much of this progress has\r\nbeen reversed or has stalled.\r\n\r\n8. The PRSCG 7–11 (2007–11) had moderately unsatisfactory results attributable to\r\nweak design and modest achievements on two objectives out of three. IEG’s\r\nImplementation Completion and Results (ICR) Review of the series indicates that a\r\nconsiderable proportion of program targets across all objectives were not achieved. The\r\noutcomes were weak in decentralization and cotton sector restructuring, where\r\ngovernment commitment was insufficient. The program made substantial progress in\r\npromoting higher efficiency, transparency, and accountability in the use of public\r\nresources. These gains were largely reversed during the crisis period (2012–15).\r\n\r\n9. The World Bank team recognized the difficulties faced by previous series in\r\nadequately addressing reform objectives. In the first program document of the G&C\r\nseries, the team acknowledged the difficulty of improving the overall competitiveness of\r\nthe economy (World Bank 2012a, 2). It also noted that the successive PRSCG series had\r\nachieved limited results in support of decentralized social services. The World Bank\r\ndecided to address key outstanding reform issues through the series of four operations\r\nthat are the subject of this evaluation.\r\n\r\n\r\nMacroeconomic and Other Developments\r\n10. Burkina Faso maintained macroeconomic stability amid political instability and\r\nexternal shocks. On average, the fiscal deficit was 2.7 percent of GDP between 2012 and\r\n2015, while inflation hovered around 1.2 percent. Real GDP growth was responsive to\r\n 3\r\n\fthe country context: it declined from 9 percent in 2012 to 4 percent in 2015, but rose to\r\n5.9 percent in 2016. GDP growth is heavily influenced by the prices of Burkina Faso’s\r\ncommodity exports. Stronger exports of cotton and gold supported higher economic\r\ngrowth, especially in 2012 and 2013 (figure 2). However, GDP growth fell with\r\nlower gold and cotton prices in 2015. Although the share of gold mining in national\r\noutput is low (mostly due to outdated national accounts that are in the process of\r\nbeing rebased), it nonetheless accounted for 58 percent of exports and 14 percent of\r\nfiscal revenues in 2014, down from a peak of 75 percent and 19 percent, respectively,\r\nin 2011–12, when international prices were nearly 30 percent higher.\r\n\r\nFigure 2. Production and Prices of Gold and Cotton\r\n a. Cotton production dropped due to erratic b. … amid plummeting prices\r\n rainfall, whereas gold output remained robust\r\n …\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: IMF 2017.\r\n\r\n11. The government’s fiscal situation has been stable, with moderate tax revenue\r\nperformance, and lower than budgeted spending due to slow execution of the\r\ninvestment budget. The overall fiscal deficit remained below 5 percent from 2008\r\nuntil 2016. Total revenue increased by 4 percentage points of GDP during 2008–2016,\r\nover 80 percent from tax revenue, because of significant administrative reforms\r\nsince 2009 and new tax policies adopted after 2010. Nevertheless, much remains to\r\nbe done in this area, which was covered by four out of nine structural benchmarks\r\nunder the International Monetary Fund (IMF) seventh program review.1\r\nFurthermore, the January 2018 Tax Administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool\r\n(TADAT) report identified significant weakness through the ratings of various\r\nindicators:2 16 D, 10 C, no B, and one A. The Doing Business rating also rates “paying\r\ntaxes” poorly—153rd out of 190 countries.3\r\n\r\n12. Tax revenues declined from 16.5 percent of GDP in 2013 to 15 percent in 2016,\r\nreflecting lower commodity prices. Nontax revenues have been stable at an average of\r\n2 percent of GDP since 2012. The overall fiscal deficit declined from 3.5 percent of GDP\r\nin 2013 to 3.1 percent in 2016 in tandem with changes in tax revenues.\r\n\r\n\r\n 4\r\n\f13. Burkina Faso benefits from substantial external assistance. Ahead of the G&C\r\nseries under review, 27 donors jointly supported implementation of the government’s\r\nstrategy through budget support, sector programs, investment projects, capacity\r\nbuilding, and technical assistance. Nine of these donors provided direct budget support.\r\nThe World Bank is the largest contributor in the budget support group. Total grants\r\naveraged about 4.7 percent of GDP between 2008 and 2016. However, they fell from\r\n5.4 percent of GDP in 2013 to 2.5 percent in 2016 due to concerns over the political\r\nsituation and low government commitment to reforms. Program grants also fell to\r\n1.1 percent of GDP in 2016 from 3.8 percent in 2011 (table 1).\r\n\r\nTable 1. Macro and Fiscal Position of Burkina Faso, 2008–16 (percent of GDP)\r\n\r\n\r\n Item 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\nTotal revenue and grants 17.1 19.4 20.1 21.8 22.7 23.9 21.4 19.4 19.6\r\nTotal revenue 13.1 13.5 15.6 16.5 17.7 18.5 17.3 15.9 17.1\r\nTax revenue 12.1 12.4 12.9 14.5 15.8 16.5 15.3 14.1 15\r\nNontax revenue 1.1 1.1 2.6 2.0 1.9 2.1 2 1.8 2.2\r\nGrants 4 5.8 4.6 5.3 4.9 5.4 4.2 3.5 2.5\r\nProject 1.6 2.2 1.2 1.5 2 3.4 2.6 1.6 1.4\r\nProgram 2.4 3.7 3.4 3.8 2.9 2 1.6 1.9 1.1\r\nExpenditure and net 21.6 24.1 24.6 24.3 25.8 27.4 23.3 21.4 22.8\r\nlending\r\nCurrent expenditure 12.3 12.5 12.1 13.1 14.7 13.6 14.4 14 15.6\r\nWages and salaries 5.4 5.7 5.6 5.9 5.9 5.9 7.1 7.1 7.7\r\nGoods and services 2.6 2.4 2.1 2 2.1 2 1.7 1.7 1.8\r\nInterest payments 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.9\r\nCurrent transfers 4 4 4 4.6 5.9 5.1 4.9 4.6 5.2\r\nInvestment expenditure 8.9 11.5 11.1 10.2 11.1 14.2 9 7.6 7.3\r\nOverall balance (1) −4.5 −4.7 −4.5 −2.5 −3.1 −3.5 −1.8 −2 −3.1\r\nCash basis adjustment 0.4 2.4 0 0.3 0.3 0.8 1.2 −1.4 1.2\r\nOverall balance (cash −4 −2.3 −4.6 −2.2 −2.8 −2.7 −0.6 −3.4 −1.9\r\nbasis)\r\nFinancing 3.9 2.5 4.5 2.1 2.7 2.7 0.7 3.3 1.9\r\nForeign financing 2.8 2.7 3.4 2.3 1.5 0.6 0.8 1.4 1.5\r\nDomestic financing 1.1 −0.3 1 −0.2 1.1 2.1 −0.2 2 0.4\r\nOther memorandum\r\nitems\r\nReal GDP growth 5.2 3.2 7.9 4.2 9.0 6.6 4.2 4.0 5.9\r\nCurrent account −11.7 −4.6 −2.3 −1.2 −4.5 −11.0 −8.0 −8.0 −6.8\r\nConsumer prices (annual 10.7 2.6 −0.6 2.7 3.8 0.5 −0.3 0.9 −0.2\r\naverage)\r\nSource: Compiled from IMF reviews (IMF 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, and 2017).\r\nNote: The program document did not have consistent macro data. GDP = gross domestic product.\r\n\r\n14. Burkina Faso is at moderate risk of external debt distress. This status remained\r\nunchanged between 2013 and 2016 despite external shocks. The country’s debt indicators\r\nremain within the thresholds, based on the results of the joint IMF–World Bank Debt\r\nSustainability Analysis of November 2016. This analysis reflects various changes that have\r\n\r\n 5\r\n\foccurred since 2013, including new borrowing, both concessional and nonconcessional;\r\nlower discount rates; higher debt distress thresholds associated with the country’s move\r\nfrom an institutional performance rating of “strong” to “medium,” based on the Country\r\nPolicy and Institutional Assessment; and the use of end-2013 debt data.\r\n\r\n15. The country’s reform indicators, including those on governance, deteriorated\r\nafter 2011. The overall Country Policy and Institutional Assessment fell from about 3.8 in\r\n2012 to 3.6 in 2016 and has remained at the same level since.4 Similarly, the score of the\r\npublic sector management and institutions pillar5 fell from 3.7 in 2011 to 3.5 in 2015,\r\nreflecting weakening property rights and rule-based governance, as well as the quality\r\nof budget and financial management. The score for economic management fell\r\npersistently from 4.5 in 2005 to 4.2 in 2012, and further declined to 3.8 in 2015 (see\r\nappendix B, figure B.1). Burkina Faso ranked 148 out of 190 countries for ease of doing\r\nbusiness in 2018.\r\n\r\n16. The country’s reform indicators, including those on governance, deteriorated\r\nafter 2011. The overall Country Policy and Institutional Assessment fell from about 3.8 in\r\n2012 to 3.6 in 2016 and has remained at the same level since.6 Similarly, the score of the\r\npublic sector management and institutions pillar7 fell from 3.7 in 2011 to 3.5 in 2015,\r\nreflecting weakening property rights and rule-based governance, as well as the quality\r\nof budget and financial management. The score for economic management fell\r\npersistently from 4.5 in 2005 to 4.2 in 2012, and further declined to 3.8 in 2015 (see\r\nappendix B, figure B.1). Burkina Faso ranked 148 out of 190 countries for ease of doing\r\nbusiness in 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n2. Strategic Underpinning and Relevance of\r\n Growth and Competitiveness Grants and Credits\r\nRelevance of Objectives\r\n17. Relevance of objectives is rated substantial.\r\n\r\n18. The four operations under the G&C series had multiple formulations of the\r\nproject development objectives (PDOs):\r\n\r\n • PDO of first and second operation: catalyze private sector growth and\r\n employment, improve governance and public resource management, and\r\n build resilience and reduce vulnerability.\r\n\r\n • PDO of third operation: catalyze private sector growth and employment\r\n creation, improve governance and enhance public resource management,\r\n build economic resilience and reduce vulnerability to shocks.\r\n\r\n 6\r\n\f • PDO of fourth operation: enhance the government’s ability to reduce costs in\r\n the agriculture and transport sectors; improve transparency and\r\n accountability in public resource mobilization and management; and reduce\r\n vulnerability to shocks.\r\n\r\n19. The first two operations had identical development policy objectives. The PDO of\r\nthe third operation was formulated slightly differently, but not materially so. The PDO\r\nof the fourth operation was reformulated, narrower, and more specific. However, the\r\nessence of the objectives, the sectors focused on by the operations, and the reforms to be\r\nundertaken were similar to those of the other PDOs.\r\n\r\n20. Drawing on the above formulations, this evaluation is based on the following\r\nobjectives: catalyze private sector growth and generate employment; improve\r\ntransparency and accountability in public resource mobilization and management; and\r\nincrease resilience and reduce vulnerability to shocks. The objective of reducing costs in\r\nagriculture and transport sectors (in the fourth operation) is assessed as a part of the first\r\nobjective.\r\n\r\n21. The G&C series broadly supported the strategy presented in the government’s\r\nPoverty Reduction Strategy Paper (Stratégie pour la Croissance Accélérée et le\r\nDéveloppement Durable). It remained the strategy of reference at closure. The SCADD\r\nprogram focused on sustained economic growth and employment. It was based on four\r\nstrategic axes: promoting growth and reducing economic vulnerability; investing in\r\nhuman capital and social protection to increase economic resilience; improving\r\ngovernance and enhancing the efficiency of the public sector; and addressing cross-\r\ncutting priorities, such as gender, demography, and the government’s capacity to\r\nimplement development policies and programs. The SCADD was realigned by the\r\ntransitional government, taking into consideration the postcrisis context. The program\r\ndocument for the fourth operation mentions that the transitional government decided to\r\nfocus its efforts on four priority policy areas: defense and national security; justice sector\r\nreform; political, economic, and administrative governance; and social services delivery.\r\nHowever, it does not explain the nature of this realignment or its impact on the World\r\nBank program.\r\n\r\n22. The World Bank supported less than fully fleshed-out government sector\r\nstrategies included in the SCADD.8 In some instances, such as cotton and transport, it is\r\nunclear whether all the G&C pillars or policy areas were closely related to specific\r\nsectoral strategies and the extent to which relevant action plans had been developed.\r\nInstead, these policy areas were mentioned in the Letter of Development Policy\r\nprepared for each operation. Cotton sector reforms appeared to have been directly\r\nlinked to the recommendations made in the 2010 Country Economic Memorandum,\r\n\r\n\r\n 7\r\n\fwhich is not equivalent to being based on a fully articulated, government-owned\r\nstrategy.\r\n\r\n23. The G&C series was underpinned by two World Bank assistance strategies: the\r\n2010–12 country assistance strategy (CAS) and the 2012–16 country partnership strategy\r\n(CPS), which in turn were aligned with the overarching themes of the Africa Region\r\nStrategy (World Bank 2009b, 2013a; also see World Bank 2015d). The CAS was the\r\ndocument of reference for the first and second operations in the series, whereas the\r\nsubsequent operations were related to the CPS. The latter remained relevant at closing.\r\n\r\n24. The CAS states that “the challenge … is to enhance the impact and visibility of\r\nWorld Bank interventions through a more selective and strategic program. This is\r\nparticularly relevant in the context of budget support … future general budget support\r\nwould benefit from more selective targeting of key reforms at the central level.” The mix\r\nof reforms in the first and second operations was not fully aligned with this strategic\r\ngoal. The CAS considered the possibility of topping-up budget support to allow for\r\ncountercyclical financing—a measure intended to alleviate unforeseen crises (World\r\nBank 2009b). Specific areas of intervention mentioned included decentralization and\r\nsocial safety nets.\r\n\r\n25. The CPS contains limited strategic arguments for budget support in general and\r\nG&C specifically. The G&C series is conceptually consistent with the three pillars in the\r\nCPS: accelerate inclusive and sustainable economic growth; enhance governance for\r\nmore efficient social service delivery; and reduce economic, social, and environmental\r\nvulnerabilities (World Bank 2015b, ix). However, the G&C priorities are imperfectly\r\nmatched with those of the CPS. For instance, the CPS does not focus on judicial issues\r\nthat are covered under G&C series. The CAS completion report included in the CPS\r\ndoes not highlight any specific lessons concerning budget support.\r\n\r\n26. To conclude, budget support was envisaged as a key financing instrument by the\r\nWorld Bank in the CAS. The G&C series was broadly aligned with the strategies of the\r\nWorld Bank and government. However, the program’s relevance fell short with respect\r\nto greater selectivity.9 The alignment of the series with the CPS is weaker, as the strategic\r\nrelevance and importance of the G&C series is not well described. Nevertheless, it can be\r\nconcluded that the program had substantial relevance to the CAS at entry, and to the\r\nCPS at exit, as well as the government’s overall and available sectoral strategies both at\r\nentry and at closing.\r\n\r\n\r\nRelevance of Design\r\n27. Relevance of design is rated modest.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 8\r\n\f28. The results framework for the series was adversely affected by the varied\r\nformulation of objectives pursued under each operation, reversal and repetition of some\r\nprior actions, the choice of instrument, mitigation of shocks, and the scope of the\r\nprogram. The series attempted to implement uncompleted reforms from the previous\r\nPoverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSC) series (1–11) at a time when the country\r\ncontext had begun to deteriorate and earlier gains were eroded—notably for public\r\nfinancial management (PFM). Such a challenging environment called for a simple results\r\nframework, based on a few well-focused reform actions and clear linkages between prior\r\nactions, intermediate outputs, and outcomes.10 In this case, the objectives pursued were\r\nbroad, making it difficult to find a clear logical chain for the entire program. The chain of\r\ncausality was somewhat clearer with the narrowing of the objectives in the fourth\r\noperation, especially on “public financial management” and on “vulnerability to\r\nshocks.”\r\n\r\n29. The PDO statements in the first three operations, though adopted from\r\ngovernment priorities, were overly broad. Narrower, more specific objectives, such as\r\nthose stated in the fourth operation, would have been more manageable. This was done\r\nfor the fourth operation. For instance, the goals in the first three operations to catalyze\r\nprivate sector growth and employment were narrowed down in the fourth operation to\r\nreducing costs in agriculture and transport. This reflected the focus of the actual reforms\r\nundertaken during the first three operations.\r\n\r\n30. The objectives were set too high, and the policy actions were too weak to achieve\r\nthem. The difficulties that the country was experiencing should have been apparent to\r\nthe World Bank team during the design phase. The PDOs are at least two logical steps\r\nremoved from the areas supported by the operation and what would be realizable\r\nduring the period covered, resulting in a broken chain of logic. The ICR recognizes this,\r\nbut the issue is described as indicators not being at the right (high enough) level.\r\nHowever, higher-level targets would be difficult to achieve and to attribute to the\r\nprogram during the implementation period. Another issue is that the stated objective of\r\nprivate sector growth is misaligned with the program, which does not cover key\r\nconstraints to private sector growth, such as investment climate and energy, although it\r\nincludes unrelated elements, such as social protection. The revised PDO statement under\r\nC&G4 is more closely related to the program and appropriately more modest. However,\r\nit makes no mention of governance or vulnerability, which should have been kept in the\r\nstatement.\r\n\r\n31. The macroeconomic framework was assessed as adequate in all four operations.\r\nThe program documents based their assessments on the assumption of high GDP\r\ngrowth of 7 percent per year (which proved optimistic and subject to downside risks),\r\nprudent fiscal policies, and stable monetary policy managed by the regional architecture.\r\nThe program documents also mentioned balance of payments and fiscal risks, and high\r\n 9\r\n\frisks of debt distress over the medium term (revised to moderate risk in PD4), despite\r\nearlier Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief\r\nInitiative. debt write-off and continuous concessional financing by donors—all four\r\nG&C operations were financed through a grant, with an addition credit for the last two.\r\nInflation was not seen as a risk thanks to regional monetary arrangements. The\r\nassessment in PD2 also noted additional challenges related to fiscal subsidies and the\r\npublic investment program. Despite potential downside risks, the program documents\r\ndid not present any sensitivity analysis (other than for debt). Since there was an IMF\r\nprogram, the series did not support macroeconomic reforms related to potential shocks.\r\n\r\n32. The series was designed to cover four operations, rather than the three\r\noperations typical of programmatic series. The logic of reliance on a relatively long\r\nprogrammatic series given contextual uncertainties identified up-front as risks seems\r\ncounterintuitive. During this review, the World Bank team justified this choice by\r\nindicating that the country was politically stable at the beginning of the series and it was\r\nalmost impossible to predict the magnitude of the political upheaval during\r\nimplementation. With the advantage of hindsight, a series of stand-alone DPFs after the\r\nsecond programmatic series, with some forward-looking design elements, such as\r\npossible triggers for subsequent support, may have been better suited to the changing\r\npolitical and economic environment in the country. The challenges of maintaining the\r\nprogrammatic approach despite the increased political instability are illustrated by the\r\nchanging nature of the policy content of the program. Although cotton and PFM sector\r\nreforms represented continuity with past PRSC series, many of the other policy actions\r\nappear to have been added in a manner that seems inconsistent with a programmatic\r\napproach. Specifically, transport sector policy actions were only introduced under the\r\nthird operation, judicial reform policy actions under the first and second operation\r\n(respectively two and one action) were not followed up later, and the microfinance\r\nreforms were not well connected to one another (except between the second and third\r\noperations). Furthermore, the announced possibility that World Bank DPF support\r\nwould be used to deal with an unexpected crisis could have motivated a possible switch\r\nfrom the programmatic series to stand-alone DPF operations.\r\n\r\n33. The relationship between expected outcomes, policy actions, and the PDOs is\r\nsometimes tenuous, especially as the program documents do not establish whether the\r\nmost binding constraints11 were being addressed. However, the subobjectives presented\r\nin the policy matrix strengthen the chain of logic somewhat as they are more closely\r\nrelated to the reforms being undertaken; the link was more credible even if the policy\r\nactions selected were not necessarily the most pressing ones, as in the case of contract\r\ndisputes (discussed below). Specifically, taking the original pillars:\r\n\r\n • Private sector–led growth and employment creation is much broader than the\r\n cotton sector, fertilizer distribution, customs, and trucking reforms.\r\n 10\r\n\f Furthermore, the indicators were largely outputs, which do not capture the\r\n potential outcomes.\r\n\r\n • The PFM measures are quite minimal.12 The causal chain related to the\r\n commercial court appears sound13 but falls short of measuring whether\r\n written judgments are executed—the goal of the reform. The chain is still\r\n weaker for mining, as the expected outcomes are either outputs or may not\r\n be attributable to the policy actions.\r\n\r\n • There were too many outcome targets. The first objective had five targets, the\r\n second had nine, and the third had six. Some indicators were only remotely\r\n related to the objectives. For instance, increasing the number of certified\r\n professional truck drivers by 10 percent in relation to private sector\r\n employment.\r\n\r\n • The policy actions taken under the third pillar (see appendix B, table B.7)\r\n appear to contribute to the development objectives. However, the expected\r\n outcomes are mostly formulated as outputs.\r\n\r\n34. The revised PDOs under the fourth operation benefit from a stronger chain of\r\nlogic because objectives are more modest and more closely associated with policy\r\nactions, which is nevertheless affected by some revised indicators being too input-\r\noriented or not attributable to a significant extent. More specifically, three indicators\r\nwere added under G&C 4 while seven were dropped. An indicator added was “the\r\nAnnual Financial Reporting Sheets of microfinance institutions are made available each\r\nyear no later than July.” There was no auditing requirement and no follow-up required\r\nby the regulatory institution, and this was thus only a first step in the form of an output\r\ntoward the objective of improved oversight of microfinance institutions. Another\r\nadditional indicator was “annual increase of 10 percent in the number of certified\r\nprofessionals and ratio between trucking companies/individuals.” The link is only\r\npartial with regard to the policy action “professionalism in the trucking industry is\r\nenhanced through the adoption and implementation/enforcing a legal framework for\r\nlicensing road transport operators” as the 10 percent figure is not based on any analysis\r\nof potential supply response and it is unclear why individuals cannot meet the\r\nrequirements of the law.\r\n\r\n35. Some of the reforms undertaken were conceptually incomplete, limiting their\r\ncontribution to the intended outcome of the program. For instance, the transfer of funds\r\nto local governments is one pillar of fiscal decentralization. However, without an\r\nassessment of the local capacity constraints and the composition of local government\r\nbudgets, it is unclear if higher transfers would achieve the objective of reduced\r\nvulnerability to shocks. Officials of the Budget Department informed the mission that\r\n\r\n 11\r\n\fgovernment had reversed the policy due to low absorptive capacity of local\r\ngovernments, but no evidence that central government is more effective or that serious\r\nefforts were made to build subnational government capacity during the decade since the\r\nstart of the decentralization process. This issue points to the lack of a clear shared vision\r\nbetween the government and the World Bank on the respective roles of central and\r\nsubnational authorities.\r\n\r\n36. In summary, design suffered from significant shortcomings, and relevance of\r\ndesign is rated modest.\r\n\r\n\r\n3. Implementation\r\n37. All four series were fully disbursed at effectiveness, and closed on schedule. A\r\ntotal of $359 million (SDR 240 million) was disbursed between 2012 and 2015. The first\r\noperation was approved by the Board as a grant of $90 million on June 26, 2012, declared\r\neffective on September 12, 2012, and closed as scheduled on December 31, 2012. The\r\nsecond operation was a grant of $70 million, approved on March 21, 2013, declared\r\neffective on September 11, 2013, and closed as expected on December 31, 2013. The third\r\noperation was financed through a Development Policy Credit of $50 million equivalent\r\nand an IDA grant of $50 million equivalent. It was approved on December 5, 2013,\r\ndeclared effective on December 20, 2013, and closed as expected on July 30, 2014. The\r\nfourth operation was also financed through a Development Policy Credit of $50 million\r\nequivalent and an IDA grant of $50 million equivalent. There were a few months delay\r\nin the approval of G&C 2 and G&C 4, which resulted in the series approval being\r\ncompleted in 2015 instead of 2014—this delay is not considered significant.\r\n\r\n38. The series was implemented within a challenging and changing political and\r\nsocioeconomic context, characterized by strikes, ousting of the sitting president, coup\r\nd’état, and a transitional government. The government’s appetite for reforms had waned\r\nsignificantly, but there was an urgent need to external assistance to help maintain the\r\nmacroeconomic situation and reduce the impact of the shocks. The World Bank used\r\nDPF as tool to support the government, following 11 PRSCs.\r\n\r\n39. A total of 36 prior actions were implemented throughout the four operations.\r\nThe Implementation Status and Results Report (ISR) indicated that the first 10 prior\r\nactions were completed on time. However, there were significant challenges during the\r\nsecond and third operations in governance, mining sector taxation, and justice sector\r\nreform. A prior action covering the completion of procedure-based audit of the customs\r\nclearance procedures in Ouagadougou was delayed, as was another on operationalizing\r\nthe agricultural input fund in time for the 2014–15 agricultural season. There were\r\ndifficulties completing the prior actions to revise the Mining Code and anticorruption\r\nlaw. The supervision report of the fourth operation noted that these challenges persisted\r\n 12\r\n\fand that the threshold for the food and emergency food reserves had not been achieved.\r\nSupervision missions in December 2014 and January 2015 signaled the lack of resources\r\nfor implementing agencies and delayed procurement processes that were likely to affect\r\nthe national food security stock.\r\n\r\n40. The over-ambition of the program and the difficulties likely to be faced in the\r\ngovernance and justice sectors were signaled in the first supervision report of the series.\r\nHowever, the reform agenda was not narrowed until the fourth operation when it had\r\nbecome obvious that many objectives would not be achieved.\r\n\r\n41. The series maintained its seven focus areas throughout, even though some prior\r\nactions were dropped. The focus areas targeted by the G&C series were agriculture,\r\nmining, transportation, PFM, decentralized social service provision, judicial reform, food\r\nsecurity, and microfinance. Each operation had a somewhat different composition of\r\nindicators in addition to some revisions of targets. The series had 30 targets of which 10\r\nwere dropped from the fourth operation and only 20 were assessed by the ICR.\r\n\r\n42. Donor support to assist in the implementation of the reform program did not\r\nmaterialize to the extent expected. The budget support group was not fully functional\r\nduring implementation of the series. During this assessment, donor representatives\r\ncriticized the World Bank for not having used its convening power to revive the group,\r\neven though at the time the group was being led by another donor based on a “Troika\r\nsystem,” where leadership rotates among stakeholders. There was a tendency for\r\nindividual donors to pursue their own priorities without interaction with others. The\r\nWorld Bank’s supervision missions discussed the program with donor agencies, but\r\nthese discussions appear to have contributed little to enhancing coordination. The\r\nbudget support group was virtually nonoperational at the time of the PPAR mission.\r\nInformation on donor programs was not being collated.\r\n\r\n43. Adequate public fiduciary systems, notably PFM, are required to ensure that\r\nbudget support provided under DPFs and disbursed into consolidated accounts are\r\nused relatively effectively. The program partly internalizes this issue by covering PFM\r\nreforms (discussed under efficacy). The assessments in each program document focused\r\non PFM and are based on various analytical works, including an out-of-date 2001 CFAA\r\nand 2005 CPAR, as well as progressively more relevant 2007, 2010, and 2013 PEFAs. The\r\ninitial assessment in program documents for the first two operations seems overly\r\nenthusiastic: “the Bank has judged implementation performance of the PFM reform\r\nprogram to date and government’s commitment to PFM improvements as exemplary.”\r\nThis statement is moderated in the subsequent two program documents: “The Bank has\r\njudged the overall implementation of the government’s PFM reform program to be\r\nsatisfactory.” This assessment is substantially changed today now that the 2017 PEFA\r\ndocuments a general deterioration or stagnation in almost every aspect of PFM (see\r\n\r\n 13\r\n\fWorld Bank 2017c). There was sound basis for the assessment at the beginning of the\r\nseries as it reflected in the relatively good PEFA indicators (based on 2011–13 data),\r\nnotably regarding procurement and not withstanding weaknesses in areas rated “D” in\r\nboth 2010 and 2013 PEFAs,14 including external controls. IEG’s assessment of the PRSC\r\n7–11 series also confirms substantial progress on fiduciary reforms.15 However, the 2017\r\nPEFA documented significant deterioration in almost every aspect of PFM. Although it\r\nis true that this report became available after program closing, the World Bank team\r\nshould have been more aware of signs of deterioration of PFM and refocused the series\r\non this policy area to preserve pervious achievements.\r\n\r\n44. The program documents all include a statement such as “the activities supported\r\nby the proposed operation are not likely to have significant negative effects on the\r\nenvironment, forests, and other natural resources.” The latter two program documents\r\nare even more positive citing the likelihood of positive or neutral impact. This argument\r\nis two-pronged: (i) the specific policy actions do not have a direct negative impact—\r\nsecondary impact through microfinance, for example, is not considered; and (ii) IDA is\r\nproviding separate support to facilitate better enforcement of environmental rules. In\r\nsome countries, cotton production has been associated with environmental degradation,\r\nbut this assessment identified a 2016 study16 that linked agriculture poisoning to cotton\r\nproduction in Burkina. It would have been helpful for program documents to at least\r\nhighlight this potential issue and how it may be mitigated—including through parallel\r\nWorld Bank investment lending. Nevertheless, overall, adequate attention appears to\r\nhave been paid to environmental issues in the design of the program.\r\n\r\n\r\n4. Achievement of the Objectives\r\n45. Most of the objectives of the series were not achieved. This review discusses\r\nevidence related to each of the three objectives and 20 results indicators in the World\r\nBank’s results framework. It integrates additional information collected during the IEG\r\nmission and from independent sources for the assessment such as the PEFA and Doing\r\nBusiness reports.\r\n\r\nObjective 1. Catalyze Private Sector Growth and Employment\r\n46. Private sector growth depended only in part on the sectors targeted by the\r\nseries.17 The last operation significantly lowered the ambition of this objective, focusing\r\nas it did on transportation costs. Although these are undoubtedly important,18 there is no\r\nevidence that they have been reduced.\r\n\r\n47. The 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD) finds no link between increased\r\nagricultural production and higher employment (World Bank 2017a). It notes that the\r\nlimited creation of productive jobs in Burkina Faso is a result of the poor performance of\r\n\r\n 14\r\n\fthe agricultural sector. Agriculture employs 80 percent of the population but contributes\r\nonly 15 percent of the GDP growth. The SCD links increased employment with\r\nindustrial and services sectors. The contribution of the industrial sector rose by\r\n5 percent, and that of the services sector increased by 8 percent during 2008–2017. The\r\nshare of employment in agriculture was reported to have fallen by 12.5 percent between\r\n2005 and 2014. The increased share of employment in the industrial and service sectors\r\ncannot be attributed to the program because it did not include policy reforms that\r\nfocused on those sectors.\r\n\r\n48. A proxy outcome target of private sector growth is the credit to the private sector\r\nas a percent of GDP. Although this indicator appears to be weak, the IEG mission did\r\nnot get data for other stronger indicators of private sector growth. Information from the\r\nIMF indicates that credit to the private sector increased from 24.8 percent in 2012 to\r\n28.4 percent of GDP in 2016. However, the PPAR mission was informed that businesses\r\nrelocated from Burkina Faso to neighboring countries due to political and economic\r\nshocks between 2012 and 2015. Table 2 presents additional indicators not measured by\r\nthe program.\r\n\r\nTable 2. Selected Financial Sector Indicators (annual percentage change, unless\r\notherwise indicated)\r\n\r\n Indicator 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\nCredit to the private sector 24.1 26.3 18.9 7.0 7.5\r\nBroad money (M3) 15.9 11.3 11.9 19.9 12.2\r\nPrivate sector credit/GDP N/a 24.8 29.1 28.8 28.4\r\nFDI inflow (percent of GDP) N/a 3.5 2.3 2.0 2.5\r\n\r\nSources: IMF 2014, 2016, and 2017.\r\nNote: FDI = foreign direct investment; GDP = gross domestic product.\r\n\r\n49. No evidence was found that private sector employment in Burkina Faso\r\nincreased through measures supported by the series. The 2017 United Nations\r\nDevelopment Programme African Economic Outlook reported that the government was\r\nstill the main employer in 2016 and unemployment remained at 6.6 percent in 2014\r\n(9.3 percent among women and 4 percent among men).19 Most rural jobs occupied barely\r\n5 percent of workers’ time and underemployment in agriculture was 64 percent.\r\n\r\nSubobjective 1.1\r\n4.1 Subobjective 1.1 was to increase resilience, productivity and employment in the\r\nagricultural sector in G&C 1–3 and greater efficiency in the agricultural input market in\r\nG&C 4.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 15\r\n\fTable 3. Achievement of Agricultural Sector Outcome Targets\r\n Indicatora Revised Achieved\r\nCapitalization of the stabilization fund is at least CFAF 6 billion No Yes\r\nCapitalization of the input fund is at least CFAF 10 billion No Yes\r\nImproved fertilizer distribution to the private sector increased by No No (only 2.7 percent of\r\n30,000 tons target)\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: a. Unchanged throughout.\r\n\r\n50. This subobjective primarily targeted continuing reforms in the cotton sector by\r\n(i) reducing price uncertainty through creation and capitalization of a stabilization fund;\r\n(ii) establishing and capitalizing an input fund; and (iii) improving efficiency in the\r\nfertilizer market through increased private participation in the sector. The latter measure\r\nwould also help other sectors, notably rice and maize, even though the state had a\r\ndifferent mechanism for distributing inputs to the cereal farmers. Appendix B, table B.7,\r\nprovides the list of prior actions that supported this objective.\r\n\r\n51. Although the use of genetically modified cotton seeds was not supported by the\r\nprogram, it was widely assumed that it was (see World Bank 2013f; this is not\r\nmentioned or explained in later program documents or the ICR). However, although\r\nthere were initial gains in productivity, by 2014 it had become apparent that these seeds\r\nhad lower yields, produced lower quality cotton (shorter fibers) and could not prevent\r\nmore resistant parasites (Jeune Afrique 2017).20 However, these issues do not seem to\r\nhave affected the design of the series.\r\n\r\n52. The mission’s interactions with the Association Interprofessionnelle des\r\nCotonculteurs du Burkina Faso (Interprofessional Association of Cotton Farmers of\r\nBurkina Faso; AICB)21 indicated that the price of cotton seeds and the price of inputs\r\nwere the main factors determining output. The capitalization of the stabilization fund\r\nenabled the AICB to regulate the prices of the seeds and inputs paid by the farmers.\r\nData received from AICB show that cotton production increased from 834,322 tons in\r\n2011/12 farming year to 1,415,510 tons in 2014/15.22 AICB stated that the program had\r\ncontributed to this through reducing the cost of inputs. However, production\r\nsubsequently slightly declined to 1,172,976 tons in 2015/16 (though about 41 percent\r\nhigher than 2011/12 farming year). AICB noted that the stabilization fund may not be\r\nable to withstand a prolonged period of low prices (appendix B, figure B.2) as its\r\nrecapitalization would compete with other demands on government resources.\r\nFurthermore, the AICB was unable to indicate the optimal level of capitalization that\r\nwould enable the fund to withstand a major international price shock.\r\n\r\n53. The AICB confirmed to the mission that the targets for the capitalization of the\r\nstabilization (CFAF 6 billion) and input funds (CFAF 10 billion) were achieved by the\r\nend of 2015. The stabilization fund was expected to align more closely the prices paid to\r\n\r\n 16\r\n\ffarmers with world cotton prices, whereas the input fund was meant to help credit-\r\nconstrained farmers deal with uncertainty about input prices. The capitalization of the\r\nstabilization fund was a precondition for the release of the funds for the input fund by\r\nthe World Bank. The cotton companies raised the CFAF 6 billion to help stabilize prices\r\nand the incomes of producers. The fund changed the behavior of farmers who had\r\nswitched from the production of cotton to other cereals and gave them an incentive to\r\nreengage in cotton production—though the cost effectiveness could not be judged by\r\nthis assessment. AICB stated that the purchase of inputs was the largest cost for cotton\r\nfarmers and that guaranteed prices enabled them to calculate their potential income. It\r\nalso improved the cash flow of the cotton companies, as they did not have to commit\r\nfunds for the purchase of cotton seeds. Rather, suppliers now give the companies input\r\ncredits at low interest rates. This is important because the inputs are given to producers\r\non credit and payments are deducted only after harvests are sold. The input fund\r\nguaranteed the payment of funds to suppliers, thereby taking over any form of risks of\r\ndefault. AICB argued that the reformed had helped to reduce the cost structure of the\r\ncotton companies.\r\n\r\n54. The third outcome target was not achieved. The prior action was “continued\r\ninvolvement of the private sector in the fertilizer distribution process, by the issuance of\r\ninvitations to private suppliers to bid on at least 6,900 metric tons of fertilizer to be\r\npurchased by the recipient for distribution to rice and maize producers.” It aimed to\r\nimprove the role of the private sector in the distribution of fertilizer. However, the\r\ngovernment perceived the measure differently: that it was to help the government to\r\nrecover unpaid debt incurred in the distribution of inputs. The Ministry of Agriculture\r\nused the reform to change the mind-set of peasant farmers who thought the inputs were\r\ndonations from government. Civil society indicated to the mission that the reform failed\r\nbecause of the noninvolvement of an important stakeholder association, the\r\nConfederation Paysanne du Faso.23\r\n\r\n55. During the mission, the government referred to the perceived lack of capacity by\r\nthe private sector as a reason to resume the distribution of fertilizer in villages in 2015,\r\nreversing a 2014 policy action under the program. However, data from the Ministry of\r\nAgriculture showed that the private sector was more effective than government as it\r\ndistributed twice as much fertilizer in 2014 compared with the previous and subsequent\r\nyears (see appendix B, table B.1).\r\n\r\n56. The reform was not successful in reaching peasant farmers for several reasons.\r\nFirst, there was no study to ascertain the potential impact of the reforms. Second, the\r\nprivate sector was given insufficient time to settle into the distribution of fertilizer. The\r\nnetwork for distribution was still being built when the policy was reversed. Third, the\r\nConfederation Paysanne du Faso was not involved in distribution or the selection of the\r\nbeneficiaries.24 The new distribution mechanism established by the government, and\r\n 17\r\n\frelying on the Ministry of Agriculture, Regional Chambers of Agriculture, Territorial\r\nCommunities, Producers, and Village Committees, is viewed as inefficient by civil\r\nsociety organizations (CSOs). The report that many farmers with critical needs appear\r\nnot be receiving the distributed fertilizer.\r\n\r\n57. In summary, although the measures supported by the operation were relevant to\r\nthe development agenda there is no evidence that employment increased or that private\r\nsector growth was catalyzed. The cotton companies and some cotton producers might\r\nhave benefited from the interventions, but there is no data indicating who the\r\nbeneficiaries were or by how much they benefited. AICB assumes that the income of\r\ncotton farmers is less volatile but has no data to confirm this. Neither the governance of\r\nthe funds nor the exit strategy appears to have been adequately considered.\r\n\r\nSubobjective 1.2\r\n58. Subojective 1.2 was to reduce transportation and transaction costs for cross-\r\nborder trade (cut transport costs in G&C 1–3; and improved formalization in the\r\noverland transport sector G&C 4).\r\n\r\n59. Table 4 shows that of the five targets used to measure this subobjective, three were\r\ndropped.25 Neither of the remaining two had been achieved by the time of the PPAR\r\nmission. The relevant prior action was “an audit of customs clearance procedures in\r\nOuagadougou is completed and recommendations to improve customs administration are\r\nadopted.”\r\n\r\nTable 4. Status of Results Indicators for Subobjective 1.2\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\nAverage waiting time for customs clearance in Ouaga Inter reduced by No No\r\n50 percent\r\nGovernment continues to refine the operational structure of the guarantee Dropped No\r\nscheme\r\nPrivate firms begin expressing interest in joining the new scheme Dropped No\r\nPercent of axle overloading Dropped No\r\nAnnual increase of 10 percent in the number of certified professionals and ratio Added No\r\nbetween trucking companies or individuals G&C 4\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\n\r\n60. The 2017 SCD argues that trucking is dominated by many small, poorly\r\norganized, and inefficient operators who rely on intermediaries and market organizers\r\nto find freight (World Bank 2017a). The sector is characterized by low profitability. The\r\nreform aimed at building the capacity of truck owners and drivers to increase efficiency.\r\nIt also attempted to address the issue of import-carrying trucks returning empty due to\r\nthe lack of exports. In the past, the government gave subsidies for the replacement of old\r\ntrucks, but the sector continues to be inefficient. The government commitment to this\r\nreform was limited by the truck owners’ perception of interference with private\r\n 18\r\n\fbusiness. In a context of a breakdown in dialogue between government and the private\r\nsector, there was a lack of trust and of champions to get this reform implemented. The\r\ninstrument for the professionalization of trucking company owners and driver was a\r\ngovernment decree. However, the decree had not been implemented by the time of the\r\nIEG mission, since the framework for doing so was still incomplete.\r\n\r\n61. According to the ICR, customs clearance time (at Ouaga Inter) had been reduced\r\nfrom an average of four days to one. However, the PPAR mission found the average\r\ndelay to be three days. Customs officials could not confirm the validity of the one day\r\nreported by the ICR. They indicated that a study (on handling and lifting goods) had\r\nbeen planned for 2018 to determine the average time for customs clearance. They\r\nattributed the continued delays to underinvoicing and late submission of inaccurate\r\ninformation. Other stakeholders interviewed by the mission attributed delays to the\r\ntreatment by customs of most goods as high risk, which need to be inspected. They\r\nargued that it is practically impossible to achieve same-day clearance.\r\n\r\nAssessment of Efficacy for Objective 1\r\n62. There is no evidence that the objective was attained. Many intermediate\r\nindicators proposed in the program documents were dropped or not met.26 The\r\ncapitalization of the stabilization and input funds was important in strengthening and\r\nstabilizing the cotton sector, but insufficient to have an impact on the development\r\nobjective as defined originally, or as revised under G&C 4. Sustainability is also\r\ndoubtful. Moreover, initiatives to increase private sector participation in the fertilizer\r\ndistribution and formalization of trucking were unsuccessful; the former policy was\r\nsubsequently reversed. Improvements in customs clearance did not materialize. The\r\nmission was informed that the authorities lack the resources to implement the reforms.\r\nComplementary capacity building and technical assistance could have led to better\r\nresults. The efficacy rating for the objective is rated negligible.\r\n\r\nObjective 2. Improve Governance and Public Resource Management\r\n63. The series had nine results indicators, measuring the success of the objective.27\r\nTwo results indicators covered the mining sector, five focused on the justice sector, and\r\ntwo were on PFM. Four other indicators were dropped during the series (see\r\nappendix B, table B.8).\r\n\r\nSubobjective 2.1\r\n64. Subobjective 2.1 was to build transparency and accountability in the mining\r\nsector in G&C 1–3 and greater transparency in the mobilization and management of the\r\nmining sector fiscal revenues in G&C 4.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 19\r\n\fTable 5. Results Indicators on the Mining Sector\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\n Public revenues generated by the mining sector are increased to No No\r\n 4 percent of GDP (2.7 percent of GDP)\r\n The number of mining companies submitting validated data for No Achieved and\r\n EITI reports is increased to six exceeded\r\n The number of physical inspections of gold exports by customs Dropped No\r\n officials increased by 15 percent, enhancing the accuracy of export\r\n data\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: EITI = Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative; GDP = gross domestic product.\r\n\r\n65. Mining was one of the sectors that contributed the most to growth28 during 2006–\r\n13 (16 percent), generating about 10,000 jobs plus those in artisanal mining, which\r\ncomplements rural income. About 60 international companies are currently active in a\r\nrange of mining activities throughout Burkina Faso. The 2017 SCD identified the three\r\nmost important priorities of the mining sector as maximizing joint investment projects in\r\ninfrastructure, creating synergies through the development of backward and forward\r\nlinkages between large multinational firms and local small and medium enterprises, and\r\nsecuring tax and nontax revenue. The operation covered the last priority using prior\r\nactions focused on monthly reporting of consolidated data on mining, reconciling the\r\ndata among the key stakeholders, and publishing the results. This is appropriate given\r\nthat the first two areas require an in-depth sectoral approach over the medium to long\r\nterm.\r\n\r\n66. The operation also supported the preparation of a new Mining Code (a prior\r\naction), which after delays due to the need to revise it and undertake public\r\nconsultations, was approved by the National Assembly in 2015 (thereby going beyond\r\nthe Letter of Development Policy). IEG was informed that the Code is deemed\r\nsatisfactory by the World Bank. The full impact of the Code cannot yet be assessed, but\r\nits adoption is a significant step forward in adhering to international best practices for\r\nfiscal, environmental, and social standards. The Mining Code supported the creation of\r\na local development fund for mining communities which is funded by a share of the\r\nmining revenues. The authorities explained to the IEG mission that the Code had led to\r\na better reconciliation of data on mining revenues among the relevant stakeholders, even\r\nthough its enactment faced strong resistance from powerful groups with vested interests\r\nin the status quo. The Code orients the sector toward the country’s development and\r\nshould benefit local communities. The results indicator aimed at increasing mining\r\nrevenues to 4 percent of GDP was not achieved due to the fall in the international price\r\nof gold. There were also conflicts in some mining areas, where mining company\r\nequipment was seized and burned.\r\n\r\n67. The second prior action for increasing the mining revenue was the “adoption by\r\nthe recipient of a mechanism of monthly reporting of consolidated data on mining\r\n 20\r\n\frevenues designed to ensure better coordination between the recipient’s ministries\r\nresponsible for finance and for mining, to improve collection of public revenues\r\ngenerated by mining activities in the country; and issuance of said data for the last\r\nquarter of FY 2011.” Mining revenues rose from 1.8 percent in 2011 to 3.3 percent in\r\n2012. The authorities noted that better data contributed to this increase (figure 3).\r\nHowever, the target (4 percent of GDP) was inappropriate for many reasons. Its\r\nattainment or otherwise was largely due to factors beyond the control of the program;\r\nthe goal of doubling the contribution of mining revenues to GDP was unrealistic; GDP\r\n(the denominator) was itself growing; expansion of production was a private sector\r\ndecision; and international prices (notably gold) were subject to fluctuation (dollar\r\nprices in 2015/16 were below their level in 2011).\r\n\r\nFigure 3. Mining Revenue in Burkina Faso, 2011–16\r\n\r\n 3.5 200.0\r\n 3\r\n Percent of GDP\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 150.0\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Billions of CFA\r\n 2.5\r\n 2\r\n 100.0\r\n 1.5\r\n 1 50.0\r\n 0.5\r\n 0 0.0\r\n 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\n Years\r\n\r\n Mining Revenue Mining Revenue (% of GDP)\r\n\r\nSource: GDP from national Institute of Statistics and demography, Mining revenue from director general office, Treasury\r\nand public accounts – Ministry of Economy and Finance.\r\nNote: GDP = gross domestic product.\r\n\r\n68. The prior action for the publication of the Extractive Industries Transparency\r\nInitiative (EITI) report was “a public dissemination of the second EITI report, that\r\nprovides comprehensive statements on mining revenues collected in 2010 (licenses,\r\nroyalties, income tax, and so on.) from all operating mines (materiality decided by the\r\nEITI multistakeholder group).” The government continued publishing the other EITI\r\nreports.\r\n\r\n69. With the aim of improving transparency, the EITI Unit (the government entity in\r\ncharge of EITI matters) confirmed that eight reports had been produced as of end 2016.\r\nThe quality of the report shared with the mission was satisfactory. The specific results\r\nindicator concerned an increase in the number of companies submitting data for the EITI\r\nfrom a baseline of zero to a target of six. The EITI Unit compiles these data and\r\ndisseminates it in reports covering 11 productions and 12 research companies between\r\n2011 and 2016 (see appendix B, table B.2). According to the unit, the reports, in French\r\nand six local languages, are distributed widely across the country and discussed on\r\n\r\n 21\r\n\fradio and television stations. They cover issues such as mining cadaster, discharge of\r\nmining companies, project supported by mining companies, and role of customs in\r\nmining. This helps mining communities to identify projects undertaken with mining\r\nrevenues and thus contributes to reducing the occurrence of conflicts in mining areas.29\r\nIn total, 23 companies submitted data for production of eight EITI reports.\r\n\r\n70. This review considers progress achieved in this area as significant and\r\nattributable to the operation, notably the dissemination of the EITI reports.\r\n\r\n71. The indicator on the inspections of gold exports was dropped because it was not\r\nassociated with a prior action and therefore not attributable to the program. The IEG\r\nmission was informed that the mining companies were not providing accurate\r\ninformation to customs officers when exporting their products.\r\n\r\nSubobjective 2.2\r\n72. Subobjectived 2.2 was to enhance judicial efficiency and openness in G&C 1–3 and\r\nimproved functioning of the justice sector and anticorruption tools in G&C 4.\r\n\r\nTable 6. Status of Results Indicators on the Justice Sector\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\nA general decline in corruption indicators is observed over time Yes No in 2015\r\n(G&C 4 Burkina Faso’s score in the Transparency International Exceeded in 2016 and\r\nCorruption Perceptions Index is increased to 40 or higher) 2017\r\nAn increase of at least 50 percent of mediation cases at CAMC-O Dropped Technical assistance\r\nin 2012 and 25 percent in 2013 project supported\r\n framework and law\r\nNumber of Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature elected members Added G&C 4 Achieved\r\nper grade increased by 50 percent\r\nA 20 percent decrease in the time required to obtain a court No Not achieved\r\nruling\r\nA 20 percent reduction in the time needed to enforce contracts No Not achieved:\r\n remained unchanged\r\nPercent of judgments written down in commercial courts is at No Achieved and\r\nleast 75 percent exceeded\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: CAM-CO = Centre d’Arbitrage de Médiation et Conciliation de Ouagadougou (Commercial Arbitration, Mediation,\r\nand Conciliation Center of Ouagadougou); G&C = Growth and Competitiveness series.\r\n\r\n73. The main policy actions under this subobjective aimed to improve the legal and\r\ninstitutional framework governing the justice system, with emphasis on elements related\r\nto the investment climate. The core reform (prior action) undertaken to support this\r\nobjective was the preparation of the anticorruption law. Like the mining law, it suffered\r\nfrom a setback and delay, but was adopted by the National Assembly in 2015,\r\ncompleting the policy action.\r\n\r\n74. The target of a 50 percent increase in the number of Superior Council Magistrates\r\nelected to their positions was achieved. The mission received a copy of the relevant\r\n 22\r\n\fdecree indicating the number of persons per grade. The authorities attributed this\r\nachievement to the change in government and the decision of the new administration to\r\nrespond to demands for a fairer and more transparent justice system. There has also\r\nbeen an important step in the separation of powers, in that the President of the Republic\r\nand the Minister of Justice are no longer presiding over the Superior Council of\r\nMagistrates. They are only observers on the council. This change could also be partly\r\nattributed to strong demands by CSOs, which perceived the change as business friendly\r\nand a significant step toward accountability and good governance. The related prior\r\naction was “measures are adopted to improve the functioning of the Superior Council of\r\nthe Magistracy, including an increase in its number of elected members.”\r\n\r\n75. Three prior actions aimed at reducing the time required to obtain a court ruling\r\nand to enforce contracts, as shown in appendix B, table B.7. The ICR reports that the\r\ntime to obtain a court ruling was reduced from two years (730 days) to 120 days.\r\nHowever, information provided the Ministry of Justice indicates that the baseline was\r\nnot accurate. The ministry could not confirm the data presented in the ICR. The mission\r\nwas informed that the average time for making decisions in five courts increased from\r\n247 days in 2011 to 293 days in 2016. The breakdown in different courts in presented in\r\nfigure 4 and appendix B, table B.3.\r\n\r\nFigure 4. Average Time for Making a Decision in the Courts\r\n\r\n Administrative Courts-Average Rate for Making a\r\n Decision\r\n Courts of Labor-Average Rate for Making a\r\n Decision\r\n Courts of Commerce-Average rate to make a\r\n commercial decision\r\n\r\n Trial courts-average time to render a decision\r\n High Courts - Average Time to Process a Civil\r\n Case\r\n\r\n 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700\r\n\r\n 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011\r\n\r\nSource: Tableau de bord statistique 2016 de la Justice, 2017 Edition.\r\n\r\n76. No information was available on the time taken to enforce contracts. The\r\ngovernment did not implement the related reforms. The indicator on enforcement of\r\ncontract is associated with the performance of the commercial tribunal and corresponds\r\nto an element of the Doing Business indicator where Burkina Faso’s ranking is low (163rd\r\nout of 190 economies in 2017).30 The number of days remained unchanged throughout\r\nthe operation and since. The mission was informed that the indicator was inappropriate\r\nsince it did not focus on the main issue, which is the high cost of contract enforcement as\r\n\r\n 23\r\n\fa percentage of the value claimed (in 2017, this was 81.7 percent, and much higher than\r\nthe Subsaharan average of 44.0 percent).\r\n\r\n77. An intermediate indicator concerning the number of judgments written by the\r\ncommercial court rose from 62.4 percent in 2011 to 100 percent in 2015 and 2016.\r\nAlthough the target was achieved, it appeared to have little impact on the time needed\r\nfor contract enforcement.\r\n\r\n78. The submission to National Assembly of a law designed to establish a suitable\r\nregulatory and legal framework for the promotion of mediation as an alternative dispute\r\nresolution mechanism (subsequently adopted) was a prior action for the first operation.\r\nIt was an important and potentially effective reform, although its precise outcome is\r\nhard to assess. The original indicator of a 50 percent increase in mediated cases was\r\ndropped because it was not monitored by the government. Information on results were\r\nnot readily available, though according to the public information page of the Centre\r\nd’Arbitrage de Médiation et Conciliation de Ouagadougou (Commercial Arbitration,\r\nMediation, and Conciliation Center of Ouagadougou),31 the claims being currently\r\narbitrated or mediated are quite significant (equivalent to about $500 million in\r\narbitration and $4 billion in mediation).\r\n\r\n79. In summary, moderate, though uneven, progress was achieved in relation to this\r\nsubobjective through policy actions supported by the series.\r\n\r\nSubobjective 2.3\r\n80. Subobjective 2.3 was to strengthen public financial management in G&C 1–3 and\r\nenhanced PFM systems in G&C 4.\r\n\r\nTable 7. Status of Results Indicators Related to Public Financial Management\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\n The average execution rate of the line ministries’ investment budgets is increased No Not\r\n by more than 50 percent confirmed\r\n Number of physical spot checks of contracts subject to competitive bidding No Yes\r\n increased by 50 percent\r\n Greater transparency and accountability in PFM is achieved Dropped n.a.\r\n Number of [court of account] judges that will remain in office for at least a year is Dropped n.a.\r\n 12\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: n.a. = not applicable; PFM = public financial management.\r\n\r\n81. The most recent independent assessment of PFM in Burkina Faso is found in the\r\n2017 PEFA report.32 This report is based mostly on 2014–16 data and can be compared\r\nwith the previous PEFA report, issued in 2013, which relied on 2010–12 data. These two\r\nreports (using the same 2011 methodology) thus provide both baseline and target\r\ninformation pertaining to PFM during the period when the G&C series was\r\nimplemented. The picture that emerges is one of significant deterioration in most\r\n 24\r\n\findexes. Improvements occurred only for revenues (PI-3.1 from D to B). This implies\r\nthat, overall, not only was the goal of greater transparency and accountability in PFM\r\n(an indicator dropped at the fourth operation) not achieved, but the overall situation\r\ndeteriorated significantly during series implementation. The deterioration was partly\r\ncaused by the political turmoil. Moreover, the series focused only on certain aspects of\r\nPFM, so the overall decline is partly attributable to factors outside the scope of the\r\nprogram.\r\n\r\n82. The series focused mainly on four dimensions of PFM, internal and external\r\naudit, the execution rate of the investment budget, and procurement.\r\n\r\n83. The ICR reports that the average execution rate of the line ministries’ investment\r\nbudget went up from 30.0 percent to 61.2 percent exceeding the target of 50.0 percent.\r\nHowever, some of this improvement appears to be in line with more realistic budgeting\r\nof capital public expenditures, which were reduced during the series (to 7.6 percent of\r\nGDP from a high point of 14.3 percent of GDP in 2013). Allocation of resources more in\r\nline with absorptive capacity may explain the improvements as much as the impact of\r\nany policy action—appointment of financial controllers in line ministries and increased\r\nprocurement thresholds. The PEFA points to a closer relationship between investment\r\nbudgets and the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework. Although this indicates a\r\ncloser relationship between selection of investments and sectoral strategies it does not\r\nappear that recurrent budget implications are being factored in; to the extent that they\r\nare not, fiscal sustainability of the investment program would be undermined.\r\n\r\n84. The Budget Department attributes the low execution rate of investment budgets\r\nto cumbersome procurement processes (especially of some donor-funded projects) and\r\nthe lack of proper planning by some ministries. Although reforms had been undertaken\r\nto accelerate the execution of government-funded investment projects through the\r\nintroduction of program-based budgeting,33 the government has no control over donor\r\nprocesses that would allow them to speed disbursements to line ministries. No\r\ninformation was available on the total budget and actual execution (government plus\r\ndonor) of line ministries to enable the mission to make a judgment about whether the\r\nindicator had been achieved. Achievement would seem improbable in view of the 2017\r\nPEFA indicator (PI-2). Composition of actual expenditure), which showed a\r\ndeterioration in budget execution from C in 2010 to D in 2016.\r\n\r\n85. A closer look at the indicator pertaining to spot checks on competitive bidding\r\nsuggests that it may have been met in form. The relevant PEFA indicator for procurement\r\n(PI-19) shows an overall deterioration (from B+ to C+). In particular, there is a significant\r\ndecline in reliance on competitive bidding (PI-10) (ii) indicator falls from A to D, due in\r\npart to absence of adequate information). Further information collected during the mission\r\nconfirms that the indicator was met partly because it was not ambitious. The office of the\r\n\r\n 25\r\n\fGeneral Director for Control of Public Contracts and Financial Commitments confirmed\r\nthe department’s obligation by law to ensure that at least 250 contracts are subjected to\r\ncompetitive bidding every year. This target, which was achieved without undertaking\r\nsignificant reforms, was higher than the one specified in the results framework as a\r\nbaseline (200). Results cannot in any event be attributed to the series, since no special\r\nresources were provided by the Director of Budget to the Control Office to undertake the\r\nreform. In 2015, 400 contracts (valued at CFAF 20 million) were inspected. The 2015\r\nphysical control covered all 13 regions of Burkina Faso. This evaluation considers the\r\nindicator met but the intended impact of enhanced PFM systems was not achieved due to\r\nlack of ambition.\r\n\r\n86. The external audit indicator was related to an intermediate target that aimed to\r\nincrease tenure for Court of Accounts judges. This indicator was not reported in the ICR.\r\nThe PEFA sheds additional light on this and suggests no progress (PI-26 remains D+).\r\nHowever, a subindicator (PI-26) (i), “operationalization of the Court of Accounts”)\r\nshows improvements (from D to C), reflecting possible contributions from the G&C\r\nprogram.\r\n\r\n87. The PEFA reports no change in the internal audit indicator (PI-26 D+). However,\r\nrelated to policy actions supported by the series, specifically the appointment of financial\r\ncontrollers in line ministries, the scope of internal control has improved (PI-26 (i) from D\r\nto C).\r\n\r\n88. In summary, although actions supported by the series appear to have resulted in\r\nminor improvements in PFM, the overall system has become notably weaker reversing\r\nprevious achievements and undermining the program development objectives.\r\n\r\nAssessment of Efficacy for Objective 2\r\n89. The PDO for the fourth operation refers to improved resource mobilization.\r\nOther than in mining, the program did not include a specific policy actions aimed at\r\ntargeting this area. This was in part because it was largely covered by the IMF program.\r\nNevertheless, according to the 2017 TADAT report,34 significant weaknesses could have\r\nbeen addressed by the operation had there been greater focus on resource mobilization.\r\n\r\n90. There was significant progress toward meeting the mining subobjectives, as\r\nreflected in indicators specified in the results framework, updated with recent data as\r\nneeded, or derived from other sources. Furthermore, the depth of the actions is reflected\r\nin three important laws (arbitration, mining, and anticorruption) being approved by\r\nparliament and the progress made with the EITI reporting, all with the support of the\r\nseries. However, progress with respect to the second and third objectives was partial or\r\ninadequate. Overall progress toward the second program objective is assessed as\r\nmodest.\r\n\r\n 26\r\n\fObjective 3. Increase Resilience and Reduce Vulnerability to Shocks\r\n\r\nSubobjective 3.1\r\n91. Subobjective 3.1 is to increase access to decentralized basic services in G&C 1–3\r\nand improved funding transfers for decentralized social service provision in G&C 4.\r\n\r\nTable 8. Status of Results Indicators on Decentralization\r\n Decentralization Indicator Revised Achieved\r\n5 percent of the national budget is transferred to local No Met 2014, not met 2015\r\ngovernments under the budget law Policy reversed\r\nThe population’s general satisfaction with the quality of public Dropped Survey not undertaken\r\nservices delivered by local governments improves\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\n\r\n92. Key to the goal of reducing the population’s vulnerability to shocks is to increase\r\nthe availability and quality of basic public services. To this end, a greater focus on local\r\nservice delivery is part of stated government policy. Nonetheless, the 2017 SCD states\r\nthat “80 percent of public revenues are controlled by central administration, despite\r\nextended administrative decentralization/de-concentration initiatives in 13 regions, 45\r\nprovinces, 350 departments, 359 communes, and 8,000 villages; and over half of Burkina\r\nFaso’s public employees are in Ouagadougou, even though this city is home to only\r\naround 15 percent of the country’s total population.” The SCD also identifies the need to\r\nbring services closer to beneficiaries, though increased financial allocations to\r\ndecentralized services capacity building and by complementary actions, such as\r\nexpanding the mandate for the delivery of investments and social expenditure to local\r\ngovernments (World Bank 2017a). The SCD appears to consider that strategic and legal\r\nframework for decentralization to be adequate but that implementation lags (World\r\nBank 2017a, 146).35 It concludes that “despite progress over the years, the\r\nimplementation of these reforms has been slow and uneven, with on average only\r\n5 percent of the national budget being transferred to the communes, often with\r\nsignificant delays.”\r\n\r\n93. The 2015 policy reversal concerning increased resource transfers to subnational\r\nauthorities arose from the central government’s perception of the inability of local\r\nentities to absorb the funds sent to them.36 The government decided to limit transfers to\r\nabout 4 percent of the national budget while building local capacity to use the funds. In\r\naddition, the central government needed the funds to close the fiscal gap and thus found\r\nit imprudent to leave large unused balances in the accounts of the local governments.\r\nBesides, the allocations are based on need rather than a law. It is noted that the local\r\ngovernments were affected by the social revolts, including their suspension during the\r\nimplementation period of the series.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 27\r\n\fSubobjective 3.2\r\n94. Subobjective 3.2 is to increase access to microfinance/ promote gender equality in\r\nG&C 1–3 and increased women’s access to microfinance and improved oversight of\r\nmicrofinance institutions in G&C 4.\r\n\r\n95. The SCD highlights limited rural access to microfinance as a key constraint\r\nfacing farmers. Furthermore, although microfinance institutions have expanded rapidly,\r\nonly 9.4 percent of households’ report using them, with 7.8 percent using the Caisse\r\nPopulaire.37 Although microinstitutions had approximately 1.35 million members at the\r\nbeginning of 2015, the volume of credit they provide is equivalent to only 5 percent of\r\ntotal credit.\r\n\r\nTable 9. Indicators Covering the Microfinance Sector\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\nNumber of active borrowers increased by at least 10 percent No Yes\r\nFAARF has a total loan portfolio of more than CFAF 5 billion Yes, G&C 4 Yes\r\n (minor)\r\nThe Annual Financial Reporting Sheets of microfinance institutions are New G&C 4 Yes\r\nmade available each year no later than July\r\nNumber of women-owned businesses to increase by 5 percent Dropped n.a.\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: FAARF = Support Fund for Women’s Income-Generating Activities; G&C = Growth and Competitiveness series; n.a. =\r\nnot applicable.\r\n\r\n96. The prior actions supported under the program were mainly focused on\r\npromoting the expansion of credit to women by a single credit institution, the Support\r\nFund for Women’s Income-Generating Activities (FAARF) established in the 1990s.38\r\nThey included adoption of a microfinance strategy under G&C 1 and audit of all\r\nmicrofinance institutions under G&C 4. Little detail is available in the program\r\ndocuments concerning the financial and institutional soundness of FAARF. PD2\r\nprovides information on lending numbers and recovery rates, which are estimated at\r\n96.3 percent, but information on the fund’s operating costs and profitability are not\r\nprovided. Prior actions sought to increase capitalization of FAARF by about $1 million\r\n(from $6.7 million) and its loan portfolio from CFAF 4.5 billion to CFAF 5 billion (loan\r\nportfolio of about $10 million; based on World Bank 2017e). Expansion of its\r\ngeographical coverage was a prior action under G&C 3. According to the Ministry of\r\nEconomy and Finance, the targeted increase in the loan portfolio had already been\r\nexceeded by the end of 2012, implying that the target may have been too low.\r\n\r\n97. Of the four indicators in table 10, three were met and one was dropped for lack of\r\ndata. However, the dropped target was the only outcome-oriented indicator closely\r\nrelated to the subobjective. Additional information provided to IEG indicates that the\r\ngrowth in number of borrowers and loans exceeded the program targets—the number of\r\nbeneficiaries increased from 85 to 148 thousand between 2011 and 2016, and the loan\r\n\r\n 28\r\n\fportfolio almost doubled during the same period. This expansion well outpaced the\r\ncapital increase. Furthermore, the expansion appears to have been through increasingly\r\nsmaller loans, as measured by the loan portfolio divided by the number of beneficiaries,\r\nwhich typically would raise FAARF’s cost of doing business and its viability, given that a\r\nfixed processing cost accompanies each loan. According to the managers of the fund, the\r\nrecovery in 2016 was about 98 percent, as both women groups and individual ensure that\r\npayment schedules are followed to qualify for more loans in subsequent years. Little\r\ninformation is available on the quality of FAARF’s portfolio or the scheme’s sustainability\r\n(the mission was unable to obtain a recent audit of FAARF).\r\n\r\n98. The target concerning financial reporting was also met, indicating progress\r\ntoward increased transparency of the microfinance system through improved\r\ncommunication of financial information.\r\n\r\n99. The goals related to increasing women’s access to credit were largely met.\r\nHowever, financial sustainability remains uncertain and the impact of the loans on\r\nbusinesses cannot be assessed, notably because the relevant indicator was dropped.\r\n\r\nSubobjective 3.3\r\n100. Subobjective 3.3 is to strengthen food security in G&C 1–3 and increased\r\nresponse capacity of the food security system in impoverished and vulnerable areas in\r\nG&C 4.\r\n\r\nTable 10. Status of Indicators on Food Security\r\n Indicator Revised Achieved\r\nEmergency food stock increased to at least 25,000 tons Yes, G&C 4 Not Achieved\r\nThe national food reserve increase to at least 50,000 tons No Not Achieved\r\nSources: World Bank 2012a, 2013f, 2013g, 2015d, 2017e.\r\nNote: G&C = Growth and Competitiveness series.\r\n\r\n101. Although alleviating the risk of food insecurity implies increasing agricultural\r\nproductivity (see discussion of objective 1), a more immediate goal is to increase food\r\nsupply to vulnerable households. The scheme of maintaining emergency food reserves\r\nthat could be quickly distributed to poor household was already operational and by\r\n2012 one million people had benefited from it. The approach underpinning the policy\r\naction was to replenish food stocks that had been drawn down during previous periods.\r\nIt should be noted that the scheme itself was not assessed as part of program\r\npreparation and therefore it was not known whether it was efficient and effective.\r\nNonetheless, the series supported this area in response to the 2013–14 food security and\r\nMalian refugee crises. The G&C series was innovative in getting the World Bank to\r\nintervene in an area not traditionally covered under the development policy operation\r\nseries but which could potentially impact the lives of the very poor. The migration of\r\nmore than100,000 Malians refugees into Burkina Faso in the 2011–14 period contributed\r\n\r\n 29\r\n\fto increased fiscal pressures and the World Bank’s budget support was relevant in\r\ncurtailing a deterioration of the fiscal situation.\r\n\r\n102. The institution in charge of the operational activities on national food security\r\n(La Société Nationale de Gestion du Stock de Sécurité Alimentaire; SONAGESS)\r\nindicated to the IEG mission that the indicators could not be attained due to lengthy\r\nprocurement processes, the obligation to obtain the food from only local producers, and\r\na depletion in SONAGESS resources. As indicated by the ICR, data provided by\r\nSONAGESS showed that the national food security stock was temporarily exceeded in\r\n2013 (59,000 tons of cereals). The one-time increase in the national food security stock\r\n(59,000 tons of cereal in 2013) could not be sustained due to continued strong demand\r\nand a subsequent fall in supply. The objective to strengthen food security was, therefore,\r\nnot met. SONAGESS acknowledged the need for more robust systems to respond to\r\nprolonged food crises. Such reforms would include changes in the procurement system,\r\nbudgetary flexibility during food crises, rapid response transport systems, software for\r\nmonitoring food security, liberalization of the purchases (including options to restock\r\nusing imports), and building of warehouses in vulnerable areas.\r\n\r\nAssessment of Efficacy for Objective 3\r\n103. Progress toward the third objective of the program was uneven and the majority\r\nof intended targets were dropped or not met. The capacity of local governments to\r\nspend the funds allocated to them remains weak. Some progress was made toward\r\nenhanced financing of women’s groups but those advances may not be sustainable. The\r\ncapacity of government to respond to food crises has not yet been strengthened and the\r\nseries did not address the binding constraints. In view of these limited results the\r\nefficacy for the third objective is rated modest.\r\n\r\n\r\n5. Ratings\r\nOutcome\r\n104. The overall outcome is rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n105. The objectives of the series were substantially relevant because, they were\r\naligned with the overall strategies of the World Bank and the government. The design is\r\nrated modest as it was undermined by many issues, including lack of focus and\r\nselectivity, excessive complexity, and weaknesses in the chain of logic. The program had\r\nthree objectives, which were sharpened and reduced in scope for the fourth and last\r\noperation in the series. Efficacy is assessed as negligible for the first objective (there is no\r\nevidence that the series catalyzed private sector growth or generated employment); and\r\nmodest for the second and third (limited and uneven progress in improving\r\ntransparency and accountability in public resource mobilization and management, and\r\n 30\r\n\fin increasing resilience and reducing vulnerability to shocks). A significant number of\r\nindicators were not met. Some of those that were met were inadequate to measure\r\nattainment of objectives. Information gathered by the PPAR mission indicates reversal of\r\nprevious achievements in many areas, such as PFM and the role of the private sector.\r\n\r\n\r\nRisk to Development Outcome\r\n106. The risk to development outcome is rated moderate.\r\n\r\n107. The limited achievements under two out of the three objectives are unlikely to be\r\nreversed. Where progress was more significant, it was underpinned by laws that\r\nprobably will not be revoked. However, there is a risk that their implementation may be\r\ndelayed or incomplete, due to resistance from vested interest and slow adoption of\r\ncomplementary regulations.\r\n\r\n108. A broader risk concerns the role of government, which is already overextended.\r\nIt is still directly involved in economic activities rather than acting as a facilitator and\r\nregulator. This is seen, for instance, in microfinance (FAARF) and more clearly in\r\nfertilizer distribution.\r\n\r\n109. The political crisis during the first half of 2010 culminated in the September 2015\r\ncoup. It was resolved with the election of a new government, which could restore a more\r\nstable environment for policy reforms. However, the country remains vulnerable to\r\nattacks from extremists. In March 2018, militants attacked the French embassy and the\r\nmilitary’s headquarters. In 2017, Islamist extremists opened fire on diners at a Turkish\r\nrestaurant popular with foreigners in Ouagadougou. These attacks are likely to increase\r\nthe government’s budget on security and shift attention from structural policy reforms.\r\nOn balance, this assessment deems the risks to development outcomes as moderate.\r\n\r\n110. Macroeconomic risks are also present. The country remains dependent on the\r\nexport of two commodities and on external development assistance that can be volatile\r\nand affect fiscal and external balances. The continued limited diversification of the\r\neconomy and untapped potential of the private sector due to an unfavorable investment\r\nclimate exacerbate this problem.\r\n\r\n\r\nBank Performance\r\n111. The Bank performance is rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\nQuality at Entry\r\n112. Quality at entry is rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 31\r\n\f113. The World Bank’s program in Burkina Faso had been responsive to domestic\r\npressures and aligned to the political cycles of the government. A major lesson\r\nemanating from the PRSC series was the importance of alignment of the World Bank’s\r\nfinancial support with the national budget. This commitment implied delivering budget\r\nsupport within the calendar year to enable the government finance development project\r\nto the close the fiscal gap. The officials of Budget Department of the Ministry of Finance\r\ncommended the flexibility of the World Bank in delivering financing predictably and on\r\ntime during the calendar year. However, predictability may have been at the expenses of\r\nimplementing a more ambitious, if narrower, range of policy actions that addressing\r\nbinding constraints. In this series, the World Bank identified factors that could reduce\r\nthe impact of the reforms, but it did not put in measures to improve the likelihood of\r\nsuccess (including using a simpler design). Moreover, as highlighted under design,\r\nquality at entry was undermined by the series tackling to many unrelated policy areas,\r\nignoring the lesson stated in the CAS to avoid such dispersion.\r\n\r\n114. The continued use of budget support during periods of crisis indicates the desire\r\nto provide more predictable resources at the expense of credible reforms. All three\r\nobjectives required structural reforms, many of which had not been thoroughly\r\nassessed. The government’s ability to undertake reforms during crisis was not well\r\ndiagnosed by the World Bank, in particular, the capacity to manage the Sahelian food\r\ncrisis, addressing increasing social and economic instability, and accomplishing complex\r\nand sensitive reforms under a transitional government (World Bank 2015d, vi).\r\n\r\n115. Nevertheless, various elements of the program design that affected quality at entry\r\nunfavorably have already been discussed elsewhere, especially with respect to relevance\r\nof objectives and monitoring and evaluation (M&E). These areas share a common element\r\nthat affected quality at entry: lack of timely midprogram adjustment in view of realities in\r\nthe field—despite late changes to PDOs and some results. The other strengths and\r\nweaknesses are discussed below.\r\n\r\n116. The first program document identified three main categories of broad risks:\r\nmacroeconomic, political economy, and climatic risks. This assessment was sound but\r\nwas undertaken at a level that was too general. More specific risks associated with the\r\nspecific policy areas should have been considered but were not. These would have\r\nincluded unwillingness of government to continue direct involvement in certain\r\nactivities where the private sector would have comparative advantage, resistance from\r\nvested interests, complementary donor funding, and line ministries wishing to retain\r\nresources and their prerogatives, thus slowing down decentralization. The impact of the\r\nmaterialization of the political economy risk on government capacity and staff turnover\r\nwas also understated, contributing to a deterioration of the PFM environment. The\r\nfourth program document presented a more comprehensive assessment of risks and\r\n\r\n\r\n 32\r\n\frated overall risk as substantial. However, this assessment should have resulted in a\r\nreconsideration of program design, but this was only done marginally.\r\n\r\n117. World Bank procedures for DPFs also call for a review of environmental and\r\npoverty and social impacts. The four program documents clearly and credibly explain\r\nthe positive aspects of the program on reducing poverty. However, the program\r\ndocuments for the first two operations (section 6.A.) state that “the GCG series will rely\r\non poverty monitoring through the use of household surveys.” This was supposed to\r\nhelp in collecting indicators and improve the targeting of measures under the program.\r\nThis statement was dropped in the two later program documents and, based on poverty\r\ndata collected in 2009 (prior to the series), replaced by a less proactive statement:\r\n“although the government has made important strides in combating poverty, much\r\nmore can be done to speed up the pace of poverty reduction.” The ICR does not mention\r\nthe use of surveys to steer the program and affect its design from one operation to the\r\nother, and there was not any refocus on “doing much more” in line with the\r\naforementioned statement. This disconnect diminishes the quality at entry. It should also\r\nbe noted that trucking has known to be a potential vector for spread of human\r\nimmunodeficiency virus–acquired immune deficiency syndrome, but this was not\r\nmentioned.39 Similarly, the fact that improved judicial access may help “empower the\r\npoor” is not analyzed or discussed—even though the program targets commercial\r\ndispute it can be helpful to micro, small, and medium enterprises. That these issues are\r\nnot mentioned constitutes a gap in the analysis.\r\n\r\n118. Many other areas contribute to quality at entry, as follows:\r\n\r\n • Analytical underpinning. All the operations provided analytical basis on\r\n which the series had been designed. The first program document lacks\r\n reference to relevant sector studies, including those undertaken by\r\n development partners. This improves under each operation, even though the\r\n relevance of some of the earlier studies may have decreased by the fourth\r\n operation and some of the analytical work should have been updated.\r\n Furthermore, the links between the studies and policy actions are not well-\r\n established for the first two operations, but become clearer thereafter. Finally,\r\n as noted in various parts of the efficacy section, some of the policy areas\r\n where chosen in an ad hoc manner due to lack of proper assessment of\r\n institutions or schemes that were being supported.\r\n\r\n • Integration of lessons learned. This area constitutes a weakness throughout\r\n the program. Specifically, the operation did not incorporate key factors of\r\n success, which would have improved the possibility achieving the objectives.\r\n Little consideration was given to lessons from the past—those learned in\r\n other countries and by other donors. There is also no reference to relevant\r\n\r\n 33\r\n\f IEG evaluations (ICR Reviews for PRSC 7–11, or relevant thematic\r\n evaluations) or studies by Operations Policy and Country Services (notably\r\n triennial reviews of DPFs). Also, lessons learned under earlier operations\r\n within the series were not cited till the very last one, and then only in broad\r\n terms. Finally, it is unclear how these lessons have affected the design of the\r\n series, notably in the one referring to the need for greater selectivity and\r\n depth, which according to this assessment was a weakness in design.\r\n\r\n• Link to other operations. Each program document listed World Bank\r\n operations in related policy areas. However, the complementarity and\r\n division of labor with these operations was unclear. Furthermore, although\r\n some of the operations cited appeared to be of marginal relevance, an\r\n important regional transport DPF was not duly referenced. An issue that\r\n becomes apparent in the analysis and discussed under lessons learned was\r\n the need for complementary technical assistance. This was an important issue\r\n for Burkina Faso, but the program did not use technical assistance for\r\n measure such as those on food security.\r\n\r\n• Donor harmonization and stakeholder consultation. The mission found that\r\n collaboration with donors was quite limited. The operation was designed at a\r\n time when donors has stopped meeting regularly. Very limited consultations\r\n were made with the budget support group. Many donors complained about\r\n the weak coordination during the mission, including duplication of reforms\r\n in the energy sector of ongoing operations. The mission found that links at\r\n sectoral level with other development partners’ programs or projects is not\r\n established and this constitutes a shortcoming. The framework laid out in\r\n G&C 1 promised to benefit from the budget support group. However, the\r\n rotational leadership of the budget support group limited the extent to which\r\n the World Bank could harness the support of the group to improve the\r\n design of the series. At the time of the mission, the donors had not been able\r\n to agree on a joint policy assessment framework. Also, some influential\r\n stakeholders (CSOs and academia) were not consulted on the World Bank’s\r\n program. It was a missed opportunity to get their inputs to improve the\r\n design of the operation. Some of the objectives were not achieved because the\r\n World Bank could not distinguish the higher-level politically motivated\r\n objectives from the actual reforms needed until during the PD4.\r\n\r\n• Risk assessment. The presentation of risks in the first three program\r\n documents was generally terse and incomplete. It did not cover risks\r\n associated with undertaking the specific policy actions—including resistance\r\n from vested interests or policy reversals, and nonimplementation. The last\r\n program document presents an analysis of Strengths, Weaknesses,\r\n 34\r\n\f Opportunities, and Threats that is more complete, but still lacked specificity\r\n in areas related to sector reforms—for instance, risks of nonpayment by\r\n microfinance beneficiaries should have been mentioned. More\r\n fundamentally, lack of conviction of government to allow the private sector\r\n to play a greater role in the rural economy (fertilizer distribution) or\r\n identified advantages of decentralization. The program appropriately\r\n identified sources of risks and possible exogenous shocks but could not put\r\n in place mitigating measures to reduce their effects—other than through\r\n financial support through the operation. The main risks identified include:\r\n political economy risks, macroeconomic shocks, climate-change risks,\r\n disaster risks, implementation capacity risk, and environmental and social\r\n risks. The risks that materialized affected the implementation of the reform.\r\n Materialization of political risks overwhelmed the implementation of reforms\r\n championed by the government bureaucrats.\r\n\r\n • Key documents were apparently not available in French, which limited\r\n access by government counterparts and other stakeholders. The office of the\r\n director general in charge of cooperation (DGCOOP) informed the IEG\r\n mission of its limited capacity to comprehend large documents written in\r\n languages other than French. In this case, the issue went beyond translation\r\n of key World Bank documents to compass the lack sharing of these\r\n documents with DGCOOP. For instance, none of the government officials,\r\n donors, CSOs, and academia had seen the ICR for this operation. They had\r\n no idea about the performance of the previous series.\r\n\r\nQuality of Supervision\r\n119. Quality of supervision is rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n120. In DPF series it is hard to distinguish between supervision activities and\r\npreparation of the next operation, which tend to take place together. This assessment has\r\ntaken the view that each program document, even when part of a series, is based on a\r\nstand-alone appraisal process and therefore covers the main elements of the operations\r\nunder quality at entry.\r\n\r\n121. Nevertheless, a few important points emerge from documentary reviews and\r\ninterviews with stakeholders. An ISR was prepared for each operation. The first three\r\nISRs were brief and uninformative. The ratings were misleading and unrealistic. For\r\ninstance, the first two operations were rated “highly satisfactory,” followed by\r\n“satisfactory” and “moderately satisfactory” ratings respectively for the third and\r\nfourth. As evidenced by the ICR and this assessment, the team significantly overstated\r\nthe performance of the operation. These rating obscured the possibility of identifying the\r\ndesign weaknesses. World Bank management and the government were not adequately\r\n 35\r\n\finformed of the challenges being experienced. More candid discussions on the\r\nperformance of the operations could have helped improve the performance. As correctly\r\ncited in the ICR: “One significant shortcoming was the weak monitoring of the results\r\nframework as reflected in ISRs. ISRs did not report on most results indicators. Even the\r\nISR for the last operation included only the 10 indicators that had achieved their\r\ntargets.” Donors complained of their limited involvement and knowledge of the reforms\r\npursued by the World Bank. They acknowledged having meetings with supervision\r\nmissions which focused on data collection rather than partnering with them on key\r\nchallenges.\r\n\r\n\r\nBorrower Performance\r\n122. Borrower performance is rated moderately unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n123. The operation was implemented by the Government of Burkina Faso. It was led\r\nby the Ministry of Economy and Finance, which collaborated with various line\r\nministries and implementing agencies. For instance, the Ministry of Agriculture\r\ncollaborated with the association of cotton companies and SONAGESS on the reforms\r\nrelated to the sector. The technical departments of sector ministries carried out the day-\r\nto-day process required to implement most reforms. This assessment found no\r\ndistinction between government and implementing agencies’ performance. Relevant to\r\nborrower performance is the clear leadership role of the World Bank in designing the\r\noperations using its previous knowledge products. Thus, more responsibility for the\r\nshortfalls of the series accrues to the World Bank.\r\n\r\n124. Reforms that required the submission of laws, especially in the mining and\r\njudicial sectors, benefited from effective collaboration between the sector ministries and\r\nthe implementing agencies. However, the implementing agencies were not committed to\r\nthe reforms, they were not monitoring results indicators in the World Bank’s program as\r\npart of the day-to-day activities.\r\n\r\n125. The borrower worked with the IMF to maintain macroeconomic and fiscal\r\nstability, and kept external debt at sustainable levels, despite economic and political\r\nshocks. Another positive aspect was that many of the prior actions were achieved on\r\ntime. However, a few reforms were either modified or delayed. For instance: the Mining\r\nCode approval was delayed due to insufficient consultations with stakeholders; the\r\neffort to increase private sector involvement in fertilizer distribution was unsuccessful,\r\nexcept in 2012; reduction in the time for customs clearance was not implemented; and\r\nthe trucking reforms and complementary actions were not implemented as designed.\r\n\r\n126. Another area of weakness was government reporting of results, which can also be\r\ntraced back to inadequate M&E design. More fundamentally, although out of the direct\r\ncontrol of the borrower, institutional and political turmoil affect implementation of\r\n 36\r\n\freforms, as did the central government’s preference to remain involved in delivery of\r\nservices that should have been devolved to subnational governments or to the private\r\nsector.\r\n\r\n127. The coordination and monitoring of the results of the reforms was led by the\r\noffice of the director general in charge of cooperation (DGCOOP). This office did not\r\nfollow or have information on the reforms pursued by the World Bank. The office had\r\nfundamental challenges in interpreting World Bank documents that were sent to them in\r\nEnglish. They also lacked the capacity and logistics needed to effectively monitor\r\nvarious reforms. The main role undertaken more effectively at the time of the mission\r\nwas the facilitation of policy dialogue. However, the underlying technical work was not\r\nbeing done, shared, or used. The Ministry of Economy and Finance deferred the\r\noversight responsibilities over policy reforms to the DGCOOP without realizing that\r\nvery little was being done. The office of DGCOOP also expected the line ministries to\r\nmonitor their own reforms. In other words, there was no government oversight of the\r\nreforms. The situation weakened the coordination of policy reforms on the government\r\nside, and policy dialogue were carried out bilaterally between line ministries and\r\ndevelopment partners (with DGCOOP as an observer).\r\n\r\n\r\nMonitoring and Evaluation\r\n128. M&E is rated modest.\r\n\r\n129. The G&C series supported multisectoral reforms and accounted for a substantial\r\npart of IDA financing to Burkina Faso during the period reviewed.40As such it would\r\nhave been a significant contributor to delivery of the World Bank’s intended strategic\r\noutcomes. Given this consideration, the operation’s M&E assumes importance. The\r\nvarious elements of M&E design, implementation, and use are discussed below.\r\n\r\n130. M&E design is assessed by considering: quality of results indicators as\r\nformulated in the original documents and as revised subsequently; consistency with\r\nother World Bank targets; and comprehensiveness of the system. The design of the M&E\r\nhad significant shortcomings, and there were some weaknesses in the results\r\nframework.\r\n\r\n131. Part of the design issue stems from the shortcomings in the chain of logic already\r\ndiscussed under relevance of design. The focus here is on the indicators themselves and\r\nhow they relate to actions and subobjectives. The original definition of the program\r\nlisted 24 indicators in its results framework, which is more numerous than is considered\r\ngood practice. A few indicators were revised and a handful of others were dropped.\r\nAppendix B, table B.7, of this report presents the M&E (results framework) and changes\r\nbrought to it from one operation to the next.\r\n\r\n 37\r\n\f132. Most indicators included baselines and targets. A few were vague, such as\r\n“satisfaction with public service delivery,” which has neither a baseline or target, and\r\nlack of explanation regarding how it will be measured. A notable weakness in the\r\nindicators is that most capture only partial aspects of the intended result, typically in the\r\nform of an output that contributes to the stated outcome. For instance, fiscal transfers\r\nalone will not result in improved services and improvement of justice will require that\r\njudgments are promptly executed when rendered, and not just issued. In many cases,\r\nthe materiality of the indicators and targets was unclear and the actual indicators did\r\nnot provide good measures of the intended results. Examples of the latter are the mining\r\nrevenue to GDP target, which had attribution issues since both GDP and revenues may\r\nfluctuate due to factors outside the program’s scope, and the time taken to enforce\r\ncontracts was not the appropriate focus. The materiality issue affected close to 50 percent\r\nof the targets.\r\n\r\n133. Shortcomings in initial indicators should have been apparent to World Bank\r\nmanagement and the task team during implementation and addressed in subsequent\r\noperations. However, this was not identified as an issue. Other than changes in some\r\nindicators at the last operation caused by reformulation of the PDOs, no fundamental\r\nchanges and improvements were made to the M&E framework during program\r\nimplementation.\r\n\r\n134. A further shortcoming of the M&E is that it did not include any impact\r\nassessments or surveys, which would seem required given the nature of outcomes in some\r\npolicy areas—an example is the measure of the indicator on “building resilience and\r\nreducing vulnerability,” or on employment generation. The government could not\r\nundertake such assessments on its own. The issue could have been addressed through\r\nparallel technical assistance, M&E of other related World Bank projects, or analytical work\r\nundertaken by other donors. However, this was not foreseen in M&E design.\r\nFurthermore, there was no attempt ex post to draw on relevant surveys that could shed\r\nlight on the impact of some of the policy actions, such as the household consumption\r\nsurvey.\r\n\r\n135. The first program document, box 4.1, stated a key lesson that “the current\r\ndonors’ harmonization framework requires further work to rationalize the unified joint\r\npolicy matrix, which should become more focused on the government’s own strategic\r\nmilestones. Future work will help design the Performance Assessment Framework of\r\nthe government’s new medium-term development strategy. There is also a need to\r\nfurther streamline the role of the various M&E frameworks at the sector level” (World\r\nBank 2012a, 12). This lesson was repeated in the second program document but dropped\r\nfrom the last two, without any evidence that it had been integrated in program\r\nimplementation.\r\n\r\n\r\n 38\r\n\f136. M&E arrangements reflected the multisector nature of the program. DGCOOP\r\nmonitored the government program with the donors while a directorate (for M&E) in\r\nthe Ministry of Economy and Finance was responsible for monitoring the entire\r\ngovernment program. The effectiveness of this arrangement is not apparent in\r\noperational documents and IEG did not find evidence that the directorate monitored the\r\nindicators for the series. Neither did DGCOOP monitor the results of this series. The ICR\r\nalso cited difficulties in collecting data as a problem that was not addressed during\r\nimplementation.41\r\n\r\n137. There was limited use of M&E information, because data collection and\r\navailability was problematic and some indicators were not used. Furthermore,\r\nadditional sources that might have informed program impact was not sought or\r\nconsulted. In general, the IEG mission found no data for indicators that were not\r\nselected from existing government M&E frameworks.\r\n\r\n138. The quality of M&E is rated modest.\r\n\r\n\r\n6. Lessons\r\n • When political risks are high and capacity is strained, design is better focused\r\n on a few key priorities. This series covered too many areas, and some key\r\n binding constraints were not addressed. The series might have been more\r\n successful with a sharper focus on more realistic objectives accompanied by a\r\n simpler design.\r\n\r\n • The success of budgetary support depends on the suitability of the\r\n instrument to the country environment. In a context of political turbulence\r\n and uncertainties about the government’s ability to undertake long term\r\n reforms, the World Bank could have ended the programmatic series after the\r\n third operation and made the fourth operation a stand-alone. Alternatively,\r\n the World Bank could have implemented a series of stand-alone operations\r\n after the second programmatic series when it became apparent that the\r\n political and policy environment was rapidly changing.\r\n\r\n • Lack of clarity on the respective roles and responsibilities of central and local\r\n governments and of the private sector undermines policy actions. It is\r\n important to ensure that there is a shared vision and that the need for reform\r\n is recognized and accepted by all parties. In this case, there was a lack of\r\n clarity among different stakeholders during implementation of the reforms\r\n on decentralization and fertilizer distribution.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 39\r\n\f • When M&E is not adequately resourced or implemented, there can be delays\r\n in the identification of problems and the application of remedies. M&E\r\n weaknesses can be compensated by leveraging information available\r\n elsewhere, or through specific impact assessments and perceptions surveys.\r\n\r\n • There may be a trade-off between the promise of continuous and predictable\r\n financing, urgently needed in times of crisis, and the strength of the reform\r\n program. In Burkina Faso the emphasis was on continuous financing even\r\n when reform performance was waning.\r\n\r\n • The lack of broad consultations with stakeholders when the World Bank is\r\n designing a complex reform program could lead to unsatisfactory results. In\r\n this case, the lack of consultations with an important stakeholder association\r\n (the Confederation Paysanne du Faso) on fertilizer distribution affected the\r\n achievement of results of one of the first objectives. Also, some development\r\n partners and civil society organizations had limited knowledge of the\r\n reforms pursued in the G&C series.\r\n\r\n • Consultation with all important stakeholders is critical to inform program\r\n design. In this case, development partners, civil society organization, and\r\n academia complained to the PPAR mission about inadequate consultation by\r\n the World Bank.\r\n\r\n • Inadequately resourced implementing agencies will likely be unable to carry\r\n out agreed reforms. Under-resourcing may be an indication of low\r\n government commitment, which needs to be addressed through policy\r\n dialogue. It is also important to ensure that agencies have appropriate\r\n technical capacity and systems in place, and that potential political obstacles\r\n at the local level are being addressed.\r\n\r\n\r\nBibliography\r\nBurkina Faso. 2016a. “Decree No. 2016-377 / PRES / PM / MJDHPC /MINEFID implementing\r\n Organic Law No. 049 / CNT of 25 August 2015 on the organization, composition, powers\r\n and functioning of the Superior Council of Magistracy, 19/05/2016.” Ouagadougou,\r\n Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2016b. Evaluation of Budget Support in Burkina Faso (2009–14). Ouagadougou, Burkina\r\n Faso: Ministry of Economics and Finance.\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso, Directorate-General for Economics and Planning. 2015. Report on the Economy\r\n 2015: Analysis of the Economic and Financial Situation, 2011–2014. Ouagadougou,\r\n Burkina Faso: Directorate-General for Economics and Planning.\r\n\r\n\r\n 40\r\n\fBurkina Faso, Ministry of Economics and Finance. 2007. Strengthening Public Finance Strategy\r\n Paper. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2011. Sectoral Policy 2011–2020. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and\r\n Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2014. Impact Evaluation of the Accelerated Growth and Sustainable Development\r\n Strategy (SCADD) 2011–2015. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and\r\n Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2015. 2016–2018 Performance Matrix of the Sector Policy for the Economy and Finance\r\n (POSEF). Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2015b. Performance Report of the Sectoral Economic and Financial Policy (POSEF).\r\n Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and Finance.\r\n\r\n———. 2017. Internal Control Report: Financial Flows of Budget Support under the Protocol of\r\n the General Framework for Budget Support Organization (CGAB), Fiscal Year Ended\r\n 31/12/2016: Interim Report. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Economics and\r\n Finance.\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso, Ministry of Justice. 2016. 2016 Statistical Scoreboard, March 2016 Edition.\r\n Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Ministry of Justice.\r\n\r\n———.2016. 2016 Statistical Yearbook of Justice, March 2016 Edition. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso:\r\n Ministry of Justice.\r\n\r\nCherrier, Cecile, Carlo del Ninno, and Setareh Razmara. 2011. “Burkina Faso Social Safety Nets.”\r\n Social Protection and Labor Discussion Paper 1403, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\nEITI (Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative). 2014. Simplified Version of the 3rd Burkina Faso\r\n EITI Report Year 2011. Oslo, Norway: EITI.\r\n\r\n———. 2015. Simplified Version of the 4th Burkina Faso EITI Report Year 2012. Oslo, Norway: EITI.\r\n\r\n———. 2016. Simplified Version of the 5th Burkina Faso EITI Report Year 2013. Oslo, Norway: EITI.\r\n\r\n———. 2016. Simplified Version of the 6th Burkina Faso EITI Report Year 2014. Oslo, Norway: EITI.\r\n\r\n———. 2017. Simplified Version of the 7th Burkina Faso EITI Report Year 2015. Oslo, Norway: EITI.\r\n\r\n———. 2017. 2015 Burkina Faso EITI Report. Oslo: EITI.\r\n\r\nJeune Afrique. 2017. “Coton OGM au Burkina : retour sur une expérience ratée.” Jeune Afrique. .\r\n\r\nLawson, Andrew, Mailan Chiche, and Idrissa Ouedraogo. 2012. Evaluation of Public Financial\r\n Management Reform, 2001–2010. Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish International Development\r\n Cooperation Agency.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 41\r\n\fInternational Budget Partnership. 2015. Open Budget Survey 2015, Burkina Faso. Washington, DC:\r\n International Budget Partnership.\r\n\r\nIMF (International Monetary Fund). 2010. “Burkina Faso: First Review Under the Three-Year\r\n Arrangement Under the Extended Credit Facility and Request for a Waiver of\r\n Nonobservance of Performance Criterion.” IMF Country Report 10/361, IMF,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2012. “Burkina Faso: Fourth Review Under the Three-Year Arrangement Under the\r\n Extended Credit Facility and Request for Modification of Performance Criteria and\r\n Augmentation of Access.” IMF Country Report 12/159, IMF, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013. “Faso: Ex Post Evaluation of the Implementation of Long-Term Programs—\r\n Update.” IMF Report 13/228, IMF, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2014. “Burkina Faso: Staff Report for the 2014 Article iv Consultation, First Review under\r\n the Three-Year Arrangement under The Extended Credit Facility, and Request for\r\n Waiver and Modification of Performance Criteria.” IMF Country Report 14/215, IMF,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2016a. “Burkina Faso: Fourth and Fifth Reviews under the Extended Credit Facility and\r\n Request for Modification of Performance Criteria.” IMF Country Report No. 16/173, IMF,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2016b. Evaluation conjointe des autorités du Burkina Faso et des services du FMI du\r\n programme soutenu par la facilite de crédit élargie (2013–16). Washington, DC: IMF.\r\n\r\n———. 2017. “Seventh Review under the Extended Credit Facility Arrangement.” IMF Country\r\n Report 17/222, IMF, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\nREN-LAC (Réseau national de lutte anti-corruption). 2016. State of Corruption in Burkina Faso, 2015\r\n Report. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: REN-LAC.\r\n\r\n———. 2017. State of Corruption in Burkina Faso, Report 2016. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso:\r\n REN-LAC.\r\n\r\nTransparency International. 2015. “Corruption Perceptions Index 2015.” Transparency\r\n International, www.transparency.org/cpi.\r\n\r\nWorld Bank and IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2011. Burkina Faso: Joint Staff Advisory Note\r\n on The Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy Paper. Washington, DC: World Bank and\r\n IMF.\r\n\r\n———. 2012. Burkina Faso: Developing a Medium-Term Debt Management Strategy.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank and IMF.\r\n\r\nWorld Bank. 1993. “Burkina Faso—Public Expenditure Review.” Report 11901-BUR, World Bank,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n\r\n 42\r\n\f———. 2005. Burkina Faso—Country Assistance Strategy for Burkina Faso, FY06–09. Washington,\r\n DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2009a. Country Assistance Strategy Completion Report Review, FY 06 –09. Independent\r\n Evaluation Group. Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2009b. Burkina Faso—Country Assistance Strategy, FY10–12. Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2009c. “Burkina Faso—Ninth Poverty Reduction Support Grant.” Program Document\r\n Report 48468-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2009d. Burkina Faso—Poverty Reduction Support Credit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Independent\r\n Evaluation Group, Project Performance Assessment Report 47548, World Bank,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2010a. “Burkina Faso—Promoting Growth, Competitiveness, and Diversification,\r\n Country Economic Memorandum, Volume I.” Program Document Report 51815-BF,\r\n World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2010b. “Burkina Faso—Promoting Growth, Competitiveness, and Diversification,\r\n Country Economic Memorandum, Volume II: Sources of Growth—Key Sectors for\r\n Tomorrow.” Country Economic Memorandum Report 51815-BF, World Bank,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2010c. “Burkina Faso—Promoting Growth, Competitiveness, and Diversification,\r\n Country Economic Memorandum, Volume III: Enhancing Growth Factors.” Country\r\n Economic Memorandum Report 51815-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2011a. Africa’s Future and the World Bank’s Support to It: Africa Regional Strategy.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2011b. Burkina Faso—Debt Management Performance Assessment Tool (DEMPA).\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2011c. “Burkina Faso—Eleventh Poverty Reduction Support Grant (PRSG-11) to Burkina\r\n Faso.” Program Document Report 59910-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2012a. “Burkina Faso—First Growth and Competitiveness Grant Program. ” Program\r\n Document Report 67446-BF, World Bank Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2012b. Burkina Faso—IDA Grant H785-BF Financing Agreement. Washington, DC: World\r\n Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2012c. “Burkina Faso—Poverty Reduction Support Credit (11).” Implementation Status\r\n Results Report ISR6887, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013a. Burkina Faso—Country Partnership Strategy, FY13–16. Washington, DC: World\r\n Bank.\r\n\r\n\r\n 43\r\n\f———. 2013b. Burkina Faso—IDA Grant H830-BF Financing Agreement. Washington, DC: World\r\n Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2013c. Burkina Faso—IDA Credit 5327-BF and Grant H895-BF Financing Agreement.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2013d. “Burkina Faso—Policy Priorities to Boost Competitiveness.” Report 78204-BF,\r\n World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013e. “Burkina Faso—Poverty Reduction Support Credits Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth,\r\n Eleventh.” Implementation Completion and Results Report ICR2551, World Bank,\r\n Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013f. “Burkina Faso—Second Growth and Competitiveness Grant Program.” Program\r\n Document Report 74656-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013g. “Burkina Faso—Third Growth and Competitiveness Credit Program.” Program\r\n Document Report 80557-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2013h. World Bank: Grant Reporting and Monitoring (GRM) Report. Washington, DC: World\r\n Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2014. Burkina Faso—IDA Credit 5457-BF Financing Agreement. Washington, DC: World\r\n Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2015a. “Burkina Faso—Poverty Reduction Support Credits 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.”\r\n Independent Evaluation Group, Implementation Completion and Results Report Review\r\n ICRR14764, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2015b. “Burkina Faso—Country Partnership Strategy, FY13–16.” Independent Evaluation\r\n Group. Performance and Learning Review Report 96513-BF, World Bank, Washington,\r\n DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2015c. “Burkina Faso—Public Sector Modernization Program.” Project Appraisal\r\n Document 95199-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2015d. “Burkina Faso—Fourth Growth and Competitiveness Operation.” Program\r\n Document Report 90773-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2015e. The Quality of Results Frameworks in Development Policy Operations. Independent\r\n Evaluation Group Learning Product. Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2016a. “Burkina Faso—Economic Governance and Citizen Engagement Project.” Project\r\n Appraisal Document PAD1506, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2016b. “Burkina Faso Support for the Implementation of PFM reforms and WAEMU\r\n Directives.” Working Paper AUS12695, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 44\r\n\f———. 2017a. Burkina Faso—Priorities for Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity . Systematic\r\n Country Diagnostic. Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2017b. “Burkina Faso—Growth and Competitiveness Credits and Grants Series.”\r\n Implementation Completion Results Report ICR00003713, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2017c. “Burkina Faso—Second Energy and Fiscal Management Development Policy\r\n Financing Project.” Program Document Report 114714-BF, World Bank, Washington, DC.\r\n http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/970061513479640534/ pdf/BURKINA-FASO-\r\n PAD-11212017.pdf.\r\n\r\n———. 2017d. Burkina Faso—IDA Credit 6166-BF and Grant D258-BF Financing Agreement.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank.\r\n\r\n———. 2017e. “Burkina Faso—Growth and Competitiveness Credits and Grants Series.”\r\n Implementation Completion and Results Report ICR00003713, World Bank, Washington,\r\n DC.\r\n\r\n———. 2018a. “Ease of Doing Business in Burkina Faso.” World Bank, Doing Business.\r\n http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/burkina-faso.\r\n\r\n———. 2018b. Maximizing the Impact of Development Policy Financing in IDA Countries: A\r\n Stocktaking of Success Factors and Risks. Independent Evaluation Group. Washington, DC:\r\n World Bank.\r\n\r\nWorld Bank Group. 2014. CPIA Africa: Assessing Africa’s Policies and Institutions. Washington, DC:\r\n World Bank Group. http://datatopics.worldbank.org/cpia/country/burkina-faso.\r\n\r\n———. 2016. Doing Business 2016: Measuring Regulatory Quality and Efficiency. 13 ed.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank Group.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1 http://www.imf.org/~/media/Files/Publications/CR/2017/cr17222.ashx.\r\n2 http://www.tadat.org/files/BK_Final_PAR_2018.pdf\r\n3 http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/burkina-faso.\r\n\r\n4 http://datatopics.worldbank.org/cpia.\r\n\r\n5 This pillar covers property rights and rule-based governance; quality of budgetary and financial\r\n\r\nmanagement; efficiency in revenue mobilization; quality of public administration; and\r\ntransparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector.\r\n6 http://datatopics.worldbank.org/cpia/\r\n7 This pillar covers property rights and rule-based governance; quality of budgetary and financial\r\nmanagement; efficiency in revenue mobilization; quality of public administration; and\r\ntransparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector.\r\n\r\n 45\r\n\f8The following sector strategies had been formulated by the government, and were presumably deemed\r\nby the World Bank to provide an adequate basis for some of the policy actions: (i) National Justice Sector\r\nPolicy Reform 2010–19 and its associated Triennial Action Plan; (ii) PFM strategy; (iii) the National\r\nMicrofinance Strategy, formulated under Growth and Competitiveness (G&C) series 2; and (iv) the\r\nNational Plan for the Organization and Coordination of Emergency Relief and Recovery. In addition,\r\nimportant strategic considerations are reflected in Burkina Faso joining the Extractive Industries\r\nTransparency Initiative (EITI) and implementing the General Code for Local Governments.\r\n9Internal inconsistencies within the country assistance strategy (CAS), the analysis of which is outside the\r\nscope of this assessment, may have contributed to this problem.\r\n10 Based on research presented in World Bank 2015e and 2018b.\r\n11Such as competitiveness of private sector, limited market size; barriers to entry and competition; a\r\nshortage of skills; limited access to external financing; and complexity of administrative and tax\r\nprocedures.\r\n12 One of the indicators (transparency international index) is not easily matched with the reforms.\r\n13This is in part because experience within the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU)\r\nindicates that issuance of timely judgment and their execution constitute a major problem.\r\n See section 3.8 of the 2013 PEFA: https://pefa.org/sites/default/files/assements/comments/BF-Jun14-\r\n14\r\n\r\nPFMPR-Public.pdf.\r\n15The Implementation Completion and Results Report Review rates “promoting higher efficiency,\r\ntransparency and accountability in the use of public resources” as substantial (World Bank 2015a).\r\n16 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c210/6432e962f3126b349bd15decf1b6b48fca57.pdf.\r\n17 The G&C 4 objective to “reduce cost in the agriculture and transport sectors” is assessed in this section.\r\n18As confirmed by the 2017 Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD; World Bank 2017a). The SCD goes on to\r\nnote that although changes to the law had been enacted with a view to reducing transport costs,\r\nregulations that would have permitted application of the new law’ were not in place; nor were they in\r\nplace at the time of the Project Performance Assessment Report mission.\r\n19 http://www.oecd.org/dev/africa.\r\n20 Farmers are now reverting to the older types of seed, which require additional inputs.\r\n21Interprofessional Association of Cotton Farmers of Burkina Faso (AICB) is the umbrella body\r\noverseeing the work of three cotton buying companies (Société Cotonnière du Gourma, Faso Coton, and\r\nSofitex [Société Burkinabè des Fibres Textiles]), national farmers union (Ensemble Burkina), cotton\r\nproducers, the state, and other stakeholders (for example, research institutions).\r\n22 This is despite falling international prices over this period.\r\n23This private association represents 14 peasant farmer organizations. It engages with the government on\r\nkey policy issues that affect its members.\r\n24 See appendix B, table B.7 for list of prior actions.\r\n25The government adopted some alternative goals. For instance, instead of a guarantee scheme, the\r\ngovernment granted exemptions of custom fees and value-added tax on imported trucks/vehicles with an\r\nexpanded deadline to December 31, 2013. 46\r\n26 Three were not met and three were dropped.\r\n\f27The G&C 4 objective to “improve the transparency and accountability in publi c resource mobilization\r\nand management” is assessed in this section.\r\n28Table 2 of the SCD provides a breakdown of the contribution of each sector to growth (World Bank\r\n2017a).\r\n29The EITI Unit explained that the government’s Administrative Council decides which companies must\r\nreport data based on production capacity. The 2010 EITI report mentions the conflicts that existed before\r\nthe operation.\r\n30 http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/burkina-faso#enforcing-contracts.\r\n31 https://camco.bf.\r\n32 https://pefa.org/sites/default/files/BF-DeC 17-PFMPR-Public%20with%20PEFA%20Check.pdf\r\n33Data provided to the mission shows that the average execution rate for government funds was\r\n81 percent in 2011 and 78 percent in 2015 (see appendix B, table B.4).\r\n34 http://www.tadat.org/files/BK_Final_PAR_2018.pdf\r\n35According the PD1, among the 11 competencies mentioned for devolution to local governments, only 4\r\nhave been transferred to urban municipalities.\r\n36 Information provided to the mission by the Director of Budget of the Ministry of Economy and Finance.\r\n37 The largest microfinance institution of Burkina Faso, with over one million clients.\r\n FAARF provides credit to women with no collateral at low interest rates (about 10 percent). It aims to\r\n38\r\n\r\nempower women who are vulnerable to economic hardship.\r\n39This was recognized by the World Bank, and impact at the level of West Africa was mitigated by a\r\nseries of World Bank projects evaluated in 2006 by the Independent Evaluation Group.\r\n40The country benefited from debt write-off through Highly Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the\r\nMultilateral Debt Relief Initiative. The latter, which is equivalent to budget support, resulted in reduced\r\nIDA country allocation. IDA budget support was in practice above what was provided under various\r\ndevelopment policy operations.\r\n The ICR mentions an implementation workshop held after the closing date of the last operation (World\r\n41\r\n\r\nBank 2017e).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 47\r\n\fAppendix A. Basic Data Sheet\r\nBurkina Faso: First Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P126207)\r\nTable A.1. Key Project Data\r\n Actual or Actual as\r\n Appraisal Current Percent of\r\n Estimate Estimate Appraisal\r\n Financing ($, millions) ($, millions) Estimate\r\nTotal project costs 90.00 89.30 99.2\r\nLoan amount 90.00 89.30 99.2\r\nCofinancing — — —\r\nCancellation — — —\r\n\r\nTable A.2. Cumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements\r\n Disbursements FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16\r\n Appraisal estimate ($, millions) 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00\r\n Actual ($, millions) 89.30 89.30 89.30 89.30\r\n Actual as percent of appraisal 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2\r\n Date of final disbursement: 12/31/12\r\n\r\nTable A.3. Project Dates\r\n Event Original Actual\r\nInitiating memorandum 01/12/2012 01/12/2012\r\nNegotiations 05/04/2012 05/04/2012\r\nBoard approval 06/26/2012 06/26/2012\r\nSigning 07/25/2012 06/26/2012\r\nEffectiveness 09/12/2012 09/12/2012\r\nClosing date 12/31/2012 12/31/2012\r\n\r\nTable A.4. Staff Time and Cost\r\n World Bank Budget Only\r\n Staff time Costa\r\n Stage of Project Cycle (no. weeks) ($, thousands)\r\nLending\r\nFY12 64.63 333,364\r\nTotal lending 64.63 333,364\r\nSupervision/ICR\r\nFY13 0 0\r\nTotal supervision 0 0\r\nTotal lending and supervision 64.63 333,364\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. Including travel and consultant costs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 48\r\n\fTable A.5. Task Team Members\r\n Responsibility or\r\n Name Title a\r\n Unit Specialty\r\nLending\r\n\r\nAli Zafar Sr. Economist GMF08 Team Leader\r\nMariam Diop Sr. Economist GMF09 Sr. Economist\r\nKolie Ousmane Maurice Sr. Financial management Specialist GGO26 Sr. Financial management\r\nMegnan Specialist\r\nJean Gaspard Ayi Consultant GHN07 Consultant\r\nValerie Nussenbaltt\r\n\r\nCelestin Bado\r\n\r\nKoffi Nouve Sr. Agriculture Economist Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\n\r\nDjibrilla Adamou Issa Senior Financial Specialist AFMCG Senior Financial Specialist\r\nAguiratou Savadogo Tinto Sr. Transport Specialist GTI08 Sr. Transport Specialist\r\nAdja Dahourou Sr. Private Sector Specialist GTC07 Sr. Private Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nMagueye Dia Sr. Private Sector Specialist GTC07 Sr. Private Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nSetareh Razmara\r\n\r\nBoubacar Bocoum Lead Mining Specialist GEEX2 Lead Mining Specialist\r\nSerdar Yilmaz Lead Public Sector Management GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist Management Specialist\r\nBronwyn Grieve Lead Public Sector Management GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist Management Specialist\r\nAdama Ouedraogo Sr. Education Specialist GED07 Sr. Education Specialist\r\nOusmane Haidara Senior Health Specialist GHN13 Senior Health Specialist\r\nAndrew Dabalen Lead Poverty Specialist GPV07 Lead Poverty Specialist\r\nNicolette DeWitt\r\n\r\nAissatou Diallo Sr. Finance Officer WFALN Sr. Finance Officer\r\nElisée Ouedraogo Sr. Agriculture Specialist GFA01 Sr. Agriculture Specialist\r\nCorinne Ilgun\r\n\r\nCatherine Marie Z. Team Assistant AFMBF Team Assistant\r\nCompaore\r\nMichel Valois Consultant GFM01 Consultant\r\nJudite Fernandes Language Program Assistant Language Program\r\n Assistant\r\nElianne Tchapda Program Assistant ITSNI Program Assistant\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. At time of appraisal and closure, respectively.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 49\r\n\fBurkina Faso: Second Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P132210)\r\nTable A.6. Key Project Data\r\n Actual or Actual as\r\n Appraisal Current Percent of\r\n Estimate Estimate Appraisal\r\n Financing ($, millions) ($, millions) Estimate\r\nTotal project costs 70.0 70.5 100.7\r\nLoan amount 70.0 70.5 100.7\r\nCofinancing — — —\r\nCancellation — — —\r\n\r\nTable A.7. Cumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements\r\n Disbursements FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17\r\n Appraisal estimate ($, millions) 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0\r\n Actual ($, millions) 70.5 70.5 70.5 70.5\r\n Actual as percent of appraisal 100.7 100.7 100.7 100.7\r\n Date of final disbursement: 12/31/2013\r\n\r\nTable A.8. Project Dates\r\n Event Original Actual\r\nInitiating memorandum 11/06/2012 11/06/2012\r\nNegotiations 02/07/2013 02/07/2013\r\nBoard approval 03/21/2013 03/21/2013\r\nSigning 04/12/2013 04/12/2013\r\nEffectiveness 09/11/2013 08/19/2013\r\nClosing date 12/31/2013 12/31/2013\r\n\r\nTable A.9. Staff Time and Cost\r\n World Bank Budget Only\r\n Staff time Costa\r\n Stage of Project Cycle (no. weeks) ($, thousands)\r\nLending\r\nFY13 52.91 374,411\r\nTotal lending 52.91 374,411\r\nSupervision or ICR\r\nFY14 0 0\r\nTotal supervision 0 0\r\nTotal lending and supervision 52.91 374,411\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. Including travel and consultant costs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 50\r\n\fTable A.10. Task Team Members\r\n Responsibility or\r\n Name Title a\r\n Unit Specialty\r\nLending\r\nAdja Mansora Dahourou Sr. Private Sector Specialist GTC07 Sr. Private Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nAguiratou Savadogo Tinto Sr. Transport Specialist GTI08 Sr. Transport Specialist\r\nAli Zafar Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\nBronwyn Grieve Lead Public Sector Management GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist Management Specialist\r\nCatherine Marie Z. Compaore Team Assistant AFMBF Team Assistant\r\nElisée Ouedraogo Sr. Agriculture Economist GFA01 Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\nJean Gaspard Ntoutoume Ayi Consultant GHN07 Consultant\r\nKoffi Nouve Sr. Agriculture Economist Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\n\r\nMariam Diop Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\nSerdar Yilmaz Lead Public Sector Specialist GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. At time of appraisal and closure, respectively.\r\n\r\n\r\nBurkina Faso: Third Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P146640)\r\nTable A.11. Key Project Data\r\n Actual or Actual as\r\n Appraisal Current Percent of\r\n Estimate Estimate Appraisal\r\n Financing ($, millions) ($, millions) Estimate\r\nTotal project costs 100.0 100.3 100.3\r\nLoan amount 100.0 100.3 100.3\r\nCofinancing — — —\r\nCancellation — — —\r\n\r\nTable A.12. Cumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements\r\n Disbursements FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18\r\n Appraisal estimate ($, millions) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0\r\n Actual ($, millions) 100.3 100.3 100.3 100.3\r\n Actual as percent of appraisal 100.3 100.3 100.3 100.3\r\n Date of final disbursement: 06/30/2014\r\n\r\nTable A.13. Project Dates\r\n Event Original Actual\r\nInitiating memorandum 09/10/2013 09/10/2013\r\nNegotiations 10/31/2013 10/31/2013\r\nBoard approval 12/05/2013 12/05/2013\r\nSigning 12/09/2013 12/09/2013\r\nEffectiveness 12/20/2013 12/20/2013\r\nClosing date 06/30/2014 06/30/2014\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 51\r\n\fTable A.14. Staff Time and Cost\r\n World Bank Budget Only\r\n Staff time Staff time\r\n Stage of Project Cycle (no. weeks) (no. weeks)\r\nLending\r\nFY14 36.39 199,535\r\nFY15 12.35 37,929\r\nTotal lending 48.74 237,464\r\nSupervision or ICR\r\nFY15 1.06 17,480\r\nTotal supervision 1.06 17,480\r\nTotal lending and supervision 49.80 254,944\r\n\r\nTable A.15. Task Team Members\r\n Responsibility or\r\n Name Titlea Unit Specialty\r\nLending\r\nAli Zafar Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\nJohannes G. Hoogeveen Lead Economist GPV07 Lead Economist\r\nSamba Ba Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\nAbdoulaye Gadiere Sr. Environmental Specialist GEN07 Sr. Environmental\r\n Specialist\r\nAdja Mansora Dahourou Sr. Private Sector Specialist GTC07 Sr. Private Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nAguiratou Savadogo Tinto Sr. Transport Specialist GTI08 Sr. Transport Specialist\r\nBoubacar Bocoum Lead Mining Specialist GEEX2 Lead Mining Specialist\r\nCatherine Marie Z. Compaore Team Assistant AFMBF Team Assistant\r\nElisée Ouedraogo Sr. Agriculture Economist GFA01 Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\nJeremy Robert Strauss Sr. Private Sector Specialist GTC07 Sr. Private Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nJudite Fernandes Language Program Assistant Language Program\r\n Assistant\r\nKoffi Nouve Sr. Agriculture Economist Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\nMamate Tiendrebeogo Sr. Procurement Specialist GGO01 Sr. Procurement\r\n Specialist\r\nMariam Diop Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\nSerdar Yilmaz Lead Public Sector Specialist GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nYele Maweki Batana Sr. Economist GPV07 Sr. Economist\r\nMamata Tiendrebeogo Sr. Procurement Specialist GGo01 Sr. Procurement\r\n Specialist\r\nKolie Ousmane Maurice Sr. Financial Management GGO26 Sr. Financial\r\nMegnan Specialist Management Specialist\r\nRoch Levesque Sr. Counsel Sr. Counsel\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. At time of appraisal and closure, respectively.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 52\r\n\fBurkina Faso: Fourth Growth and Competitiveness Credit (P151275)\r\nTable A.16. Key Project Data\r\n Actual or Actual as\r\n Appraisal Current Percent of\r\n Estimate Estimate Appraisal\r\n Financing ($, millions) ($, millions) Estimate\r\nTotal project costs 100.0 99.0 99.0\r\nLoan amount 99.9 99.0 99.0\r\nCofinancing — — —\r\nCancellation — — —\r\n\r\nTable A.17. Cumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements\r\n Disbursements FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19\r\n Appraisal estimate ($, millions) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0\r\n Actual ($, millions) 99.0 99.0 99.0 99.0\r\n Actual as percent of appraisal 99.0 99.0 99.0 99.0\r\n Date of final disbursement: 12/31/2015\r\n\r\nTable A.18. Project Dates\r\n Event Original Actual\r\nInitiating memorandum 09/30/2014 09/30/2014\r\nNegotiations 02/02/2015 02/02/2015\r\nBoard approval 04/02/2015 04/02/2015\r\nSigning 04/15/2015 04/15/2015\r\nEffectiveness 06/15/2015 06/30/2015\r\nClosing date 12/31/2015 12/31/2015\r\n\r\nTable A.19. Staff Time and Cost\r\n Stage of Project Cycle World Bank Budget Only\r\n Staff time Costa\r\n (no. weeks) ($, thousands)\r\nLending\r\nFY15 30.51 177,180\r\nFY16 0 0\r\nTotal lending 30.51 177,180\r\nSupervision or ICR\r\nFY16 10.41 78,445\r\nFY17 1.22 4,271\r\nTotal supervision 11.63 82,716\r\nTotal lending and supervision 42.14 259,896\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. Including travel and consultant costs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 53\r\n\fTable A.20. Task Team Members\r\n Name Titlea Unit Responsibility or\r\n Specialty\r\n Lending\r\n Samba Ba Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\n Michael G. Nelson Operations Officer OPSPQ Operations Officer\r\n Mariam Diop Sr. Economist GMF08 Sr. Economist\r\n Mamate Tiendrebeogo Sr. Procurement Specialist GGO01 Sr. Procurement\r\n Specialist\r\n Ngor Sene Sr. Financial Management GGO26 Sr. Financial\r\n Specialist Management Specialist\r\n Aguiratou Savadogo Tinto Sr. Transport Specialist GTI08 Sr. Transport Specialist\r\n Boubacar Bocoum Lead Mining Specialist GEEX2 Lead Mining Specialist\r\n Elisée Ouedraogo Sr. Agriculture Economist GFA01 Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\n Nicolas Ahouissoussi Sr. Agriculture Economist GFA01 Sr. Agriculture Economist\r\n Serdar Yilmaz Lead Public Sector Specialist GGO27 Lead Public Sector\r\n Specialist\r\nNote: ICR = Implementation Completion and Results Report.\r\na. At time of appraisal and closure, respectively.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 54\r\n\fAppendix B. Figures and Tables\r\nFigure B.1. Country Policy and Institutional Assessment Ratings by Cluster in Burkina\r\nFaso\r\n\r\n 5.0\r\n 4.0\r\n 3.0\r\n 2.0\r\n 1.0\r\n 0.0\r\n CPIA economic CPIA structural policies CPIA policies for social CPIA public sector\r\n management cluster cluster average (1=low to inclusion/equity cluster management and\r\n average (1=low to 6=high) 6=high) average (1=low to 6=high) institutions cluster average\r\n (1=low to 6=high)\r\n\r\n 2005 2012 2015 2016\r\n\r\nSource: Data from World Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment website.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure B.2. Production of Cotton by Company in Burkina Faso (2004–16)\r\n\r\n 800,000\r\n\r\n 600,000\r\n\r\n 400,000\r\n\r\n 200,000\r\n\r\n -\r\n 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16\r\n\r\n SOFITEX SOCOMA FASO COTON ENSEMBLE BURKINA\r\n\r\nSource: Data from the Interprofessional Cotton Association of Burkina Faso.\r\nNote: SOCOMA = Société Cotonnière du Gourma; Sofitex = Société Burkinabè des Fibres Textiles.\r\n\r\nFigure B.3. Cotton Production and Prices, 1985–2015\r\nProduction (x1000tonnes)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 300.0\r\n 800.0\r\n Average price (FCFA/KG)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 250.0\r\n 700.0\r\n\r\n 600.0\r\n 200.0\r\n 500.0\r\n\r\n 400.0\r\n 150.0\r\n 300.0 Weighted average price & premiums (F/kg)\r\n 200.0 100.0\r\nSource: World Bank 2017a.\r\n 100.0\r\n\r\n 0.0 55\r\n 50.0\r\n\fFigure B.4. Corruption Index with the Union Economique et Monetaire Ouest Africaine\r\nZone\r\n\r\n 60\r\n Corruption Index\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 40\r\n\r\n 20\r\n\r\n 0\r\n Senegal Burkina Faso Benin Niger Côte d´Ivoire Mali Togo\r\n Peer Country\r\n\r\n 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\n\r\nSource: Transparency International 2017.\r\n\r\nTable B.1. Distribution of Fertilizer by Type and Year\r\n Type or Mode of Distribution 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\n Sum of quantities of NPK ceded to 8,172 15,919 16,096 7,131 17,110 10,266 7,801\r\n subsidized producers\r\n Sum of quantities of urea sold to 6,139 6,229 3,100 4,829 9,769 2,129 4,489\r\n subsidized producers\r\n Sum of DAP quantities ceded to NA NA 681 1,607 1,918 316 261\r\n subsidized producers\r\n Sum of quantities of Burkina NA NA 400 241 39 23 164\r\n phosphate ceded to producers at\r\n subsidized prices per year\r\n Sum of plows transferred to NA 8,368 12,975 25,642 18,130 10,976 9,243\r\n subsidized producers\r\n Sum of carts ceded to subsidized NA 729 1,108 2,824 1,626 1,367 1,425\r\n producers\r\n Sum of animals ceded to subsidized NA NA 14,921 NA 11,688 8,187 3,598\r\n producers\r\n Sum of quantities of improved 7,554 14,228 6,243 9,292 14,357 6,164 3,915\r\n seeds sold per year\r\nSource: Ministry of Agriculture, Burkina Faso.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 56\r\n\fTable B.2. Number of Mining Companies Reporting Data for EITI Reports\r\n Companies\r\n Submitting Operating Share of Companies Retained in Total State Mining\r\n Year Report Companies Revenues\r\n2011 18 6 represents 98 percent of the total contribution of the mining\r\n sector to the state budget in 2011\r\n2012 26 6 represents 98.75 percent of the total contribution of the\r\n mining sector to the state budget in 2012\r\n2013 29 8 99.59 percent of the total contribution of the mining sector\r\n to the state budget in 2013\r\n2014 18 7 97 percent of the total contribution of the mining sector\r\n2015 23 9 98 percent of the total contribution of the mining sector to\r\n the state budget in 2015\r\nSource: Ministry of Finance, Burkina Faso.\r\nNote: EITI = Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.\r\n\r\nTable B.3. Time for Processing Court Cases in Burkina Faso\r\n Type of Court 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\n High Courts: Average Time to Process a Civil Case 86 81 78 99 81 67\r\n Trial courts-average time to render a decision 71 42 72 60 83 91\r\n Courts of Commerce-Average rate to make a 276 242 230 204 213 217\r\n commercial decision\r\n Courts of labor-average rate for making a decision 455 455 365 575 455 425\r\n Administrative courts-average rate for making a 485 485 545 515 515 665\r\n decision\r\n Average time for court cases 274.6 261 258 290.6 269.4 293\r\nSource: Ministry of Justice, Burkina Faso (Tableau de bord statistique 2016 de la justice, 2017 edition).\r\n\r\nTable B.4. Written Judgment in Commercial Courts\r\n Judgment 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\nDecisions rendered 319 282 311 297 372 444\r\nDecisions written 199 277 302 283 372 442\r\nRate (percent) 62.4 98.2 97.1 95.3 100.0 99.5\r\nSource: Ministry of Justice (Tableau de bord statistique 2016 de la justice, 2017 Edition).\r\n\r\nTable B.5. Execution of The Public Investment from 2011 to 2016\r\n Rate of Rate of\r\n Budget Revised Actual Execution Execution\r\n Allocation (A) Allocation (B) Expenditure (A) (B)\r\n Year (CFAF, thousands) (CFAF, thousands) (CFAF, thousands) (percent) (percent)\r\n 2011 538,759,488 482,910,032 390,852,005 73 81\r\n 2012 672,661,294 826,506,901 484,352,743 72 59\r\n 2013 811,667,976. 795,715,836 626,265,413 77 79\r\n 2014 859,191,327 840,087,719 475,511,502 55 57\r\n 2015 676,158,305 505,884,921 371,292,225 55 73\r\n 2016 695,015,048 566,453,727 442,997,567 64 78\r\nSource: Director of Budget, Burkina Faso.\r\nNote: Government sources only are used. CFAF = CFA franc.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 57\r\n\fTable B.6. Lending by Instrument\r\n DPF Lending IPF Lending\r\n (A) (B) A/B\r\n Fiscal Year ($, millions) ($, millions) PforR (percent) Total\r\n1980 35 0 35\r\n1981 62 0 62\r\n1982 33 0 33\r\n1983 18.5 0 18.5\r\n1984 7.4 0 7.4\r\n1985 61.9 0 61.9\r\n1988 17.9 0 17.9\r\n1989 42 0 42\r\n1990 22.2 0 22.2\r\n1991 80 60.5 57 140.5\r\n1992 28 81 26 109\r\n1993 18.7 0 18.7\r\n1994 25 55.5 31 80.5\r\n1995 47 0 47\r\n1997 47.4 0 47.4\r\n1998 41.3 0 41.3\r\n1999 15 5.2 74 20.2\r\n2000 25 100 25\r\n2001 136.7 0 136.7\r\n2002 45 76.6 37 121.6\r\n2003 35 125.1 22 160.1\r\n2004 110 10 92 120\r\n2005 60 75.58 44 135.58\r\n2006 60 136.6 31 196.6\r\n2007 84 0 84\r\n2008 90 73.8 55 163.8\r\n2009 200 80 71 280\r\n2010 90 40 69 130\r\n2011 220 0 220\r\n2012 215 88.9 71 303.9\r\n2013 70 215 25 285\r\n2014 100 220.95 31 320.95\r\n2015 100 130 43 230\r\n2016 165 40 0 205\r\n2017 100 120 45 220\r\nTotal 1,448 2,654.73 40 35 4,142.73\r\nSource: World Bank Business Intelligence.\r\nNote: DPF = Development Policy Financing; IPF = Investment Policy Financing.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 58\r\n\fTable B.7. Growth and Competitiveness Grant Prior Actions and Status\r\n Prior Actions Implementation Status and Evidence\r\nGCG1\r\n1. Application, for the Cotton Seasons 2011–12 and Implemented\r\n2012–13, of a producer price formula, based on Evidence: AIC Decision fixing the floor price for\r\ninternational cotton prices, designed to ensure that cotton (April 12, 2011); newspaper announcement\r\ncotton farmers are paid an appropriate price; and of the producer price (April 16, 2012); bank\r\ncapitalization of the Cotton Price Stabilization Fund in statement confirming the amount on deposit in\r\nan amount of at least seven billion CFA Francs (CFAF the stabilization fund (April 17, 2012)\r\n7,000,000,000).\r\n2. Continued involvement of the private sector in the Implemented\r\nfertilizer distribution process, by the issuance of In January 2012 the procurement was launched,\r\ninvitations to private suppliers to bid on at least 6,900 and the fertilizer has been imported\r\nmetric tons of fertilizer to be purchased by the Evidence: Ministry bidding documents; results of\r\nrecipient for distribution to rice and maize producers. the procurement authority evaluation proposing\r\n award of contracts (March 15, 2012)\r\n3. Adoption by the recipient of a mechanism of Implemented\r\nmonthly reporting of consolidated data on mining Consolidated revenue reports prepared for last\r\nrevenues designed to ensure better coordination quarter 2011\r\nbetween the recipient’s ministries responsible for Evidence: Ministry of Finance reports on mining\r\nfinance and for mining, to improve collection of public sector revenues for the months of December 2011\r\nrevenues generated by mining activities in the country; (January 20, 2012);\r\nand issuance of said data for the last quarter of FY November 2011 (December 12, 2011); and\r\n2011. October\r\n 2011 (November 11, 2011); minutes of ministry\r\n meeting on monitoring of the sector (March 2012)\r\n4. Submission to Parliament of a law designed to Implemented\r\nestablish a suitable regulatory and legal framework for The bill has been submitted to Parliament in May,\r\nthe promotion of mediation as an alternative dispute 2012.\r\nresolution mechanism. Evidence: Draft law and cover letter from Minister\r\n of Justice transmitting the draft law to the\r\n Parliament (May 9, 2012)\r\n5 Publication of statistics covering the period FY10 and Implemented\r\nFY11 on the activities of the recipient’s courts of first The Ministry of Justice has validated and\r\ninstance (tribunaux de grande instance), including uploaded the core statistics on its website.\r\naverage time required for a final disposition, rate of Evidence: www.cns.bf;\r\ncase disposition, annual budget allocation, and 2011 and 2010 statistics and budgetary\r\npercentage of judgments rendered in writing. allocations\r\n6. Devolution, on a pilot basis, of budget and Implemented\r\nexpenditure management to the recipient’s line The five units have all been established.\r\nministries, through the establishment and Evidence: Decree establishing budget verification\r\noperationalization of budget oversight and verification units (October 7, 2011); MEF order (arrêté) on\r\nunits in the recipient’s ministries responsible for organization and functioning of these units\r\nagriculture, health, infrastructure, secondary and (October 25, 2011); 5 joint MEF/line ministry\r\nhigher education, and justice. orders\r\n (arrêté conjoint) (March 15, 19, 23, 29, 2012)\r\n7. Approval by the recipient’s high judicial council of Implemented\r\nthe nomination of qualified and experienced members The CSM has approved MEF’s nominations.\r\nto the recipient’s Court of Aaccounts (Cour des Evidence: Signed minutes of the CSM meeting on\r\nComptes) to enable the full staffing of said court. May 17, 2012, stating that four persons were\r\n retained as “presidents de chambres” of the Court\r\n of Accounts, and 11 persons were “retained to be\r\n nominated” as counselors at the Court of\r\n Accounts\r\n 59\r\n\fPrior Actions Implementation Status and Evidence\r\n8. Adoption of a regulatory framework for the Implemented\r\norganization of municipalities (l’organigramme type Government has adopted the framework.\r\ndes communes) designed to further the predictability Evidence: 4 joint MEF/MATD orders (arrêté\r\nof intergovernmental transfers and afford enhanced conjoint) on the organization of rural\r\ncapacity of local governments. Decentralization municipalities; urban municipalities; special status\r\n urban municipalities; and regional administrations\r\n (April 6, 2012)\r\n9. Adoption of a national strategy for the period FY Implemented\r\n2012 through FY 2016, designed to promote the Government has adopted the strategy.\r\neconomic and financially sound development of Evidence: Decree adopting the strategy and its\r\nmicrofinance throughout the recipient’s territory, action plan (January 24, 2012), copy of the\r\ntargeted to groups underserved by financial strategy and action plan\r\nintermediaries.\r\n10. Adoption of an action plan to strengthen and Implemented\r\nrationalize the recipient’s institutional arrangements Council of Ministers has adopted the action plan.\r\nfor food security to ensure adequate food reserves Evidence: Publication of minutes of council\r\nand an efficient and effective response in the event of meeting May 16 in newspaper; Letter from\r\nfood shortages. Minister of Finance confirming council adoption\r\n of the Food Security Plan (May 22, 2012).\r\nGCG2\r\n1. Creation, operationalization and capitalization of the Implemented by December 2012\r\ninput fund based on the manual prepared by the\r\nproducer association AICB and associated legal Evidence: Manual; supplemental budget showing\r\ndocuments (capitalization of at least 10 billion CFA). budget line\r\n2. Completion of procedure-based audit of the Moved to GCG3 December 2013\r\ncustoms clearance procedures in Ouagadougou to Evidence: Validated audit\r\nimprove customs administration.\r\n3. Public dissemination of the second EITI report, that Implemented by November 2012 Evidence: EITI\r\nprovides comprehensive statements on mining Report published\r\nrevenues collected in 2010 (licenses, royalties, income\r\ntax, and so on.) from all operating mines (materiality\r\ndecided by the EITI multistakeholder group)\r\n4. Adoption of a ministerial order to formalize both Implemented by December 2012\r\nthe process for the collection and publication of\r\nstatistics of the recipient’s courts and the procedural Evidence: Decree (arête) approved by Ministry of\r\nmanual for collecting statistics, including statistics on Justice\r\naverage time required for a final disposition, backlog\r\nrates, average time for written judgments and average\r\ntime for formal enforcement of judgments.\r\n5. Adoption of a national mechanism to monitor Implemented by December 30, 2012\r\ncorruption trends and evaluate anticorruption reform\r\nefforts by the semiautonomous agency ASCE (Autorité Decree (arête) validating anti- corruption tool\r\nsupérieure de contrôle dEtat) through the annual\r\ncollation and analysis of sectoral data, audit\r\ninformation (from the ASCE and the Cour des\r\nComptes) and surveys produced by the state and civil\r\nsociety.\r\n6. Submission to Parliament of a law relating to fiscal Implemented by Jan 15, 2012\r\ntransparency to ensure that the legal framework for\r\npublic finance complies with selected WAEMU Evidence: Decree establishing code submitted to\r\nDirectives on Code of Transparency. Parliament\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 60\r\n\fPrior Actions Implementation Status and Evidence\r\n7. Completion of institutional and financial audit of the Moved to CGC-4 December, 2014\r\nrecipient’s Court of Accounts (Cour des Comptes) to\r\nenable its adequate functioning. Evidence: Finalization of audit report of Cours de\r\n Comptes by Ministry of Justice\r\n8. Increase resource transfers to local collectivities to Implemented by December, 2012\r\n4 percent of national budget to ensure local\r\ngovernments have sufficient funds to fulfill mandates Evidence: Budgetary line (loi de finance)\r\nas established per the Code General des Collectivites allocating resources to local communities\r\nTerritoriales.\r\n6. Submission to Parliament of a law relating to fiscal Implemented by Jan 15, 2012\r\ntransparency to ensure that the legal framework for\r\npublic finance complies with selected WAEMU Evidence: Decree establishing code submitted to\r\nDirectives on Code of Transparency. Parliament\r\n9. Support to female microfinance by scaling up the Implemented by December 2012 Evidence:\r\nwomen’s fund (FAARF) to include financing of business Capitalization of FAARF by CFAF 500 million\r\ncreation and working capital.\r\n10. Implementation of PNOCSUR plan approved by Implemented by December 2012\r\nCM to adequately stock warehouses in food-deficit\r\nparts of the country and feed vulnerable populations Evidence: Stockage of boutiques in deficit areas\r\nto ensure effective response to food crisis.\r\nGCG3\r\n1. The agricultural input fund becomes operational in Implemented\r\ntime for the 2014–15 agricultural season. Evidence: A letter from the commercial bank\r\n contracted to operate the input fund (ECOBANK)\r\n indicating the share guarantees of each cotton\r\n company for the acquisition of inputs has been\r\n submitted to the World Bank (Sept 20, 2013).\r\n2. An audit of customs clearance procedures in Implemented\r\nOuagadougou is completed and recommendations to Evidence: A Ministerial Decree validating the\r\nimprove customs administration are adopted. audit and authorizing the adoption of the audit-\r\n recommendation action plan has been signed\r\n (Ministerial Decree 2013- 0264/MEF/SG/DGD, July\r\n 23, 2013).\r\n3. Support the renewal of the trucking fleet through an Implemented\r\nextension of effectiveness deadline of the 2012 Decree Evidence: A Ministerial Decree authorizing until\r\nfor exemption of imports of trucks to December 31, December 2013 the tax-free import of tanker\r\n2013. trucks, freight trucks, and taxis. Tax-exemption\r\n certificates are issued for import of vehicles\r\n (September 2013).\r\n4. A revised Mining Code reflecting international best Implemented\r\npractices for managing the fiscal, environmental, and Evidence: A letter acknowledging the submission\r\nsocial impacts of the natural resource sector is of the draft Mining Code to National Assembly\r\nsubmitted to National Assembly. has been received (October 7, 2013).\r\n5. A draft Anticorruption Law designed to strengthen Implemented\r\npenalties for bribery, tighten regulations on gift-giving Evidence: A letter acknowledging the submission\r\nto public officials, and more precisely and of the draft Anticorruption Law to National\r\ncomprehensively define both the nature of corrupt Assembly has been received (October 7, 2013).\r\npractices and the sanctions against them is submitted\r\nto National Assembly.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 61\r\n\fPrior Actions Implementation Status and Evidence\r\n6. A financial controller is appointed for each ministry Implemented\r\nand each national public administrative institution. Evidence: A decree appointing financial\r\n controllers for each ministry and national public\r\n administrative agency has been signed (October\r\n 2, 2013).\r\n7. Transfers to local communities are increased to Implemented\r\n4 percent of the national budget; local governments Evidence: 2013 Financial Management Law, which\r\nhave sufficient funds to fulfill mandates established by allocates 4.4 percent of the budgeted expenditure\r\nthe General Code for Local Communities. to local communities, has been signed\r\n (September 20, 2013).\r\n Implemented\r\n8. Improve access to finance for women by expanding Evidence: The FAARF exceeded these targets\r\nthe Support Fund for Women’s Income-Generating during the first nine months of 2013, when it\r\nActivities (FAARF). reported more than 83,500 beneficiaries and a\r\n loan portfolio exceeding CFAF 4.6 billion\r\n (September 20, 2013).\r\n9. The PNOCSUR plan is implemented, ensuring that Implemented\r\ngovernment warehouses are adequately stocked and Evidence: Contracts to acquire 35,000 tons of\r\nthat national agencies have sufficient capacity to cereals were approved by the Minister of\r\naddress the needs of vulnerable populations and Agriculture and the Minister of the Budget, and\r\nrespond effectively to future food crises. these expenditures were included in the national\r\n budget (October 2013).\r\nGCG4 Prior Actions\r\n1. Multiple private sector-operated open markets for Implemented\r\nthe sale of fertilizer and other agricultural inputs to Evidence: Contracts signed with cotton firms to\r\nfarmers are piloted. acquire fertilizer and other inputs have been\r\n approved by the Minister of Agriculture and the\r\n Minister of the Budget (June 2014).\r\n2. Formalization in the trucking industry is enhanced Implemented\r\nthrough the adoption of a legal framework for Evidence: A decree defining qualitative criteria for\r\nlicensing overland transport operators. access to the profession has been signed (July 2,\r\n 2014), and has been amended on January 27,\r\n 2015 to comply with the WAEMU legislation.\r\n3. A revised draft of the Mining Code is resubmitted to Implemented\r\nthe National Transition Council (CNT); including the Evidence: The World Bank has provided\r\ncreation of a local development mining fund financed comments and feedback on the draft Mining\r\nby a share of mining revenues, and resources from the Code, which was adopted by the Cabinet on\r\nfund are allocated to regions and communities where October 15, 2014, and submitted to the National\r\nmining companies operate. Assembly. A revised draft was adopted by the\r\n Council of Ministers on February 18, 2015 and\r\n submitted to the CNT on February 23, 2015.\r\n4. A draft anticorruption law designed to strengthen Implemented\r\npenalties for bribery, tighten regulations on gift-giving Evidence: The World Bank has provided\r\nto public officials, and more precisely and comments and suggestions on the draft\r\ncomprehensively define both the nature of corrupt anticorruption law, which was adopted by the\r\npractices and the sanctions against them is submitted Council of Ministers on January 7, 2015 and was\r\nto National Transition Council (CNT). submitted to the CNT on January 20, 2015.\r\n5. Measures are adopted to improve the functioning of Implemented\r\nthe Superior Council of the Magistracy, including an Evidence: A letter acknowledging the submission\r\nincrease in its number of elected members. of the draft law related to the Superior Council of\r\n the Magistracy to National Assembly has been\r\n received (June 28, 2014).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 62\r\n\f Prior Actions Implementation Status and Evidence\r\n6. A revised legal framework for procurement is Implemented\r\nadopted, and prior-review thresholds are increased at Evidence: A ministerial decree reforming\r\nleast by 25 percent. procurement methods and increasing prior-\r\n reviews thresholds has been signed (July 2,\r\n 2014).\r\n7. Transfers to local communities are increased to Implemented\r\n5 percent of the national budget; local governments Evidence: The 2014 Financial Management Law\r\nhave sufficient funds to fulfill the mandates allocates 5 percent of total budgeted\r\nestablished under the General Code for Local expenditures to local communities.\r\nCommunities.\r\n8. All microfinance institutions, including the Support Implemented\r\nFund for Women’s Income-Generating Activities Evidence: The consolidated certified financial\r\n(FAARF), perform annual audits and provide accurate reports of FAARF-affiliated microfinance\r\nstatements to the relevant authorities. institutions have been sent to the government\r\n (July 2014).\r\n9. Measures are implemented to promote greater Implemented\r\ninvolvement by private firms in strategic food-import Evidence: Contracts have been signed with five\r\nand distribution systems. private operators for 30 000 tons cereals to\r\n complete the national food reserve (50,000 tons)\r\n and for the emergency food stocks (25,000 tons).\r\n Copies of these contracts have been submitted to\r\n the World Bank on December 31, 2014.\r\nNote: CSM = Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature; G&C = Growth and Competitiveness series; WAEMU = West African\r\nEconomic and Monetary Union.\r\n\r\nTable B.8. Growth and Competitiveness Series Results Framework Indicators\r\n\r\n G&C 1 G&C 2 G&C 3 G&C 4\r\nCatalyze private sector growth and employment\r\n1 Capitalization of the Capitalization of the Capitalization of the Capitalization of the\r\n stabilization fund is at stabilization fund is at stabilization fund is at stabilization fund is at\r\n least 6 billion CFA least 6 billion CFA least 6 billion CFA least CFAF 6 billion\r\n2 Capitalization of the Capitalization of the Capitalization of the Capitalization of the\r\n input fund is at least 10 input fund is at least 10 input fund is at least 10 input fund is at least\r\n billion CFA billion CFA billion CFA CFAF 10 billion\r\n3 Improved fertilizer Improved fertilizer Improved fertilizer Improved fertilizer\r\n distribution to the distribution to the distribution to the distribution to the\r\n private sector increased private sector increased private sector private sector\r\n by 30,000 tons by 30,000 tons increased by 30,000 increased by 30,000\r\n tons tons\r\n4 Change:\r\n Waiting time for Waiting time for Average waiting time Average waiting time\r\n customs clearance in customs clearance in for customs clearance for customs clearance\r\n Ouaga Inter reduced by Ouaga Inter reduced by in Ouaga Inter reduced in Ouaga Inter reduced\r\n two days two days by 50 percent by 50 percent\r\n5 New:\r\n Annual increase of\r\n 10 percent in the\r\n Number of certified\r\n professionals and Ratio\r\n between trucking\r\n companies /\r\n individuals\r\n\r\n 63\r\n\f G&C 1 G&C 2 G&C 3 G&C 4\r\n6 New: Dropped\r\n The government\r\n continues to refine the\r\n operational structure\r\n of the guarantee\r\n scheme\r\n7 New: Dropped\r\n Private firms begin\r\n expressing interest in\r\n joining the new\r\n scheme\r\n8 Axle overloading goes Dropped\r\n down to 25 percent\r\nImprove governance and public resource management\r\n9 Mining revenue/ GDP is Mining revenue/ GDP is Public revenue Public revenues\r\n 4 percent 4 percent generated by the generated by the\r\n mining sector is mining sector are\r\n increased to 4 percent increased to 4 percent\r\n of GDP of GD\r\n10 Physical inspections of Physical inspections of Revised: The number\r\n gold exports by customs gold exports by of physical inspections Dropped\r\n officials increases customs officials of gold exports by\r\n increases customs officials\r\n increased by\r\n 15 percent enhancing\r\n the accuracy of export\r\n data\r\n11 New:\r\n Number of CSM\r\n elected members per\r\n grade increased by\r\n 50 percent\r\n12 Number of mining Number of mining The number of The number of mining\r\n companies submitting companies submitting companies submitting companies submitting\r\n validated data for EITI validated data for EITI validated data for EITI validated data for EITI\r\n reports increased to 6 reports increased to 6 reports is increased reports is increased\r\n from 0 to 6 from 0 to 6\r\n13 50 mediation cases at 50 mediation cases at Revised: Dropped\r\n CAMC-O in 2012 and 75 CAMC-O in 2012 and At least an increase of\r\n cases in 2013 75 50 percent of\r\n cases in 2013 mediation cases at\r\n CAMC-O in 2012 and\r\n 25\r\n percent in 2013\r\n14 Percent of judgments Percent of judgments Revised:\r\n written down increased written down increased Percent of judgments Percent of judgments\r\n to 85 percent to 85 percent written down in written down in\r\n commercial courts is at commercial courts is at\r\n list (sic) 75 percent list (sic) 75 percent\r\n15 A 20 percent decrease A 20 percent decrease\r\n A 20 percent decrease in A 20 percent decrease in the time required to in the time required to\r\n delays in judgment in delays in judgment obtain a court ruling obtain a court ruling\r\n times times (to 584 days)\r\n 64\r\n\f G&C 1 G&C 2 G&C 3 G&C 4\r\n16 A 20 percent reduction A 20 percent reduction\r\n A 20 percent reduction A 20 percent reduction in the time needed to in the time needed to\r\n in contract enforcement in contract enforcement enforce contract enforce contracts (to\r\n days days 372 days)\r\n17 New: Revised:\r\n A general decline in Burkina Faso’s score in\r\n corruption indicators is the Transparency\r\n observed over time International\r\n Corruption Perceptions\r\n Index is increased to\r\n 40 or higher\r\n18 Average execution rate Average execution rate The average execution The average execution\r\n of the line ministries of the line ministries rate of the line rate of the line\r\n investment budgets investment budgets ministries’ investment ministries’ investment\r\n increased to more than increased to more than budgets is increased by budgets is increased\r\n 50 percent 50 percent more than 50 percent by more than\r\n 50 percent\r\n19 Number of physical spot Number of physical Revised:\r\n checks of contracts spot checks of contracts Number of physical Number of physical\r\n subject to competitive subject to competitive spot checks of spot checks of\r\n bidding increases to 300 bidding increases to contracts subject to contracts subject to\r\n 300 competitive bidding competitive bidding\r\n increased by increased by\r\n 50 percent 50 percent\r\n20 New: Dropped\r\n Greater transparency\r\n and accountability in\r\n PFM is achieved\r\n21 Number of judges that Number of judges that Number of judges that Dropped-no data yet\r\n will remain for at least a will remain for at least a will remain in office for\r\n year is 12 year is 12 at least a year is 12\r\nReduce vulnerability\r\n22 Transfer to decentralized Transfer to Revised: Revised back to\r\n units is 5.0 percent of decentralized units is Sufficient funds are original: 5 percent of\r\n budget 5.0 percent of budget allocated from the the national budget is\r\n national budget to transferred to local\r\n local governments to governments under\r\n fulfill the mandates the Budget Law\r\n established by the\r\n Budget Law\r\n23 Revised:\r\n At least 10 percent of At least 10 percent of The population’s Dropped\r\n the population is the population is general satisfaction\r\n satisfied with public satisfied with public with the quality of\r\n services services public services\r\n delivered by local\r\n governments improves\r\n24 Number of active Number of active Revised:\r\n borrowers increases to borrowers increases to Number of active Number of active\r\n 150,000 150,000 borrowers increased by borrowers increased by\r\n at least 10 percent at least 10 percent\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 65\r\n\f G&C 1 G&C 2 G&C 3 G&C 4\r\n25 New:\r\n The Support Fund for The Support Fund for\r\n Women’s Income- Women’s Income-\r\n Generating Activities Generating Activities\r\n (FAARF) reaches over (FAARF) reaches more\r\n 80,000 beneficiaries than 80,000\r\n nationwide beneficiaries\r\n nationwide\r\n26 New:\r\n ...with a total loan …with a total loan\r\n portfolio of more than portfolio of more than\r\n CFAF 4.5 billion CFAF 5 billion\r\n27 Number of women- Number of women- Number of women- Dropped\r\n owned businesses to owned businesses to owned businesses to\r\n increase by 5 percent increase by 5 percent increase by 5 percent\r\n28 New:\r\n The Annual Financial\r\n Reporting Sheets of\r\n microfinance\r\n institutions are made\r\n available each year no\r\n later than July\r\n29 The food stocks in the The food stocks in the The national food Revised:\r\n country increase to at country increase to at reserve and emergency\r\n least least food\r\n\r\n\r\n 50,000 tons for main 50,000 tons for main stocks are increase to The national food\r\n stock and 10,000 for stock and 10,000 for at least 50,000 and reserve and emergency\r\n emergency stock emergency stock 10,000 tons, food stocks are\r\n respectively increase to at least\r\n 50,000 and 25,000\r\n tons, respectively\r\n30 Stocking of food in 50 of Stocking of food in 50 Dropped\r\n the warehouses in food- of the warehouses in\r\n deficit parts of the food- deficit parts of\r\n country the country\r\nNote: G&C = Growth and Competitiveness series.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 66\r\n\fTable B.9. Evolution of Pillars\r\n Operation 1 Operation 2 Operation 3 Operation 4\r\nPillar 1 Catalyze Private Catalyze Private Sector Catalyze Private Reduce costs in the\r\n Sector Growth and Growth and Sector Growth and agriculture and\r\n Employment Employment Employment Creation transport sectors\r\nPillar 2 Improve Governance Improve Governance Improve Governance Improve the\r\n and Public Resource and Public Resource and Strengthen the transparency and\r\n Management Management Management of accountability in\r\n Public Resources public resource\r\n mobilization and\r\n management\r\nPillar 3 Build Resilience and Build Resilience and Build Economic Reduce Vulnerability\r\n Reduce Vulnerability Reduce Vulnerability Resilience and Reduce to Shocks\r\n Vulnerability to\r\n Shocks\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 67\r\n\fAppendix C. List of Department Contacted\r\nGovernment of Burkina Faso\r\nAlice Zida Thiombiano, Ministry of Economy and Finance-SP/ITIE\r\n\r\nAmos Kienou, Ministère de l’Agriculture- DG/DGESS/\r\n\r\nBayala Firmin, Chargé d’études/DGCOOP\r\n\r\nBelemkoabga Lucien, Agent/DSCVM-INSD\r\n\r\nDie Yacouba, DGCOOP/DSPP\r\n\r\nGuinko Jean Pierre, Ministère du Commerce de l’Industrie et de l’Artisanat, SP-SFCL\r\n\r\nGuire Sidiki, Chargé des rapports SP/ITIE\r\n\r\nIlboudo Diallo Micheline. Ministry of Economy and Finance, DGA/DGD\r\n\r\nK. I. Abraham, DG/DGCMEF\r\n\r\nKabore Fati, Agent/DGESS Ministère de la promotion de la femme\r\n\r\nKaboret Aimé Roger, Ministry of Agriculture, SONAGESS\r\n\r\nKere Souleymane, Directeur de la Coordination des projets et programmes/DGESS Ministère de\r\nla Justice\r\n\r\nKi Abdoulaye, DGEP\r\n\r\nKinda Mahamadi, SP-SFCL\r\n\r\nNabalma Christian, Agent à la direction de suivi des accords internationaux/Ministère de la\r\nJustice\r\n\r\nNabole Souleymane, Ministry of Economy and Finance, DG/DGESS/MINEFID\r\n\r\nNana Adama, Directeur de la législation et de la règlementation/DGD\r\n\r\nOuattara Adama, DGESS/MINEFID\r\n\r\nOuattara Soma , SP-SFCL\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Aissata, Ministère des transports/Direction des transports urbains\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Alidou, Directeur de la Coopération douanière/DGD\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 68\r\n\fOuedraogo Emile, Chargé du TOFE/DGTCP\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Roger, SP/PMF\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Théodore G., Agent/FAARF\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Zakaria, Chef de Service Informatique /DGD\r\n\r\nOula Damien Ouattara, Directeur du suivi, de lévaluation et de la capitalisation (DSEC)\r\n\r\nRouamba G. Clémence, Ministère des transports/DGESS\r\n\r\nSanfo Arouna, Chef de service de la programmation budgétaire/DPB/DGB\r\n\r\nSanogo Abdoulaye, Agent à la Direction de l’Accès à la Justice et de l’Aide aux victimes\r\n(DAJAV)/Ministère de la Justice\r\n\r\nSawadogo Abdoulaye, SONAGESS\r\n\r\nSawadogo Kimsegninga, Chargé de l’information et de la communication SP/ITIE\r\n\r\nSawadogo T. Paul, Directeur Régional du Centre Sud/DGD\r\n\r\nSemde Rulin M., SONAGESS\r\n\r\nSerge L. M. P. Toe., Chef des services des études/DGTCP\r\n\r\nSoulama Vieux Rachid, Ministry of Economy and Finance-DG/DGB\r\n\r\nZida/Thiombiano Alice, Secrétaire permanente SP/ITIE\r\n\r\nZombra Adamou, Chargé de décaissement/DGTCP\r\n\r\nZongo Lambert, Chef de département/Premier Ministère/SP-PNDES\r\n\r\nZoure Françoise, Chargé de validation et de Suivi-évaluation SP/ITIE\r\n\r\n\r\nWorld Bank\r\nKante F. Cheick, Country Manager\r\n\r\nSamba Ba, Sr. Economist\r\n\r\nDiop Mariam, Chargé des operations\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Inoussa, Senior Private Sector Specialist\r\n\r\nOuedraogo Elisée, Senior Agriculture Economist\r\n\r\n 69\r\n\fSawadogo Aguiratou Tinto, Senior Transport Specialist\r\n\r\n\r\nDevelopment Partners\r\nM. Facinet Sylla, Economiste-Pays Principal en charge du Burkina Faso & Niger, Banque\r\nAfricaine de Développement\r\n\r\nSebre Dramane, European Union delegation\r\n\r\nThomas Huyghebaert, European Union delegation, Head of governance and private sector,\r\nBurkina Faso\r\n\r\n\r\nCivil Society, Academia, and Private Sector\r\nJean W. Pierre Guinko, Secrétaire Permanent du Suivi de la Filière Coton Liberalisée Ministère\r\ndu Commerce, de lIndustrie et de lArtisanat\r\n\r\nKohoun Joseph, CIFOEB\r\n\r\nPorgo Issoufou, Confédération paysanne su Faso/Secrétaire Permanent\r\n\r\nPr Ouedraogo Idrissa, Centre d’etude de documentation et de recherche economiques et\r\nsociales (CEDRES)\r\n\r\nSylvestre Bassono, Private sector- exports\r\n\r\nThomas R. Ouedraogo, Center for Democratic Governance\r\n\r\nWetta Claude, RENLAC\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 70\r\n\f" }, "D30199949": { "id": "30199949", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Comoros", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Other rural development,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Natural disaster management,Rural development,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-26T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/505311529977527874/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Comoros-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P150754-Sequence-No-07.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/505311529977527874/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Comoros-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P150754-Sequence-No-07.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/505311529977527874/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Comoros-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P150754-Sequence-No-07", "projectid": "P150754", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/505311529977527874/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Comoros-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P150754-Sequence-No-07", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n\r\nComoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Comoros | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2015 | Seq No: 7 | ARCHIVED on 25-Jun-2018 | ISR33273 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Union of Comoros, ANACEP, UNICEF\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:19-Mar-2015 Effectiveness Date:02-Jul-2015\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:20-Nov-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:23-Oct-2017\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2019 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The Project Development Objective is to increase poor communities’ access to safety net and nutrition services.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nComponent 1: Establishing a Productive and Disaster Responsive Safety Net:(Cost $4.00 M)\r\nComponent 2: Improving the Nutrition of Young Children and Mothers from Poor Communities:(Cost $1.00 M)\r\nComponent 3: Strengthening Safety Net Management, Coordination, and Monitoring and Evaluation:(Cost $1.00 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n\r\n The project has made further progress in implementation of the safety net and nutrition components despite some institutional weaknesses. If project\r\n implementation continues as planned, the project can be finalized by its closing date.\r\n Financially, the project has disbursed 80% of its funds, with slight delays with respect to the original project plan. The Bank team is now following up\r\n closely on fiduciary and safeguards aspects of the project.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  Substantial  High  High\r\n Macroeconomic  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Fiduciary  Moderate  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  Low  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries of social safety net programs (Number, Corporate)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4,217.00 4,217.00 5,890.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries of Safety Nets programs - Female (number) (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2,135.00 2,340.00 2,945.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries of Safety Nets programs - Cash-for-work, food-for-work and public works (number) (Number, Custom\r\n Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4,217.00 4,217.00 5,890.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Pregnant/lactating women, adolescent girls and/or children under age five-reached by basic nutrition services (number)\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 24,902.00 22,372.00 9,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children under the age of 24 months benefiting from improved infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices (number)\r\n (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 12,253.00 5,341.00 2,800.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of poor communities that have access to safety net and nutrition services. (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 69.00 69.00 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n Note that the indicator on children under 24 months benefiting IYCS had previously been over-reported. The Bank team and UNICEF have now\r\n clarified the mode of measurement, and thus the numbers have been updated.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of rehabilitated, reconstructed and constructed infrastructure sub-projects (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 5.00 6.00 15.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of person/days of employment created (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 189,000.00 348,750.00 810,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households benefiting from post-disaster activities (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,890.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Fortunately, Comoros has not faced any disasters in recent years, so the indicator remains at 0. this also influences the number of hours\r\n worked (see indicator above) which now captures the regular safety net beneficiaries, not the disaster response beneficiaries.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of children under five years enrolled in the growth monitoring program (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 18,785.00 11,830.00 9,200.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The actual numbers of this indicator are expected to float as the growth monitoring is not mandatory.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of Community Health Workers trained to provide IYCF services (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 105.00 100.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Operational costs of FADC (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 20.00 31.00 26.32 20.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of Operational Audits implemented (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 2.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of beneficiary households of the Productive Safety Net activities registered in FADCs MIS (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 100.00 100.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2015 31-Oct-2017 30-Apr-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP150754 IDA-D0320 Effective USD 6.00 6.00 0.00 4.75 1.15 80%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Comoros Social Safety Net Project (P150754)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P150754 IDA-D0320 Effective 19-Mar-2015 09-Apr-2015 02-Jul-2015 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n There are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30198988": { "id": "30198988", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Malawi", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Water resource management,Rural services and infrastructure,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Natural disaster management,Environment and natural resource management,Rural development,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-25T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/526961529939427299/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Floods-Emergency-Recovery-P154803-Sequence-No-07.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/526961529939427299/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Floods-Emergency-Recovery-P154803-Sequence-No-07.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/526961529939427299/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Floods-Emergency-Recovery-P154803-Sequence-No-07", "projectid": "P154803", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/526961529939427299/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Malawi-Floods-Emergency-Recovery-P154803-Sequence-No-07", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n\r\nMalawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Malawi | Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2015 | Seq No: 7 | ARCHIVED on 25-Jun-2018 | ISR32242 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning and Development, Government of Malawi\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:07-May-2015 Effectiveness Date:20-Aug-2015\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:30-Aug-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:04-Sep-2017\r\n Original Closing Date:31-Dec-2019 Revised Closing Date:31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The Project Development Objective is to “sustainably restore agricultural livelihoods, reconstruct critical public infrastructure to improved standards\r\n in the flood-affected districts, and improve the Government of Malawi’s disaster response and recovery capacities”.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nLivelihoods Restoration and Food Security:(Cost $29.00 M)\r\nInfrastructure Rehabilitation and Reconstruction:(Cost $43.00 M)\r\nPromoting Disaster Resilience:(Cost $4.00 M)\r\nProgram Management:(Cost $4.00 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 1 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n The Project continues to make progress towards the achievement of its development objective through public works programs in enhancing affected\r\n community livelihoods and rehabilitation and reconstruction of critical infrastructure. The project has reached most of its targets and has surpassed\r\n some of them. The number of direct project beneficiaries is 2,058,000, 130% of the end-of-project target of 1,580,000. The number of households with\r\n sustainably restored agricultural livelihoods under the IFA program has reached 208,753, which is 116% of the target. Post Disaster Needs Assessment\r\n (PDNA) methodology training has been undertaken, leading towards institutionalization /adoption of PDNA methodology. Rehabilitation of selected\r\n roads, schools and health centers have been delayed, but picked up lately and it is expected that most of the targets will be met by project closure.\r\n Considering that the project will be closed in June 2019, all implementation agencies have planned their remaining activities accordingly, focusing on\r\n timely completion, communication of results, and building capacity towards sustainability of the results achieved.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Fiduciary  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of people with sustainably restored agricultural livelihoods under the IFA program (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 160,861.00 208,753.00 180,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 2 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of schools with services fully restored (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 20.00 82.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 19-Apr-2016 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of health facilities reconstructed with services fully restored (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of kilometers of roads reconstructed to improved standards and with services restored (Kilometers, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 17.00 17.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Institutionalization/adoption of PDNA methodology, and institutional and financing framework for recovery (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N -- Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 -- 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Institutionalization/adoption of disaster resilient designs for schools, health facilities and roads (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N -- N Y\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 3 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 -- 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 563,562.00 563,562.00 500,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 54.00 54.00 50.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of individuals receiving IFA vouchers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 208,753.00 180,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 -- 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 4 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Quantity of maize purchased (Metric ton, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 52,538.00 52,559.55 50,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Quantity of maize released (Metric ton, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 52,599.90 52,559.00 50,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of SGR beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 563,562.00 500,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 -- 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Roads rehabilitated, Rural (Kilometers, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 15.00 17.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 23-May-2016 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 5 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of additional classrooms built or rehabilitated at the primary level resulting from project interventions. (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 72.00 74.00 82.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities constructed, renovated, and/or equipped (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Improved Damage Assessment Guidelines, Templates and SOPs for Damage Assessment (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  DoDMA and Civil Protection Committees trained in Emergency Response (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 15.00 15.00\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 -- 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 6 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Disaster resilient designs for the education, health and roads sectors (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N N N Y\r\n\r\n Date 06-Apr-2015 06-Sep-2017 16-Mar-2018 15-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P154803 IDA-56360 Effective USD 40.00 40.00 0.00 25.49 15.13 63%\r\n\r\n P154803 IDA-D0580 Effective USD 40.00 40.00 0.00 37.35 3.48 91%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P154803 IDA-56360 Effective 07-May-2015 03-Jun-2015 20-Aug-2015 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019\r\n P154803 IDA-D0580 Effective 07-May-2015 03-Jun-2015 20-Aug-2015 31-Dec-2019 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 7 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Malawi Floods Emergency Recovery (P154803)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6/25/2018 Page 8 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D30184071": { "id": "30184071", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Malawi", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Protection and Labor Policy & Systems,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Natural disaster management,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-21T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/429811529586513777/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Strengthening-Safety-Nets-Systems-MASAF-IV-P133620.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/429811529586513777/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Strengthening-Safety-Nets-Systems-MASAF-IV-P133620.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/429811529586513777/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Strengthening-Safety-Nets-Systems-MASAF-IV-P133620", "projectid": "P133620", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/429811529586513777/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Strengthening-Safety-Nets-Systems-MASAF-IV-P133620", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES32955\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n STRENGTHENING SAFETY NETS SYSTEMS - MASAF IV\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 18, 2013\r\n AND\r\n ADDITIONAL FINANCING TO\r\n STRENGTHENING SAFETY NETS SYSTEMS - MASAF IV\r\n APPROVED ON MARCH 26, 2015\r\n TO\r\n\r\n GOVERNMENT OF MALAWI\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & JOBS\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Bella Bird\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Robert S. Chase\r\n Task Team Leader: Ivan Drabek, Colin Andrews\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\nAF1 First Additional Financing\r\nAF2 Second Additional Financing\r\nCD Country Director\r\nCOMSIP Community Savings and Investment Promotion\r\nESMF Environmental and Social Framework\r\nGoM Government of Malawi\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nLDF Local Development Fund Mechanism\r\nLDF-TST Local Development Fund-Technical Support Team\r\nMASAF Malawi Social Action Fund\r\nM&E Monitoring and Evaluation\r\nMIS Management Information System\r\nNLGFC National Local Government Finance Commission\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPWP Public Works Program\r\nSCTP Social Cash Transfer Program\r\nUBR Unified Beneficiary Registry\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP133620 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n18-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Local Development Fund - Technical Support Team (LDF-\r\nGovernment of Malawi\r\n TST)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe Project Development Objective of the proposed project is to strengthen Malawi’s social safety net delivery systems\r\nand coordination across programs.\r\nCurrent PDO\r\nThe Project Development Objective is to improve resilience among poor households and to strengthen Malawi s\r\nsocial safety net delivery systems and coordination across programs.\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-59220 08-Nov-2016 23-Jan-2017 07-Mar-2017 31-Dec-2019 22.32 0 22.20\r\nIDA-D1480 08-Nov-2016 23-Jan-2017 07-Mar-2017 31-Dec-2019 47.68 4.05 43.89\r\nIDA-56100 26-Mar-2015 18-Aug-2015 16-Sep-2015 30-Jun-2018 6.77 6.74 0\r\nIDA-D0450 26-Mar-2015 18-Aug-2015 16-Sep-2015 30-Jun-2018 68.22 67.00 0\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIDA-53430 18-Dec-2013 13-Aug-2014 16-Sep-2014 30-Jun-2018 32.80 30.41 0\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\nA. Progress towards Achievement of the Project Development Objective (PDO)\r\n 1. The project shows satisfactory performance on progress towards the PDO. The PDO indicator for the number of direct\r\n beneficiaries has been reached, and the progress on the other PDO indicators is notable. It is expected that all project\r\n indicators will be largely met by the current closing date of December 31, 2019.\r\nB. Assessment of the Implementation Progress\r\n 2. Project implementation is progressing well, with overall disbursements above 61%. The project has so far received an\r\n original financing (IDA credit 53430), a First Additional Financing (IDA credit 56100 and IDA grant D0450), and a Second\r\n Additional Financing (IDA credit 59220 and IDA grant D1480). The original project financing and the First Additional\r\n Financing (AF1) have practically fully disbursed, and the remaining financing is from the Second AF (AF2). AF2 has disbursed\r\n only 6 %, but disbursement projections envisage another 30% (US$21 million) to be disbursed over the next six months.\r\n While the routine tasks in all components are moving, the pace in the implementation of the Social Cash Transfers Program\r\n (SCTP) is still slower than initial plans. The initial two SCTP districts financed under the MASAF IV continue to experience\r\n delays in payment of transfers as compared to districts financed by other donor contributions. The Public Works Program\r\n (PWP) has available funds for one more round of public works, which is expected to take place in August/September 2018.\r\n 3. Effective April 1, the project implementing agency – the Local Development Fund (LDF) – merged with another government\r\n institution, the National Local Government Finance Committee, under a new name - the National Local Government\r\n Finance Commission (NLGFC). The merger largely preserved the structure of LDF within NLGFC, and maintained its\r\n operating mechanisms for work with the Bank and district authorities and communities under the NLGFC name.\r\n 4. Overall on PWP, 985,635 households (representing 100% of end-of-project target) have been reached with PWP cash\r\n transfers. Of those, 450,000 households have been repeater beneficiaries of all the cycles since June 2016. In addition, two\r\n cycles of emergency response PWP (targeting a total of 225,000 households in each cycle) were implemented, with a total\r\n of 450,000 households reached. Various labor-intensive community subprojects have been implemented across sectors,\r\n including roads, forestry, land resources, fisheries, and environment. Over 13, 000 subprojects have been implemented\r\n over the life of the project.\r\n 5. Preparations for the last round of the PWP are underway. A total of US$11.2 million (MK8.1 billion) is expected to be\r\n disbursed in that last cycle, which will exhaust the available funding for PWP in the project. The cycle is expected to be\r\n implemented in August/September 2018. Disbursement of 20 percent advance funding (approximately US$2.2million) to\r\n the districts for preparation of the round has already commenced.\r\n 6. On SCTP, notable progress has been achieved with the preparation for the SCT in the 9 new districts, where more than\r\n 111,000 new beneficiary households have recently been enrolled into the program. This featured as a critical prior action\r\n under the Second Agricultural Support and Fiscal Management Development Policy Operation, negotiated on May 25, 2018.\r\n The program is expected to start disbursing immediately after the implementation of the beneficiary verification exercise\r\n (SCT Technical Audit and Beneficiary Verification), which is a legal covenant and a requirement for the commencement of\r\n actual cash transfers to beneficiaries. The work on development of systems and capacity building is also progressing well,\r\n with the successful rollout of the UBR in 10 districts and its utilization for the SCTP. The UBR was recently assessed with\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n encouraging results. Another advancement of the activities from this area is the introduction of a Grievance and Redress\r\n Mechanism for the PWP.\r\nC. Rationale for the Restructuring\r\n 7. The Bank received from the Government on May 10, 2018, a restructuring request for: (i) extending the Closing Date of the\r\n MASAF IV First Additional Financing from June 30, 2018, to December 31, 2018; and (ii) revising downwards the end-target\r\n for the PDO indicator “Number of beneficiaries of PWP – emergency response”.\r\n (i) The extension of AF1 is a technical one as the AF1 has fully disbursed from the World Bank into the Designated\r\n Account. The extension is required to implement remaining activities financed under AF1 using the available funds\r\n on the Designated Account and is of no additional cost to the project, because the overall project closing date is\r\n December 31, 2019, which is beyond the requested extended closing date for AF1.\r\n (ii) The second part of the restructuring is the downward revision of the number of beneficiaries of the emergency\r\n PWP program. The PDO indicator “Number of beneficiaries of PWP – emergency response” was introduced with\r\n the Second Additional Financing (AF2) in November 2016. One of the rationales of AF2 was to widen the\r\n beneficiary base and strengthen beneficiaries’ resilience within a very short time frame, in preparation for possible\r\n additional shocks following the preceding periods of floods and draughts in the country. AF2 planned to reach\r\n 902,000 beneficiaries with one-time emergency support, targeted on relatively loose basis using emergency\r\n hotspots. However, once 450,000 beneficiaries were covered by the emergency response, the situation was\r\n reassessed, the risk of continued emergency was seen as significantly reduced. There were also serious\r\n implementation issues related to the emergency cycles. As a result, the Bank and the Government agreed to\r\n redirect the remaining emergency funds to complete an additional round (cycle) of the better-targeted regular\r\n PWP program.\r\n\r\n\r\nII. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n A. Extension of the Closing Date\r\n (iii) This restructuring will extend the Closing Date of the MASAF IV First Additional Financing from June 30,\r\n 2018, to December 31, 2018. The closing date of the whole project remains December 31, 2019.\r\n B. Modification of one PDO Indicator Target\r\n (iv) The restructuring will revise the indicator “Number of Direct Beneficiaries of Public Works Program\r\n Emergency Response” from 902,000 to 450,000.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\nChange in Results Framework ✔\r\nChange in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\nChange in Implementing Agency ✔\r\nChange in DDO Status ✔\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Change in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\n Change in Components and Cost ✔\r\n Cancellations Proposed ✔\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\n Change in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\n Change in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\n Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\n Change of EA category ✔\r\n Change in Legal Covenants ✔\r\n Change in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Financial Management ✔\r\n Change in Procurement ✔\r\n Change in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\n Other Change(s) ✔\r\n Change in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Technical Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Social Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_RESULTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\nPDO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of direct beneficiaries of PWP - regular beneficiaires\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n 985,635 (of which 50%\r\n Value 0 985,635 (53% female) Revised\r\n female)\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Number of direct beneficiaries of PWP - emergency response\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 450000.00 902000.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Number of direct beneficiaries of Social Cash Transfers (SCT)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 129455.00 123711.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Percentage of households with asset value above critical threshold\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n 33% livelihood and skills\r\n Value development, 25% PWP, 41%, 20%, 15% no set target Revised\r\n 4.9% SCT\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Establishment of an integrated and functional national safety net delivery systems\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0 11 35 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Indicators\r\nIO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of households having at least three meals per day\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 30.50 SCT, 40.00PWP,\r\nValue 0.00 70.00 Revised\r\n 53.00 LiSD\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of households reporting that asset depletion is prevented as a result of transfers (SCT, PWP)\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 82 PWP, 90 SCT 40.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of participants paid within the agreed time frame (two weeks for PWP and within a month for SCT)\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 50 for STC, 54 for PWP 57 for STC, 62 for PWP 100 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of beneficiaries receiving full entitlement (PWP, SCT)\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0 100 100 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of beneficiaries staying in the program for a minimum of three years (PWP, SCT)\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 80.00 80.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of beneficiaries who feel project investments/PWP reflected their needs\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 74.10 78.00 80.00 Revised\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of people reporting improvement in the natural resource and environment and its benefit to\r\ncommunities as a result of public works activities\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 67.60 60.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of households that report improved access to social services\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0 80 No set target Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of households that report improved access to and use of small scale irrigation\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 5 22 no set target Revised\r\n\r\nDate 30-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber and type of productive community assets completed (re-forestation, road construction and maintenance,\r\nirrigation)\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n 4,605 hectares re-\r\n afforested, 5,989 roads\r\nValue 0 constructed/maintained, no set targets Revised\r\n 773 small scale irrigation\r\n schemes completed\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of subprojects screened for ESMF\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 94.00 100.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of subprojects for which safeguard mitigation plans are developed and are being implemented\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 80.00 100.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of subprojects selected and implemented following participatory community-based planning\r\napproaches\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 100.00 100.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of subprojects or investment for which arrangement for community engagement and or operation and\r\nmaintenance are established\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 44.00 70.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of people engaging in diversified income-generation activities (off-farm and on-farm)\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 17.80 50.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage increase in household level savings\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n 84 (old groups) 0 (new 100.00 (old groups)\r\nValue 88 Revised\r\n groups) 70 (new groups)\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage increase in household productive assets by type\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 57.20 25.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of people trained on livelihood development activities\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 123003.00 0.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of people trained on skill development activities\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 28263.00 0.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of COMSIP and other livelihood groups formed and strengthened\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 4457.00 6053.00 6697.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of groups/cooperatives accessing grants for investments\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 397.00 400.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of Local Authorities implementing harmonized targeting instruments to select beneficiaries\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 11.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of beneficiaries who are aware of project information and project supported investments\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 95 PWP, 96 SCT 100.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nPercentage of grievances registered related to delivery of project benefits that are actually addressed\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n 15 SCT, 28.8 PWP, 42\r\nValue 0.00 100.00 Revised\r\n LiSD\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of Local Authorities with operational harmonized targeting mechanism\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 11.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nNumber of Local Authorities with operational MIS\r\nUnit of Measure: Text\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Strengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 35.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Number of Local Authorities with operational M&E system\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 35.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Number of extension workers trained and supported with equipment\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 1192.00 1350.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n Number of Local Authorities with community safety net plans developed in a participatory approach\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 35.00 35.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Sep-2014 30-Apr-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_LOANCLOSING_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-53430 Effective 30-Jun-2018\r\nIDA-56100 Effective 30-Jun-2018 31-Dec-2018 30-Apr-2019\r\nIDA-59220 Effective 31-Dec-2019\r\nIDA-D0450 Effective 30-Jun-2018 31-Dec-2018 30-Apr-2019\r\nIDA-D1480 Effective 31-Dec-2019\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nStrengthening Safety Nets Systems - MASAF IV (P133620)\r\n\f" }, "D30255283": { "id": "30255283", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Central African Republic", "docty": "Project Performance Assessment Report", "theme": "Nutrition and food security,Global food crisis response,Rural policies and institutions", "docdt": "2018-06-18T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/516941531419159046/pdf/127422-PPAR-P149512-P165993-PUBLIC.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/516941531419159046/text/127422-PPAR-P149512-P165993-PUBLIC.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/516941531419159046/Central-African-Republic-Emergency-Food-Crisis-Response-and-Agriculture-Re-launch-Project", "projectid": "P165993,P149512", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/516941531419159046/Central-African-Republic-Emergency-Food-Crisis-Response-and-Agriculture-Re-launch-Project", "doc-text": " CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC\r\n\r\nEmergency Food Crisis Response and\r\n Agriculture Re-Launch Project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Report No. 127422\r\n JUNE 18, 2018\r\n\f© 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction This work is a product of the staff of The World RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS\r\nand Development / The World Bank Bank with external contributions. The findings, The material in this work is subject to copyright.\r\n1818 H Street NW interpretations, and conclusions expressed in Because The World Bank encourages\r\nWashington DC 20433 this work do not necessarily reflect the views of dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be\r\nTelephone: 202-473-1000 The World Bank, its Board of Executive reproduced, in whole or in part, for\r\nInternet: www.worldbank.org Directors, or the governments they represent. noncommercial purposes as long as full\r\n attribution to this work is given.\r\nAttribution—Please cite the work as follows: The World Bank does not guarantee the\r\nWorld Bank. 2018. Central African Republic— accuracy of the data included in this work. The Any queries on rights and licenses, including\r\nEmergency Food Crisis Response and boundaries, colors, denominations, and other subsidiary rights, should be addressed to\r\nAgriculture Re-Launch Project. Independent information shown on any map in this work do World Bank Publications, The World Bank\r\nEvaluation Group, Project Performance not imply any judgment on the part of The Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC\r\nAssessment Report 127422 Washington, DC: World Bank concerning the legal status of any 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail:\r\nWorld Bank. territory or the endorsement or acceptance of pubrights@worldbank.org.\r\n such boundaries.\r\n\f Report No.:127422\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PROJECT PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT REPORT\r\n\r\n CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC\r\n\r\n EMERGENCY FOOD CRISIS RESPONSE AND AGRICULTURE RE-\r\n LAUNCH PROJECT\r\n (IDA-5395)\r\n\r\n\r\n June 18, 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFinancial, Private Sector, and Sustainable Development\r\nIndependent Evaluation Group\r\n\f ii\r\n\r\n\r\nCurrency Equivalents (annual averages)\r\n\r\nCurrency Unit = CFAF\r\n\r\n2014 US$1.00 477 CFAF\r\n2015 US$1.00 542 CFAF\r\n2016 US$1.00 604 CFAF\r\n2017 US$1.00 621 CFAF\r\n2018 US$1.00 547 CFAF\r\n\r\nAbbreviations and Acronyms\r\nAGETIP Agence Générale d’Exécution des Travaux d’Intérêt Publics\r\nFAO Food and Agriculture Organization (of the United Nations)\r\nFCV Fragility, Conflict and Violence\r\nICR Implementation Completion and Results (report)\r\nICRA Central African Institute for Agricultural Research\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nIEG Independent Evaluation Group\r\nM&E Monitoring and Evaluation\r\nMIRA Multi-Sectoral Initial Rapid Assessment\r\nPAD Project Appraisal Document\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPPAR Project Performance Assessment Report\r\nUNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund\r\nUSAID United States Agency for International Development\r\nWFP World Food Programme\r\n\r\nAll dollar amounts are U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated.\r\n\r\nFiscal Year\r\n\r\nGovernment: January 1 – December 31\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDirector-General, Independent Evaluation Ms. Caroline Heider\r\nDirector, Financial, Private Sector, and Sustainable Development Mr. José Carbajo Martínez\r\nManager, Sustainable Development Ms. Midori Makino\r\nTask Manager Ms. Lauren Kelly\r\n\f iii\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nContents\r\nPrincipal Ratings ................................................................................................................. v\r\nKey Staff Responsible......................................................................................................... v\r\nPreface............................................................................................................................... vii\r\nSummary .......................................................................................................................... viii\r\nLessons ................................................................................................................................ x\r\n1. Background and Context................................................................................................. 1\r\n2. Objective, Design, and their Relevance .......................................................................... 2\r\n Relevance of Objective ................................................................................................... 2\r\n Project Design ................................................................................................................. 3\r\n3. Efficacy ........................................................................................................................... 7\r\n4. Monitoring and Evaluation ........................................................................................... 13\r\n5. Safeguards ..................................................................................................................... 13\r\n6. Efficiency ...................................................................................................................... 14\r\n7. Ratings .......................................................................................................................... 15\r\n Outcome .................................................................................................................... 15\r\n8. Risk to Development Outcome ..................................................................................... 16\r\n9. Bank Performance ......................................................................................................... 17\r\n Borrower Performance .................................................................................................. 19\r\n Implementing Agency Performance ......................................................................... 19\r\n10. Lessons ........................................................................................................................ 20\r\nReferences ......................................................................................................................... 21\r\n\r\n\r\nThe report was prepared by Lauren Kelly, Senior Evaluation Officer, IEGSD, with the support of Leif V.\r\nBrottem, Assistant Professor, Global Development Studies at Grinnell College. It was peer reviewed by\r\nJ.W. van Holst Pellekaan and panel reviewed by Ridley Nelson. The mission is grateful to Diana Alisson\r\nBalikouzou, Inass Ayoub and Jean-Jacques Ahouansou for their mission and administrative support.\r\n\f iv\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure\r\nFigure 2.1. FAO/WFP Seeds of Change Theory for Emergency Interventions ................. 6\r\n\r\n Appendixes\r\nAppendix A. Basic Data Sheet.......................................................................................... 22\r\nAppendix B. List of Persons Met ...................................................................................... 25\r\n\f v\r\n\r\n\r\nPrincipal Ratings\r\n ICR* ICR Review* PPAR\r\n Outcome Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory\r\n Risk to High High High\r\n Development\r\n Outcome\r\n Bank Performance Moderately Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory\r\n unsatisfactory\r\n Borrower Moderately Unsatisfactory Unsatisfactory\r\n Performance unsatisfactory\r\n* The Implementation Completion and Results (ICR) report is a self-evaluation by the responsible World Bank Global Practice. The\r\nICR Review is an intermediate Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) product that seeks to independently validate the findings of the\r\nICR.\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Staff Responsible\r\n Task Manager or Practice Manager or\r\n Project Leader Manager Country Director\r\n Appraisal Manievel Sene Severin Kodderitzsch Gregor Binkert\r\n Completion Nicaise Ehoue Simeon Ehui Gregor Binkert\r\n\f vi\r\n\r\n\r\n IEG Mission: Improving World Bank Group development results through excellence in\r\n independent evaluation.\r\n\r\n\r\nAbout this Report\r\n The Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) assesses the programs and activities of the World Bank for two\r\npurposes: first, to ensure the integrity of the World Bank’s self-evaluation process and to verify that the World Bank’s\r\nwork is producing the expected results, and second, to help develop improved directions, policies, and procedures\r\nthrough the dissemination of lessons drawn from experience. As part of this work, IEG annually assesses 20–25\r\npercent of the World Bank’s lending operations through field work. In selecting operations for assessment, preference\r\nis given to those that are innovative, large, or complex; those that are relevant to upcoming studies or country\r\nevaluations; those for which Executive Directors or Bank management have requested assessments; and those that\r\nare likely to generate important lessons.\r\n To prepare a Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR), IEG staff examine project files and other\r\ndocuments, visit the borrowing country to discuss the operation with the government and other in-country\r\nstakeholders, interview World Bank staff and other donor agency staff both at headquarters and in local offices as\r\nappropriate, and apply other evaluative methods as needed.\r\n Each PPAR is subject to technical peer review, internal IEG Panel review, and management approval.\r\nOnce cleared internally, the PPAR is commented on by the responsible World Bank country management unit. The\r\nPPAR is also sent to the borrower for review. IEG incorporates both World Bank and borrower comments as\r\nappropriate, and the borrowers comments are attached to the document that is sent to the World Banks Board of\r\nExecutive Directors. After an assessment report has been sent to the Board, it is disclosed to the public.\r\n\r\n\r\nAbout the IEG Rating System for Public Sector Evaluations\r\n IEG’s use of multiple evaluation methods offers both rigor and a necessary level of flexibility to adapt to\r\nlending instrument, project design, or sectoral approach. IEG evaluators all apply the same basic method to arrive\r\nat their project ratings. Following is the definition and rating scale used for each evaluation criterion (additional\r\ninformation is available on the IEG website: http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org).\r\n Outcome: The extent to which the operation’s major relevant objectives were achieved, or are expecte d\r\nto be achieved, efficiently. The rating has three dimensions: relevance, efficacy, and efficiency. Relevance includes\r\nrelevance of objectives and relevance of design. Relevance of objectives is the extent to which the project’s\r\nobjectives are consistent with the country’s current development priorities and with current World Bank country and\r\nsectoral assistance strategies and corporate goals (expressed in Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, Country\r\nAssistance Strategies, Sector Strategy Papers, and Operational Policies). Relevance of design is the extent to\r\nwhich the project’s design is consistent with the stated objectives. Efficacy is the extent to which the project’s\r\nobjectives were achieved, or are expected to be achieved, taking into account their relative importance. Efficiency\r\nis the extent to which the project achieved, or is expected to achieve, a return higher than the opportunity cost of\r\ncapital and benefits at least cost compared to alternatives. The efficiency dimension is not applied to development\r\npolicy operations, which provide general budget support. Possible ratings for outcome: highly satisfactory,\r\nsatisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, highly unsatisfactory.\r\n Risk to Development Outcome: The risk, at the time of evaluation, that development outcomes (or\r\nexpected outcomes) will not be maintained (or realized). Possible ratings for risk to development outcome: high,\r\nsignificant, moderate, negligible to low, not evaluable.\r\n Bank Performance: The extent to which services provided by the World Bank ensured quality at entry of\r\nthe operation and supported effective implementation through appropriate supervision (including ensuring\r\nadequate transition arrangements for regular operation of supported activities after loan/credit closing), toward the\r\nachievement of development outcomes. The rating has two dimensions: quality at entry and quality of supervision.\r\nPossible ratings for Bank performance: highly satisfactory, satisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately\r\nunsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, highly unsatisfactory.\r\n Borrower Performance: The extent to which the borrower (including the government and implementing\r\nagency or agencies) ensured quality of preparation and implementation, and complied with covenants and\r\nagreements, toward the achievement of development outcomes. The rating has two dimensions: government\r\nperformance and implementing agency(ies) performance. Possible ratings for borrower performance: highly\r\nsatisfactory, satisfactory, moderately satisfactory, moderately unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory, highly unsatisfactory.\r\n\f vii\r\n\r\n\r\nPreface\r\nThis is a Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR) on the Emergency Food Crises and\r\nAgriculture Re-launch project in the Central African Republic, an emergency recovery\r\noperation financed by the International Development Association (IDA) implemented over a\r\ntwo-year period between March 2014 and 2016. The project was executed by the World\r\nFood Program (WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), under contract of\r\nthe Ministry of Rural Development. Its appraised and actual costs were $20 million.\r\nLaunched after a protracted humanitarian crisis, the project aimed to protect and rebuild\r\nlivelihoods, human capital, particularly of children, and to relaunch the productivity of the\r\nCentral African Republic’s agriculture sector.\r\n\r\nThis assessment is based on a review of World Bank project documentation, key interviews\r\nwith the client, WFP, FAO, and World Bank management and staff, and is supplemented by\r\nprimary and secondary data collected from several sources in M’Baiki, Bossembele, and\r\nBoali, during a field mission to the Central African Republic in December 2017.\r\n\r\nFollowing standard Independent Evaluation Group procedures, a copy of the draft report was\r\nshared with the relevant government officials and agencies for their review and feedback and\r\nno comments were received.\r\n\f viii\r\n\r\n\r\nSummary\r\nThis is a Project Performance Assessment Report (PPAR) on the World Bank Emergency\r\nFood Crises and Agriculture Re-launch project designed to provide emergency assistance to\r\nvulnerable populations in the Central African Republic following a coup d’état in 2013.\r\nBecause of the extent of the crisis, and the loss of government capacity in the wake of the\r\ncrisis to implement emergency aid, the project was executed by the World Food Program\r\n(WFP) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), contracted by the Ministry of\r\nRural Development.\r\n\r\nAssessment Rationale. This emergency food security operation failed to deliver on its\r\nintended objectives. The Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) commissioned this PPAR to\r\nhelp flesh out lessons from failure to help improve the future performance of food security\r\noperations in conflict-affected settings. The PPAR exercise was timed to coincide with the\r\nlaunch in March 2018 of a new partnership between the World Bank and the WFP that\r\nidentifies nine priority areas for strategic engagement, including increased cooperation in\r\nfragile and conflict situations, social protection, and health and nutrition programs. Data\r\nobtained by this assessment reveal that between 2006 and 2016, World Bank member\r\ncountries have “passed through” about $4 billion of International Development Association\r\nfinance to multiple UN agencies through partnership agreements, of which $220 million (or\r\n5.5 percent) was executed by WFP and $198 million (or 5 percent) was executed by FAO.\r\nMost of these funds have been used to enhance food security in fragile or conflict-affected\r\nsettings yet IEG has never undertaken a comprehensive evaluation of UN-executed World\r\nBank projects implemented in countries characterized by fragility, conflict and violence\r\n(FCV).\r\n\r\nRelevance of Objectives and Design. The project objective of protecting and rebuilding\r\nlivelihoods, human capital (particularly that of children), and of relaunching the productivity\r\nof the agriculture sector was too ambitious for an emergency recovery operation\r\nimplemented over a 16-month period. The targeting of vulnerable persons, including children\r\nand pregnant and lactating women, was highly relevant and demonstrated an improvement\r\nover targeting methods in the prior World Bank food crisis project in the Central African\r\nRepublic. The targeting of food aid could have been further improved by identifying\r\nadditional entry points outside formal structures (e.g. schools and hospitals). FAO relied on\r\nfarmer cooperatives to distribute seeds and other inputs, and thus missed reaching vulnerable\r\nfarmers and households who lacked membership in the cooperatives, as corroborated in site\r\nvisits and interviews carried out for the project assessment.\r\n\r\nProject design was based on a theory developed by the United Nation’s Food Security\r\nCluster called “Seeds for Change.” The theory pairs the distribution of seeds with food aid to\r\nprotect seed from being eaten or sold. In principle, the design is sensible but seed\r\nprocurement in conflict-affected countries is complex. FAO managed seed procurement\r\ninternationally and locally but was unable to secure a sufficient supply of seed that could be\r\nclassified as fit for planting. The mantra of “provide food so they don’t eat their seed” may\r\nhave done a disservice by linking the activities unnecessarily—which negatively affected\r\n\f ix\r\n\r\n\r\ntargeting—and by pairing WFP with FAO at a time when FAO lacked networks on the\r\nground. Both relevance of the objective and relevance of design are rated modest.\r\n\r\nResults. The project modestly achieved its objective of protecting and rebuilding livelihoods\r\nfor vulnerable populations but only negligibly achieved its objective of relaunching the\r\nagriculture sector. WFP achieved only a little over one-third of the targets originally planned\r\nin terms of tonnage (36 percent) and number of children reached (37 percent). However,\r\nWFP overachieved its target for general food distribution but at the expense of targeted\r\nfeeding programs.\r\n\r\nFAO supported the procurement of seed internationally, but the seed was of inferior quality\r\nand was distributed late after the planting season. It supported the local production of pre-\r\nbase seed, but owing to its inferior quality, the seed was declassified and then distributed to\r\nproducers for simple cultivation. Seed storage was a major failure of the project: only 12 of\r\nthe 75 planned warehouses were completed, with an estimated storage capacity of 2 tons for\r\neach warehouse. Weak oversight of the contractual arrangements with nongovernmental\r\norganizations (NGOs) and the inability of communities to hold them accountable were key\r\ndeterminants of the failure.\r\n\r\nRegarding the distribution of small ruminants (sheep/goats/chickens), there were no targets\r\nestablished and no information provided in project documentation. Interviews with women\r\ncooperatives revealed that there was a mass distribution of small ruminants. FAO confirmed\r\nthe distribution of these livestock but also spoke negatively of the operation for several\r\nreasons, including that the distribution of ruminants is not a comparative advantage of FAO\r\nas compared to livestock services (medicines or vaccines). Market gardening was the only\r\narea of observed success in the agriculture part of the project. Farmers’ groups in MBaiki,\r\nBossembele, and Boali described taking up gardening for consumption and surplus\r\nmarketing, although several obstacles remain. They include inferior quality equipment,\r\ndifficulties in seed storage, and lack of technical assistance. Women’s groups described\r\nreceiving either a livestock kit or gardening equipment but not both.\r\n\r\nEfficiency. There were no data made available by the project on which to build an analysis\r\nof benefits and costs. Building a base of knowledge on what it takes to deliver food aid\r\nthrough a World Bank–financed, UN-executed project, including the estimation and\r\nmeasurement of the various cost layers between the country client, UN, and NGOs, would\r\nhave been a valuable contribution. Efficiency of the project is rated modest.\r\n\r\nOverall development outcome is rated unsatisfactory because of the modest ratings for\r\nrelevance, efficacy, and efficiency. The project objective was too ambitious for a short\r\nemergency recovery loan. Project design included a sound articulation for WFP assistance,\r\nwith some weaknesses associated with targeting, but it lacked a roadmap for how FAO\r\nwould achieve its recovery goals, especially regarding seed procurement. Efficacy is rated\r\nmodest because WFP overachieved its targets for general food distribution but significantly\r\nunderdelivered for vulnerable children. FAO did not achieve its objective of relaunching the\r\nproductivity of the agricultural sector. Efficiency is rated modest because no credible\r\ncalculations were made of how costs were layered between the World Bank, government,\r\n\f x\r\n\r\n\r\ntwo UN agencies, and the several NGOs that engaged in project execution. Efficiency\r\nanalysis is limited by lack of information regarding the actual unit cost of service delivery.\r\n\r\nBank and Borrower Performance. Prepared in three weeks, this emergency operation acted\r\nas a stop-gap to help deliver critically needed food aid to parts of the Central African\r\nRepublic affected by conflict. It was designed to partially make up for the severe funding\r\nshortfall associated with a humanitarian appeal launched by the WFP in response to the food\r\ncrisis in the Central African Republic. The short preparation cycle was justified in relation to\r\nthe objective of delivering emergency food aid through WFP, but not in relation to the\r\noverall project aims. Quality at entry suffered from the absence of a rapid analysis of feasible\r\ntargeting mechanisms, because much of the vulnerable population was displaced. It also\r\nsuffered from a lack of analysis of risks associated with FAO’s activities, including the\r\ntechnical, quality, and marketing issues associated with seed supply at short notice, while\r\nover-focusing on potential environmental risks more relevant for a multiyear agriculture\r\nproject than an emergency response. Project supervision was negligible. The Bank\r\nconsistently rated the project as “satisfactory” and the project was never flagged as being “at\r\nrisk” because the funds had been fully disbursed to the UN agencies. Supervisory functions\r\nwere neglected, including oversight and the use of monitoring and evaluation to make rapid\r\ncourse corrections and safeguard monitoring and reporting. The government showed strong\r\ninterest in the operation, but the coordination role of the Agence Générale d’Exécution des\r\nTravaux d’Intérêt Publics (AGETIP) was undermined because all project management costs\r\nwere provided to the UN agencies. At the time, funds for operating expenses in AGETIP\r\nwere scarce, and many of the costs incurred in support of the project were not covered. Both\r\nBank and Borrower performance are rated unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\nLessons\r\nStandard Agreements between World Bank clients and UN executing agencies can\r\nfacilitate success if they include a common vision about intended objectives, a clear and\r\nachievable results framework and related outcome indicators, and a clear articulation\r\nof how risks to the environment and social framework will be monitored, reported on,\r\nand managed. In the Central African Republic, the World Bank over-relied on UN reporting\r\nmechanisms after the humanitarian crisis, and did not fulfill its supervision responsibility,\r\nundermining opportunities to address ongoing project implementation challenges.\r\n\r\nEfficient seed procurement for conflict-affected countries is complex owing to\r\ndisruption of trading networks and normal supply and demand signals: the recruitment\r\nand funding of a technical team needs to be a prior condition of project effectiveness.\r\nThe experience in the Central African Republic shows that procuring the correct seeds for\r\nspecific geographic locations and their associated soil and agro-climatic conditions is\r\ntechnically demanding and time consuming. It also requires deep local and regional\r\nknowledge of supply and demand. Upstream diagnostic work on effective seed procurement\r\n(quality and realistic timeframe for procurement), including the availability and quality of\r\ntechnical support, is needed. This should involve a candid review of the World Bank’s\r\nexisting partnerships and ways of doing business (such as FAO execution) but also fine-\r\ngrained institutional analysis and mapping of government technical services as well as\r\ncapable partners in the NGO community (some NGOs are much more capable than others\r\nand they need to be identified before crisis hits). The few dispersed agricultural technical\r\n\f xi\r\n\r\n\r\nservices that remained after crisis, including many well-trained and capable agents, should\r\nhave been better incorporated into the emergency response.\r\n\r\nEmergency food security operations do not necessarily require food agency coupling\r\n(such as WFP and FAO). Depending on the stage of recovery, emergency operations may\r\nbe better served by pairing a food agency with a social agency (such as UNICEF and the Red\r\nCross) to achieve more effective targeting and service delivery for the most vulnerable\r\npopulations.\r\n\r\nPost-conflict emergency assistance in highly agrarian economies should try to maximize\r\nsynergies across sectoral operations to optimize the delivery of food aid while laying a\r\nfoundation for growth of the agricultural sector. In the Central African Republic,\r\ninterviews with UN relief agencies and development actors revealed that opportunities were\r\nmissed after the 2012 coup to link humanitarian interventions with wider development aims,\r\nfor example, by identifying transport interventions that could have increased market access\r\nwhile achieving stabilization aims. To achieve more effective harmonization, lessons from\r\nthe Central African Republic suggest that aid could have been better coordinated through a\r\nmultidonor strategy and funding tool designed to support the recovery while bridging the\r\nhumanitarian relief–development divide.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n José Carbajo Martínez\r\n Director, Financial, Private Sector, and\r\n Sustainable Development Department\r\n\f\f 1\r\n\r\n\r\n1. Background and Context\r\n1.1 Since late 2012, the Central African Republic has experienced massive armed clashes\r\nand intercommunal violence, creating an unprecedented humanitarian crisis, which has\r\nunraveled the country’s social fabric, displaced over 25 percent of the country’s population,\r\nand resulted in a steady deterioration in the political and security environments. This has led\r\nto depressed economic activity, loss of administrative capacity, and declining social service\r\nprovision.\r\n1.2 Although it twice evacuated staff in 2012 and 2013, the World Bank stayed engaged\r\nthroughout the protracted stages of crisis. The crisis triggered Operations Policy 7.30. This\r\npolicy applies when a de facto government takes power in a World Bank member country.\r\nWorld Bank disbursement paused, and then resumed selectively in November 2013. By\r\n2014, owing to the urgency of the post crisis needs, the government requested the\r\ncancellation of all undisbursed balances on active World Bank project accounts and the\r\nredirection of those funds toward an emergency response package, including addressing\r\nsevere food shortages. In January 2014, World Bank management presented to the Executive\r\nBoard a $100 million emergency response package for the Central African Republic that was\r\ncomposed of restructured parts of the existing portfolio, the unallocated IDA16 balance, and\r\nthe first year—with frontloading—of the IDA17 allocation. The portfolio restructuring\r\nincluded the cancellation of $21 million from an ongoing Agro-Pastoral Recovery project,\r\nand the redirection of these funds toward this Emergency Response and Agriculture Re-\r\nlaunch project, approved on March 8, 2014.\r\n\r\nFood Insecurity\r\n1.3 A Multi-Sectoral Initial Rapid Assessment (MIRA) undertaken in the Central African\r\nRepublic by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World\r\nFood Programme (WFP) in January 2014 indicated that, at the time, about 1.4 million\r\npersons were food insecure. The average number of meals had declined to a single meal a\r\nday in conflict-affected areas, and 94 percent of communities visited by the assessment team\r\nreported they would not have enough seed to plant for the next agricultural season (OCHA\r\n2014). During the lean season—the period between planting and harvesting—food stocks\r\ndwindle and families regularly skip meals. In addition, food prices had been on the rise\r\nowing to instability in the northern part of the country, a situation that was aggravated by\r\nproduction taxes levied by rebels, which was discouraging market sales and reducing\r\nproducers’ assets. Retaliation against Muslims also compounded these long-standing\r\neconomic problems because many of the Muslims who fled had been truck drivers who took\r\ngoods to market and shopkeepers who left behind stores that were looted and torched.\r\n\r\n1.4 The World Bank quickly prepared the Central African Republic Emergency Food\r\nCrisis Response and Agriculture Re-launch project, for an amount of $20 million, with the\r\naim of providing needed food security and agricultural assistance ahead of the sorghum and\r\nmillet planting seasons, which occur in March and May, respectively. The displaced,\r\nestimated at 1 million persons or one-fifth of the country, were slow to return, and those who\r\ndid found their homes and farms destroyed. Assessments conducted in 2013 and the MIRA\r\nshowed that the crisis had resulted in the loss, destruction, or plundering of vast amounts of\r\nfood, seed stocks, and agricultural assets. At the same time, the presence and capacity of\r\n\f 2\r\n\r\n\r\ndecentralized governmental or para-governmental technical services (mainly technical\r\nbackstopping and research structures) had been eroding over time, and the conflict\r\ncompounded the lack of access to technical support. For the government to respond rapidly it\r\nneeded to seek substantial support from development partners and external agencies.\r\n\r\n1.5 The WFP was already engaged in the Central African Republic. WFP had appealed\r\nfor $107 million in aid, but reported that it had received only a fraction of that amount by\r\nearly 2014. WFP aimed, through a phased approach, at providing emergency assistance by\r\nscaling up an integrated food distribution and blanket supplementary feeding package for the\r\nmost vulnerable, then ensuring targeted nutrition support and school meals, and then\r\nsupporting an integrated food and nutrition safety net for the moderately food insecure\r\npeople over the lean season, while maintaining a basic level of support for health and\r\neducation services.\r\n\r\n1.6 FAO had a strategic response plan that included the distribution of seeds and\r\nagricultural tools ahead of and during the agriculture season, and the rebuilding of storage\r\nfacilities. The project appraisal document (PAD, p. 3) noted, “Saving the 2014 agricultural\r\ncampaign, which will start in April, will be essential to prevent further deterioration of food\r\ninsecurity.”\r\n\r\n1.7 Thus, it was determined that the emergency recovery project would be financed by\r\nthe World Bank and executed by the WFP and FAO, including subcontracting several\r\ninternational and national nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).\r\n\r\n2. Objective, Design, and their Relevance\r\n2.1 Project Development Objectives. The project development objectives (PDOs) were\r\nto protect and rebuild livelihoods, human capital, particularly of children, and to re-launch\r\nthe productivity of the agriculture sector.\r\n\r\nRelevance of Objective\r\n2.2 This report rates the relevance of the project objective as modest. The objective was\r\ntoo ambitious for an emergency recovery loan designed to bridge the humanitarian and\r\ndevelopment divide over a 16-month delivery cycle. It included language such as to rebuild\r\nlivelihoods, rebuild human capital, and included references to productivity. For food aid, an\r\nobjective statement should be outcome focused and based on outcomes that are attributable\r\nand measurable in a short-duration emergency intervention, including increased\r\ncaloric/nutritional intake for the targeted groups and reduced mortality attributable to the\r\nintervention. Because there is a need to focus on vulnerability in emergency food aid\r\noperations, objective statements should also include target groups embedded in the statement.\r\nOne of the reasons that emergency operations often have lofty objectives is that there is legal\r\npressure in the World Bank to finesse the objective to ensure it conforms to the World\r\nBank’s development mandate. While this alignment should be articulated as part of a higher\r\ngoal, the PDO as framed in the legal agreement should be specific, attributable, and\r\nmeasurable, and should include a reference to the targeted population that is being served.\r\n\f 3\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2.3 The second part of the objective relates to FAO’s function in the project. It\r\nsweepingly referred to the re-launch of the productivity of the agriculture sector, an objective\r\nstatement that wholly misrepresented the limited aim of FAO’s intervention in a post-conflict\r\nenvironment. At the time of the intervention, the sector was devastated. A more measured\r\nand relevant statement would have referred to the immediate short-term restoration or\r\nrehabilitation of the sector within identified zones, through the distribution of inputs and\r\ntools, and through the provision of technical assistance. The rehabilitation of the sector also\r\nrequired an indication of what agricultural activities the project would support in zones of\r\ninsecurity with elevated levels of displacement, where farmers’ decisions to invest relied\r\nheavily on perceptions about security. For example, WFP found that stocking practices in the\r\nfar southeastern market of Zemio (along the border with the Democratic Republic of Congo,\r\nin the Haut Mbomou prefecture) are more robust potentially owing to chronic security\r\nconcerns and worries about displacement (WFP 2011). The objective statement could have\r\nbeen framed in a way that referred to a conflict-informed approach to the immediate\r\nrehabilitation of agricultural activities in zones that were affected by displacement or\r\ninsecurity.\r\n\r\nProject Design\r\n2.4 The project had two main components, aligned with the two-part objective. The first\r\nobjective/component was executed by WFP and the second by FAO.\r\n\r\n2.5 Component 1. Human capital protection and livelihood assistance (appraisal cost:\r\n$12.0 million; actual cost: $12.0 million). According to the PAD, this component was\r\ndesigned to protect the human capital of children, including those in the “first 1,000 days”\r\nand to prevent negative coping strategies by poor households—such as selling assets,\r\nincurring debt, and sacrificing food consumption—which would compromise human capital\r\nand livelihood recovery in the longer term. It was designed to support (i) the procurement\r\nand distribution of specialized and staple foods, (ii) supplemental feeding, and (iii) school\r\nfeeding programs in selected locations in the country. WFP, contracted by the Ministry of\r\nRural Development, was requested to procure, internationally, specialized foods (unavailable\r\nlocally) to be used for blanket and targeted feeding of young children, 6–59 months old, as\r\nwell as for pregnant and lactating women. It would also procure staple foods (grains,\r\nlegumes, oils) where possible in neighboring countries through competitive procurement, and\r\nmove them by land to the Central African Republic. These foods would then be distributed to\r\nfood-insecure households in the affected prefectures at numerous distribution points, with\r\ncoverage increasing over time as the lean season unfolded. The total human capital protection\r\nand livelihood assistance program implemented by WFP was designed to reach more than 1.1\r\nmillion people. The distribution of food would be aimed particularly at supporting those\r\npopulations returning from safe havens to areas of origin and their farmland to support the\r\nimpending planting season (March–May).\r\n\r\n2.6 Component 2. Re-launch the productivity of the agriculture sector (appraisal\r\ncost: $8.0 million; actual cost: $8.0 million). This component was designed to restore food\r\nproduction capacity for the most affected people in post-conflict, food-insecure areas. It\r\n\f 4\r\n\r\n\r\nwould finance purchase of groundnut, maize, rice, and vegetable seeds (about 400 tons) for\r\nsubsidized distribution to seed producer groups (17,400 households), and 370 women’s\r\ngroups (11,100 households) to restore domestic food production capacity. In addition, it\r\nwould support the procurement of about 55,000 pieces of farm equipment for subsidized\r\ndistribution to the same beneficiaries, as well as 740 processing units and the rehabilitation\r\nand construction of 100 post-harvest and seed storage facilities at the community and village\r\nlevels for women’s groups, and of the seed laboratory control for the Central African\r\nInstitute for Agricultural Research (ICRA). Component 2 would also provide training to\r\nbeneficiary farmers and to 50 field personnel of the Ministry of Rural Development, as well\r\nas 150 young graduates who would participate in the implementation of the project.\r\n\r\n2.7 Component 3. Provided $3.3 million for operating costs, project preparation, and\r\nphysical and price contingencies. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) was designed to be\r\nsubsumed under the WFP and FAO component activities.\r\n\r\nRelevance of Project Design\r\n\r\n2.8 Theory of change. The intervention was based on a theory, developed by the UN’s\r\nFood Security Cluster, known as “Seeds for Change.” Shown in Figure 2.1, the theory is\r\nbased on the concept that, in the absence of humanitarian intervention, displaced and\r\nreturning households will fully expend their remaining human and physical capital to\r\nsurvive, thus eroding any opportunity to restore their livelihood, including through\r\ninvestment on the farm. In the short term, emergency food aid delivered by WFP is proposed\r\nto “protect” distributed seeds, so that the seeds distributed by FAO are planted and not eaten,\r\nin addition to supporting enhanced nutritional outcomes. The pairing of seed and food\r\ndistribution is timed to coincide with the lean season, when food stocks have been exhausted\r\nand just before planting season (in the case of the Central African Republic between March\r\nand May).\r\n\r\n2.9 The design of the WFP intervention in this project was partially relevant to\r\naddressing the food crisis in the Central African Republic, and grounded in assumptions\r\nthat have been tested through rigorous impact evaluation. By including nutrition\r\ninterventions in its emergency response and by addressing moderate acute malnutrition\r\nthrough prevention and treatment programs, the intervention supported by WFP built on\r\nlessons from the 2008 Lancet series on Maternal and Child Undernutrition (Horton 2008). It\r\nwas also in line with the 2010 Framework for Action of the Inter-Agency, Inter-\r\nGovernmental Scaling Up Nutrition movement and the Renewed Efforts Against Child\r\nHunger and Undernutrition initiative. The approach builds on a base of evidence of the\r\neffectiveness of interventions, an understanding of the multicausal nature of malnutrition,\r\nand a focus on the first 1,000 days following conception as critical for a child’s survival and\r\nthe attainment of an individual’s potential for physical and cognitive development, and hence\r\nhealth and income-earning capacity in the future.\r\n\r\n2.10 A 3ie “Synthesis of impact evaluations of the World Food Programme’s nutrition\r\ninterventions in humanitarian settings in the Sahel” (Kaul, Husain, Tyrell and Gaarder (2018)\r\nfound that in Mali, access to general food distribution led to increases in households’\r\n\f 5\r\n\r\n\r\nnonfood and food expenditures and in micronutrient availability. Their evaluation examined\r\nthe delivery of a package of multisector nutrition interventions and found that households\r\nliving close to conflict and receiving at least two forms of assistance—particularly general\r\nfood distribution and school feeding—showed statistically positive effects on nutrition\r\noutcomes, whereas the effects were not significant for households that received only one\r\nform of food assistance.\r\n\r\n2.11 The intervention logic in the PAD posits that the emergency food aid, in a post-\r\nconflict situation, is foundational to securing longer-term learning outcomes. In the short\r\nterm, school feeding programs encourage return to school and enrollment. School feeding\r\nprograms are also expected to help stave off malnutrition. Beyond these immediate effects,\r\nand from a child developmental perspective, the increased nutrition is expected to increase\r\nfocus and retention, which leads to enhanced learning outcomes. But it requires school\r\nfeeding to occur over a long enough duration to have a sustained impact.\r\n\f 6\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 2.1. FAO/WFP Seeds of Change Theory for Emergency Interventions\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2.12 The design of the FAO intervention in this project was only modestly relevant to\r\naddressing the food crisis in the Central African Republic; it lacked realism and a\r\nroadmap for procuring and distributing seed ahead of the planting season. Given the\r\nacute nature of the crisis, the organizational infrastructure needed for seed procurement and\r\n\f 7\r\n\r\n\r\ndistribution, and for supporting technical assistance, was not in place to execute the FAO\r\nstrategy. The project strategy of relying on national supply chains facilitated by NGOs and\r\nFAO clearly failed based on triangulated interviews between the assessment team and the\r\nexecuting agents, NGOs, technical agents, and beneficiaries. The strategy for seed and tool\r\ndistribution also relied on the identification of farmer cooperative groups. Focus group\r\ndiscussions conducted by the PPAR assessment team with farmer cooperative groups in the\r\nM’Baiki area, where a large percentage of the aid was distributed, revealed that aid was only\r\nprovided to “legal” dues-paying farmer groups—so that only 10 groups out of the 36 male\r\nfarmer cooperative groups in this area received FAO-supplied seed or tools. Legally\r\nrecognized groups tend to be better networked and consequently better endowed. Many\r\nelderly vulnerable farmers who were not in a group, or not in a “legal” group, did not receive\r\nsupport.\r\n\r\n2.13 The timing of emergency agricultural assistance in relation to the seasonal\r\nagricultural cycle is one of the most important determinants of its effectiveness. Seeds\r\nneed to be delivered ahead of the planting season and food aid needs to be delivered during\r\nthe lean season. Lack of nutrition has long-term consequences for health and cognitive\r\nfunctioning, particularly for pregnant women and young children. Seasonal hunger affects\r\nbetween 300 and 1 billion persons globally (IFAD Rural Poverty report 2011), and its effects\r\nare compounded in conflict-affected countries because many traditional coping strategies are\r\nunavailable owing to the lack of seasonal migration opportunities and dwindling numbers of\r\nlivestock. World Bank credit to the Central African Republic under the Emergency Food\r\nCrisis Response and Agriculture Re-launch project was approved in March 2014 and became\r\neffective on April 2014. Although it took less than 3 months from project concept to\r\ninception, the aid was too late to reach victims ahead of the planting season. The design was\r\nweak in addressing this timing issue.\r\n\r\n2.14 The overall rating for relevance of design is modest.\r\n\r\n3. Efficacy\r\n3.1 The PDOs were to: (i) protect and rebuild livelihoods, human capital, particularly of\r\nchildren and (ii) to re-launch the productivity of the agriculture sector.\r\n\r\n3.2 An emergency operation approved in March 2014, the project was restructured in\r\nFebruary 2015 with the sole aim of adjusting downwards many of the PDO and non-PDO\r\nindicator values. The restructuring took place after all resources had been disbursed to the\r\nUN executing agencies. No change was made to the objective statement even though several\r\nimplementation challenges related to its second part had been identified during the first year\r\nof supervision. Other adjustments were made to geographic scope in relation to physical\r\naccessibility owing to ongoing or resurgent conflict in some of the project areas.\r\n\f 8\r\n\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVE ONE: TO PROTECT AND REBUILD LIVELIHOODS, HUMAN CAPITAL,\r\nPARTICULARLY OF CHILDREN\r\n\r\n3.3 The first project objective, of protecting and rebuilding livelihoods and human\r\ncapital, particularly of children, was modestly achieved. The relative emphasis placed by\r\nthis assessment on the attainment of human capital results for children and other vulnerable\r\npopulations is linked to the project rationale provided in the PAD. The $12 million provided\r\nby the World Bank for component 1—intended to be a small part of the wider WFP\r\ncampaign—was to ensure coverage of malnourished children, pregnant and lactating women,\r\nand school children. This emphasis was linked to the World Bank’s social protection and\r\nhuman development goals and was in line with findings from the 2008 Food Crises Response\r\nexperience, which highlighted the neglect of these groups in prior World Bank–financed food\r\ncrisis operations. This focus was also in line with the need to clearly distinguish the role of\r\nthe World Bank from the role of humanitarian agencies.\r\n\r\n3.4 Results. Although the project was designed to target vulnerable populations, it\r\nachieved only 36 percent and 37 percent of its original targets for vulnerable persons, for\r\nfood distribution (number of tons of food), and children reached (number of children).\r\nAlthough most targets for number of and type of persons reached were not met, this\r\nassessment used published WFP food supplement data (amount and duration of feeding\r\nrequired to achieve life-saving nutritional targets) to determine the adequacy of the\r\nintervention, as a proxy for outcomes (for the limited numbers of persons that were reached).i\r\nSpecifically, the following programs were implemented achieving the results indicated:\r\n• Children reached. Through a blanket feeding program, the project planned to supply\r\n220,000 children between the ages of 6 and 59 months with 2,500 tons of food. By project\r\nclose, it had only provided 92,795 children with 439 tons of food (an average of 4.26 kilos\r\nper child). Although the original target for the blanket feeding program was not met, the\r\nchildren that were reached were provided with enough supplemental food to positively affect\r\nnutrition outcomes. WFP’s blanket supplementary feeding program is designed to prevent\r\nwidespread malnutrition and to reduce mortality among those at risk by providing a\r\nfood/micronutrient supplement. The project provided plumpy doz, a ready-to-use soy-based\r\nnutrient supplement also defined as a Lipid-based Nutrient Supplement Medium Quantity\r\n(LNS-MQ). It is recommended that 47–50 g/day of the supplement be administered for 3–6\r\nmonths. The amount of food distributed. 4,260 g per child, suggests that those reached\r\nreceived the minimum recommended of 3 months of the supplemental feeding, to achieve\r\nenhanced nutritional impacts.\r\n• Children were also targeted through a school feeding program, but this program\r\nfell far short of its targets. The project planned to provide 197,000 children through a\r\nschool feeding program with 1,470 tons of food. It actually supplied 26,129 children with\r\n602 tons of food. This was equivalent to 0.023 tons per child or 21 kg per child. If the\r\nsupplemental feeding was evenly distributed across the 26,129 children, then each child\r\nwould have had access to supplemental plumpy doz for 447 days, at a recommended ration of\r\n47–50 g/day, meeting WFP’s duration requirements.\r\n• Pregnant and lactating women. Through a targeted supplemental feeding program,\r\nthe project planned to provide 7,500 pregnant and lactating women and 33,500 children aged\r\n6–59 months who suffered from moderate to acute malnutrition with 2,000 tons of food. The\r\n\f 9\r\n\r\n\r\nproject reported supplying 31,908 pregnant and lactating women, and a total of 34,324\r\npersons, with 1,158 tons of food under this targeted supplemental feeding program. It did not\r\nreport on the number of children reached under this program. Mathematically, this program\r\nwould have supplied most pregnant and lactating women with 30 kg (or 30,000 g) per\r\nperson. It is not clear from the project documents what food supplement was used, but if\r\nsuper cereal was used for the pregnant and lactating women as recommended, then based on\r\na requirement of 200 g per day, each woman would have received supplemental feeding for\r\nan average duration of treatment of 3–6 months, which would have provided enhanced\r\nnutritional requirements for the mother and child.\r\n• General food distribution. WFP also conducted general food distribution. Against a\r\ntarget of supplying 1,400 tons of food to 1.1 million persons, it distributed 5,105 tons of food\r\nto 721,635 persons (6.4 kg per beneficiary). This aid was intended to be distributed to\r\ninternally displaced persons and returnees who were severely food-insecure. Beyond the\r\nnumber of tons delivered and the number of persons reached, there is no information on\r\n“who” received the general food distribution and to whom it was allocated. This part of the\r\nproject grew by five times the original amount in terms of quantity per person, while the\r\nprograms targeted at children and pregnant and lactating women shrunk. More evaluation\r\nstudies are needed on how to improve targeting of food aid in conflict-affected situations,\r\nwith a focus on reaching the most vulnerable.\r\n• Mathematically, the general food distribution would have supplied each person\r\nreached with the equivalent of roughly a full week’s food ration based on a 1,000 g/day diet.\r\nThe cost of delivering a week’s worth of food to a general beneficiary population should be\r\nweighed against other humanitarian assistance modalities (such as cash).\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVE TWO: TO RE-LAUNCH THE PRODUCTIVITY OF THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR\r\n\r\n3.5 The second PDO, to re-launch the productivity of the agriculture sector, was\r\nnegligibly achieved. As discussed in the section on relevance of design, this was an overly\r\nambitious objective for an emergency operation designed to be implemented over an 18-\r\nmonth period in precarious circumstances. The theory behind the objective is associated with\r\nthe services that are offered by FAO and the partnership that has been established with WFP\r\nin emergency operations, as part of the UN’s food security cluster. The theory, as depicted in\r\nFigure 2.1, pairs seed and tool distribution with emergency supplemental food provision. The\r\nemergency food provision ensures that the distributed seed is planted rather than eaten. The\r\ncomplementary pairing is designed to address short-term severe food insecurity with the\r\nimplements and other factors of production needed to achieve medium-term food self-\r\nsufficiency.\r\n\r\nSeed Production, Distribution, and Storage\r\n\r\n3.6 To achieve this objective, FAO would have needed to—in the midst of a crisis\r\nsituation and in a country bereft of seed stock—support the timely procurement and\r\ndistribution of the correct seed varieties in advance of the planting season. In seed relief\r\noperations, the physical, physiological, phytosanitary, and genetic qualities of the seed in\r\nrelation to the soils, rainfall, pest burden, farming practices, technical support, and food\r\npreferences, require close attention so that vulnerable farmers are provided with quality seed\r\nof the appropriate crops and varieties (FAO 2010). In 2014 in the Central African Republic,\r\n\f 10\r\n\r\n\r\nFAO was not able to do this: it supported a significant portion of the procurement of seed\r\ninternationally, but the seed was of inferior quality and was distributed late, after the planting\r\nseason.\r\n\r\n3.7 With regard to seed procurement, the FAO managed a multipronged strategy. It\r\naimed to obtain and redistribute seeds to ICRA and seed multiplier groups (Groupement\r\nAgri-Multiplicateur) for propagation, and to vulnerable households for crop production.\r\nAccording to its intermediate report for March–September 2014, the FAO followed its own\r\ntender procedures so as to target regional and domestic seed suppliers. Eight private sector\r\nseed suppliers provided 275 tons of maize, peanut, and rice seeds, which represented 91\r\npercent of the 300-ton objective. Thirty percent of these seeds are reported to have come\r\nfrom domestic providers. Horticulture seeds were all procured from international sources\r\nthough contractor names or tonnage are not given. The report cites a distribution of seeds to\r\n123,875 beneficiaries. However, this and other reports do not address the issue of seed\r\nquality, which was identified by the IEG field visit (December 2017) as a principal\r\ndeficiency of the FAO activities.\r\n\r\n3.8 In keeping with international standards, the project’s cereal seed procurement\r\nacquisitions consisted of pre-base, base, and R1 seeds, which correspond respectively to\r\nseeds containing the highest level of purity for use in research facilities (pre-base), seeds\r\nintended for multiplication (base), and for cultivation (R1). Although adherence to these\r\nstandards requires verification, the IEG team discovered during its December 2017\r\ninterviews with ICRA officials that a significant portion of procured seeds provided to the\r\nresearch institute were of such low quality that they declassified them. The interviewees\r\nattributed this deficiency to the project’s short time frame, which led to a hasty procurement\r\nstrategy. The ICRA staff’s account raises the question of whether the pre-base seeds were\r\nproperly evaluated and classified as FAO documentation implicitly states.\r\n\r\n3.9 FAO procurement of base and R1 seeds were equally problematic. With regard to R1\r\nseeds, the IEG team found during their December field visit that many men’s groups around\r\nM’Baiki did in fact receive peanut and maize seeds from the FAO and they described them as\r\nbeing good quality. However, farmers consistently reported that the R1 seeds had arrived too\r\nlate to be very useful. Some individuals did plant them either mid-way through the rainy\r\nseason or the following year. Others reported a total loss and admitted to consuming the\r\nseeds they had received. A final obstacle to the efficient procurement of R1 seeds was that\r\ninterviewees described only 10–12 of the 36 existing farmers groups, which formed the\r\nconduit for seed distribution, as functional. Interviewees claimed quite simply that it was\r\ndifficult or impossible to benefit from the project if you were not part of a functioning group.\r\n\r\n3.10 Seed multiplier groups were the intended recipients of base seeds, which were to form\r\nthe foundation of community-based seed production in the years to come. Although 45,000\r\nkilograms of base seed were procured for multiplier groups in 2014, the FAO reported that\r\nthe no seeds were subsequently produced (FAO UTF/CAF/011/CAF). Although the FAO\r\nclaimed that seed multiplication was ongoing and would be monitored, the World Bank\r\nImplementation Completion and Results (ICR) review meeting held in September 2016\r\nindicated that seed production by multiplier groups faced numerous problems and the amount\r\n\f 11\r\n\r\n\r\nof production could not be verified. Seed multiplier groups represent a locus of dysfunction\r\nfor the project. In addition to seed procurement, seed multiplier groups were also partners in\r\nthe seed storage component (World Bank Supervision Report 2016), which performed even\r\nworse and is described below in section 3.9.\r\n\r\n3.11 Although the field team did not have time to investigate this, it seems likely that the\r\nstorage and seed multiplication failures are linked. The FAO claims seed multiplier group\r\ndysfunction is related to the collapse of the country’s cotton sector in recent years and the\r\ndebts that their members have accrued. This seems like a feasible explanation and points to\r\nthe need for careful institutional analysis before making the kinds of investment that were\r\nincluded in the project. The December 2017 IEG field visit to Boali, another PURCARA site,\r\ndid discover that it is possible to do seed multiplication. Agents from the NGO Concern\r\ndescribed training and certifying 4,000 seed multipliers in an ongoing project funded by Irish\r\nAid.\r\n\r\n3.12 FAO also supported the local production of seed. It supported the production of 316\r\npre-base tons of seed in 2014 at ICRA. The seeds were declassified and then distributed to\r\nproducers as R1 seeds for simple cultivation.\r\n\r\n3.13 Although no information is available in the project documentation on the yields that\r\nwere achieved using these seeds, interviews by the PPAR assessment team with ICRA and\r\nmultiple farmer beneficiaries revealed that production was minimal, owing to the poor seed\r\nquality. Farmers should have been informed that the seed was declassified, so they could\r\nhave made better choices, including not to plant the seed. The project was extended to allow\r\nimproved seed to reach farmers during a second planting season, in the spring of 2016, two\r\nyears after the cessation of major conflict in the project areas.\r\n\r\n3.14 Seed storage was one of the most egregious failures of the project. A total of 12 of the\r\n75 planned warehouses were completed under the project, with an estimated storage capacity\r\nof 2 tons per warehouse. In general, grain storage units, or warehouses, are utilized by\r\nfarmers’ groups to store grain for sale, farm implements, and seed grain for their collective\r\nfields, which act as a collective risk management tool in case of harvest failure in a member’s\r\nown field. Project beneficiaries in each field site visited by the PPAR assessment team\r\ndescribed NGOs pledging to build the storage units but not following through (in MBaiki) or\r\nnot even starting construction, even after beneficiaries delivered their contributions of rocks\r\nand sand (in Bossembele). This was regrettable because it undermined trust in development\r\npartners and deprived beneficiaries of much-needed capacity to participate in agricultural\r\nmarkets and to build their own capacity to respond to future shocks and crises.\r\n\r\nLivestock\r\n\r\n3.15 Before the 2013 crisis, cattle rearing represented one of the most important economic\r\nactivities in the Central African Republic yet cattle production—especially through\r\ntranshumance—remains a core source of friction in the ongoing conflict because of disputes\r\nover access to pasture and water for livestock. Transhumance is mostly carried out by\r\nmembers of the Fulani ethnic group, many of whom supported the Seleka insurgency during\r\n2014–16. As a result, they have been largely driven out of the western part of the country.\r\n\f 12\r\n\r\n\r\nSome armed groups (anti-ballaka) prey on herders, who have subsequently taken up arms to\r\ndefend their animals. Violent encounters have undermined trust and, despite the expressed\r\ndesire among interviewees consulted by the PPAR assessment team that the Fulani return to\r\ntheir communities, this has not happened yet except in a very small number of cases. Cattle\r\nthievery is also a source of revenue for war lords, which enables armed groups to continue\r\noccupying parts of the country. The ongoing large-scale displacement of the Fulani deprives\r\nfarmers of animal products (meat, dairy) but also deprives them of the possibility of\r\nprocuring draught animals to increase agricultural production. It also deprives farmers of the\r\nchance to do deals with herders who would pay them in kind to graze their herds after harvest\r\non sorghum stubble. Sometimes farmers and herders clash, sometimes they can work out\r\nmutually beneficial deals. All of the country’s major livestock markets are under the control\r\nof non-state armed groups, which deprives the government of important revenue, which prior\r\nto the crisis was used to finance livestock sector support services (e.g. vaccination, market\r\ninfrastructure).\r\n\r\n3.16 There were no targets established and no information provided in the project\r\ndocumentation about the distribution of small livestock. In interviews with women farmer\r\ncooperatives, this IEG assessment team learned about ruminant distribution, including\r\nchicken, pigs, and goats. Information obtained by the IEG mission differs from information\r\nthat was reported in the ICR. The ICR reported that “none of the animals planned for\r\ndistribution were actually distributed by the end of the project,” and also reported “the feed\r\nthat was distributed was unclean and were therefore inedible by chickens.” FAO confirmed\r\nthe distribution of ruminants but indicated that the activity was not appropriate, for similar\r\nreasons that small ruminant distribution programs have been unsuccessful even under\r\nnonemergency circumstances. Buying and moving goats, sheep, and cattle requires local\r\ncountry trading skills. For FAO, the only option would have been for it to contract with a\r\nlocal professional trader but this brings several risks (of unsavory practices) and requires\r\ntight supervision. This review finds that it would have been better to give cash and to let\r\nfarmers themselves choose the stock for purchase, alongside veterinary assistance to ensure\r\nthe stock was healthy.\r\n\r\nMarket gardening\r\n\r\n3.17 Market gardening is an area of potential in which the project and other organizations\r\n(Tear Fund, Concern) have achieved some success since the 2013 crisis. Farmers’ groups\r\ndescribed taking up gardening for consumption and surplus marketing (MBaiki, Bossembele,\r\nBoali); however, several obstacles remain. Beneficiaries in Boali described not knowing how\r\nto store seeds of imported market varieties. Storing vegetable seeds requires them to be\r\nsomewhat cool and dry and sealed from pests. Although some of the storage challenges are\r\nunclear, hybrid varieties in general do not do well if the second generation of seeds is\r\nharvested and stored because they revert to unsuitable parent lines. The availability of high-\r\nquality gardening equipment was also reported as a challenge. Extension support for\r\nintensive gardening techniques remained limited.\r\nCross-Cutting Gender Issues\r\n\f 13\r\n\r\n\r\n3.18 The WFP component had a strong gender impact, but the FAO activities resulted in\r\nlimited impacts for female cooperatives. The WFP food distribution included targeting\r\ntoward pregnant and lactating women, and this performed well. However, interviews with\r\nwomen’s associations supported by FAO revealed that women were reached, but that the\r\nactivities had negligible impact. Women’s associations in M’Baiki indicated that most of the\r\nassistance arrived when they were still hiding in the bush, and that most of the aid was\r\ndistributed in M’Baiki: “nothing got to the villages.” Women’s associations received hoes\r\nand seeds, but that, as noted earlier, the seeds were of inferior quality and the tools were\r\neither too small or broke shortly after they were delivered.\r\n\r\n4. Monitoring and Evaluation\r\nM&E Design and Implementation\r\n\r\n4.1 In an emergency response project, in a conflict-affected setting, M&E needs to be\r\ndesigned in a manner that provides iterative access and reporting on physical assets, services,\r\nand social phenomena, and conducted by persons that can access areas that are frequently but\r\nintermittently inaccessible. In a conflict-affected setting, “getting things wrong”—in a\r\nmanner that is either real or perceived—can result in increased inter- and intragroup tensions.\r\nRapid assessment of implementation quality, feedback, and redress can reduce a project’s\r\nchance of contributing to or reigniting conflict. Grievance redress systems can double as a\r\nconflict-sensitive monitoring tool that can capture problems with implementation. A review\r\nof project documentation revealed that grievance redress does not appear to have been\r\nutilized, neither for complaints, nor for iterative feedback on implementation challenges.\r\n\r\n4.2 Overall, the M&E system was intended to be participatory and managed by FAO and\r\nWFP. A study was planned to be undertaken by WFP and FAO to evaluate the impact of the\r\nproject’s interventions, including whether the increased access to food, seeds, and equipment\r\nhad the intended impact on nutrition and production levels. However, the study was not\r\ncarried out. WFP had a formal monitoring system and monitored the distribution (metric\r\ntons) of emergency food aid it delivered. It provided regular reports on this to the World\r\nBank. FAO did not have an M&E system. It was only toward the end of the project that FAO\r\nhired an international consultant to write a monitoring report but it lacked substance and\r\naccuracy because of the absence of monitoring data.\r\n\r\n4.3 Utilization. There is evidence that WFP used its monitoring data to scale back its\r\noperations, lowering its targets to reach the most vulnerable populations, because of\r\ninaccessibility and the resurgence of conflict in some areas. There is no evidence that M&E\r\nwas utilized by FAO during implementation.\r\n\r\n4.4 The overall monitoring and evaluation rating is negligible.\r\n\r\n5. Safeguards\r\n5.1 Because this project was operated under OP/BP 10.00, paragraph 11, an\r\nEnvironmental and Social Screening and Assessment Framework was prepared. The project\r\n\f 14\r\n\r\n\r\nwas classified as environmental category B. Several negative effects were identified but this\r\nanalysis finds that the screen that was applied was done in a standard way that may not have\r\nidentified the most critical issues associated with an emergency operation. For example,\r\nmany standard safeguard issues associated with agricultural interventions were identified,\r\nsuch as potential soil deterioration, surface water and groundwater pollution risks from\r\nincreased use of pesticides, and loss of vegetation following the installation of storage\r\nfacilities. All of the necessary tools were put in place—an Environmental and Social\r\nMitigation Assessment and Environmental and Social Management Plan, and a Pest and\r\nPesticide Management Plan. These environmental effects should be mitigated, but the more\r\ncritical issues in this emergency operation pertained to the social aspects of working in a\r\nconflict-affected area. Conflict sensitivity should also have been a key area of analysis in\r\nrelation to the distribution of food, seed, livestock, and tools. An Indigenous Peoples Plan for\r\nthe World Bank’s Agro-Pastoral Recovery Project (P124278) prepared in 2012 was updated\r\nbefore the implementation of activities on the ground, but there is no evidence in the project\r\nor through interviews with the Project Management Unit and project beneficiaries that the\r\nproject achieved a high degree of outreach to the Pygmy (Baka) populations living in the\r\nproject areas.\r\n\r\n5.2 Historically, the Baka are kept by Bantu “hosts” known locally as Bilo. Fieldwork\r\nconducted for this mission revealed that many Bilo were helped by the Baka when they fled\r\nto the forests. The Bilo received knowledge about what was edible or safe to eat, as well as,\r\nin some cases, shared shelter. But during design and implementation, there does not appear to\r\nhave been attention paid to the pathways by which the Baka—many of whom are farm\r\nlaborers—would receive aid. FAO targeted farmers and the WFP distributed emergency food\r\naid to schools, hospitals, and within towns. Because individuals were not targeted, and aid\r\nwas distributed through groups, the Baka population was likely to have been missed.\r\n\r\n6. Efficiency\r\n6.1 No financial or economic analysis was carried out at appraisal. The justification for\r\nnot doing an ex ante analysis in the ICR was insufficient; data could have been obtained from\r\nWFP, based on like interventions, to estimate unit costs and benefits. The PAD suggested\r\nthat the benefits from human capital protection and livelihoods assistance and the capacity\r\nbuilding were qualitative in nature”—a claim this assessment rejects. Nutrition and health\r\noutcomes could have been measured over a year’s duration. Moreover, building a base of\r\nknowledge on what it takes to deliver food aid through a World Bank–financed project,\r\nincluding by estimating and measuring the various cost layers (e.g. client, World Bank, UN,\r\nNGOs), would have been a valuable contribution of this project.\r\n\r\n6.2 A unit cost analysis was conducted for WFP interventions at project end. No such\r\nanalysis was conducted for FAO interventions. Rather, for FAO, the ICR noted the presence\r\nof ineligible expenditures and inadequate administrative efficiency, which negatively\r\naffected the efficiency of the FAO component of the project. For WFP, the ICR recorded cost\r\nsavings—or efficiencies—associated with the procurement of supplemental foods (plumpy\r\nsup, super cereal, cereal) as compared to generic product process per metric ton. In all\r\ninstances, cost savings were realized through WFP’s procurement process.\r\n\f 15\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6.3 In the absence of adequate efficiency analysis provided by the project, this\r\nassessment utilizes data from the previous WFP executed Food Crisis Project in the Central\r\nAfrican Republic to compare the costs of emergency food distribution in a non-conflict and\r\nconflict setting.\r\n\r\n6.4 In a non-conflict situation, the previous WFP-executed Food Crisis Project delivered\r\n5 million kg of food to 120,000 children, an equivalent of 5,512 tons, representing 80 percent\r\nof the amount projected to be delivered by the project. In the crisis setting, the WFP\r\ndelivered less than half of this amount, or 2,199 tons of food to children and vulnerable\r\npersons targeted by the project. The previous Food Crisis project “underdelivered” by 20\r\npercent compared to its total target; however, the Emergency Food Crisis and Agriculture\r\nRe-launch project achieved only 37 percent of its original target (for children and vulnerable\r\npersons), although the actual number of children and vulnerable persons reached is not\r\nreported in the project’s ICR.\r\n\r\n6.5 The inconsistency in World Bank–financed, WFP-executed projects limits an analysis\r\nof unit costs. In the previous Food Crisis project, although the “number of tons” and “number\r\nof children” were both set as targets, the project only reported on the “number of children”\r\nreached (based on school population). In this subsequent Emergency Food Crisis and\r\nAgriculture Re-launch project, the number of tons of food targeted toward children and\r\nvulnerable persons was projected and reported, but the number of persons to be reached and\r\nthose actually reached was neither projected at appraisal nor reported at project close.\r\n\r\n6.6 Overall, this assessment concurs with the ICR that efficiency was modest, because\r\nthere were no data on which to build an analysis of efficiency.\r\n\r\n7. Ratings\r\nOUTCOME\r\n\r\n7.1 Given the modest ratings for relevance, efficacy, and efficiency the overall outcome\r\nof this project is rated unsatisfactory. This rating is consistent with the ICR and was never in\r\ndispute. The assessment was undertaken to make more widely available granular lessons on\r\nWorld Bank–financed, UN-executed emergency operations in the agricultural sector, with a\r\nfocus on conflict-affected settings.\r\n\r\n7.2 The relevance of the project objective was modest; the objective was far too\r\nambitious for an emergency recovery loan designed to bridge the humanitarian and\r\ndevelopment divide over a 16-month delivery cycle. Relevance of design was also rated\r\nmodest because, though the WFP assistance had a clear and relevant design, FAO lacked a\r\nroadmap and strategy implementable in a conflict-affected country that had lost many public\r\nservants and capable NGOs. Efficacy was rated modest because WFP helped to protect and\r\nrebuild livelihoods and human capital, but underdelivered on its commitment to feed\r\nchildren, a commitment that was explicitly emphasized in the objective statement. Against a\r\ntarget of 220,000 children, WFP reached only 92,795 children because much more food aid\r\n\f 16\r\n\r\n\r\nthan planned went to general distribution, and what that general distribution achieved for\r\nchildren has been difficult to deduce. FAO did not achieve its objectives in re-launching the\r\nproductivity of the agricultural sector. Efficiency was rated modest because no credible\r\ncalculations were made to determine how efficient it was to use IDA funding for this World\r\nBank–administered, UN-implemented, and NGO-executed project. Problematic for\r\nefficiency analysis has been that the actual unit cost of service delivery was not known.\r\nEfficiency was also negatively affected by ineligible expenses incurred during\r\nimplementation.\r\n\r\n8. Risk to Development Outcome\r\n8.1 Conflict and Security. The security situation in the Central African Republic is well\r\nknown and although the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in\r\nthe Central African Republic (MINUSCA) is committed to remaining in the country for the\r\nforeseeable future, its forces remain largely limited to main roads and towns so it is not able\r\nto secure more remote areas, including forests. Given the high number of armed groups in the\r\ncountryside and the inevitable role that valuable and moveable livestock assets play in the\r\ncountry’s power conflict, this situation is likely to prevent a return to normalcy in the short to\r\nmedium term. In terms of national authorities such as the army (FACA) and the gendarmerie,\r\nthe non-state armed groups have made it clear that, even if other service providers (health,\r\neducation) are allowed, government security forces are not welcome in the areas they control.\r\nViolent conflict in Kaga-Bandoro, a major market town in the north, that occurred during\r\nIEG’s field work in December 2017 confirm that this is still the case.\r\n\r\n8.2 Household Asset Recovery. Even within the context of the country’s history of\r\ndispossession and violence, the 2013 crisis was unprecedented as it forced a sizable\r\npercentage of the population to leave their homes for a significant period (testimonies include\r\n3 months to 1.5 years). This led to severe health and human development impacts, and total\r\ndepletion of household assets in many cases (housing, capital), as was identified in IEG’s\r\nfield visits to M’Baiki, Bossembele, and Boali. Households are unlikely to invest in\r\nresilience-building assets if they do not feel secure for the foreseeable future. For example,\r\nthe NGO Action Against Hunger uses small ruminant investment as an indicator of perceived\r\nhousehold security and observes significant local differences between parts of the Bossongoa\r\nprefecture. In contrast, beneficiaries in M’Baiki expressed confidence in their security\r\nsituation and their readiness to invest in agricultural production.\r\n\r\n8.3 Human and Institutional Capital. The capacity for the affected areas to recover (i.e.\r\nresilience) is low at all levels, from the household to local to national levels. Deconcentrated\r\ncrop and livestock services are nominally in place, but they are still not funded. Technical\r\nservices agents have returned and are present in most parts of the country controlled by the\r\ngovernment. Interviews with several agents conducted for this assessment revealed that they\r\nare well trained and eager to work but remain unable to carry out most basic services because\r\nof a lack of vehicles and equipment.\r\n\r\n8.4 Postcrisis development investments must utilize these resources in a way that builds\r\ntheir long-term capacity. This may involve creative arrangements that ensure project funding\r\n\f 17\r\n\r\n\r\ndoes not remain within ministry offices in Bangui. However, this leaves unanswered the\r\nquestion of the role of the national government, which, despite serious misgivings expressed\r\nby donors, remains an essential partner to the World Bank. Whether international partners\r\ncontinue bypassing as much as possible an institution sometimes dubbed a “phantom state”\r\n(e.g., through community-driven development programs) or seeks a new bargain with public\r\nauthorities remains to be seen.\r\n\r\n8.5 The Role of Local Organizations. Farmers groups are intact, functional, and offer a\r\nplatform for grassroots resilience and development. A site visit to Bossembele revealed that\r\nthe Union of Professional Farmers’ Cooperatives is doing a significant amount of extension\r\nand outreach, including social reconciliation work, with little to no outside funding.\r\n\r\n8.6 Postcrisis agricultural development in the Central African Republic could take several\r\ndifferent pathways. The World Bank and several other partners are pursuing the\r\nrehabilitation of the cotton sector to jumpstart exports (see the strategic country diagnostic)\r\nbut also to facilitate the adoption of agro-pastoralism, which would boost crop productivity\r\nand potentially improve farmer-herder relations. Beneficiaries at each field site expressed a\r\ndesire to intensify their production through animal traction and other benefits of agro-\r\npastoralism (such as access to manure). A different vision for the country’s agriculture sector\r\nwas offered by other donors, including by FAO, which expressed deep skepticism that the\r\ncotton sector could be rehabilitated. This review found that a more prudent approach in the\r\nsector would be to work on staples first, including on improved seed supply, which remains\r\nthe big need, while piloting the rehabilitation of the cotton sector on a small scale at the\r\neasiest site, and at the same time monitoring and evaluating both.\r\n\r\n8.7 The risk to development outcome is rated high. The ongoing civil insecurity,\r\nincluding the chronic conflict over grazing rights for livestock, the devastation of productive\r\nassets on farms, together with the lack of government funds for developing improved\r\ntechnologies and effective support services in the agricultural sector, all continue to pose\r\nsubstantial development challenges and hence high risks for the Central African Republic’s\r\nfuture agricultural and pastoral development as well as for sustained household food security\r\nin rural areas.\r\n\r\n9. Bank Performance\r\n9.1 Quality at entry is rated moderately unsatisfactory. The project was prepared as\r\nan emergency operation. It took less than three weeks from the project concept note approval\r\nto appraisal, about a month for its approval, and about the same time until effectiveness. For\r\nthe intended aim of delivering emergency food aid, through the WFP apparatus, the short\r\npreparation cycle was justified. However, the analysis of risks was weak with regard to\r\nmitigation actions. In addition, minimal attention was paid to the known technical, quality,\r\nand marketing issues with seed supply at short notice, whereas there was a substantial focus\r\non environmental issues (less of a priority in an 18-month emergency operation). The\r\npriorities given to environmental issues in the project design were unbalanced, leaving the\r\nseed supply issues largely unaddressed.\r\n\f 18\r\n\r\n\r\n9.2 Targeting also suffered from the short preparation time. Other means should have\r\nbeen introduced early on to identify and reach school-aged children out of school. For the\r\nmore complicated aspects of the project s, including the agricultural recovery envisioned by\r\nFAO, the project design was underprepared. There was a lack of built knowledge about\r\navailable networks and, as identified in other project evaluations concerning FAO,\r\ninadequate provisions for seed procurement.\r\n\r\n9.3 The emphasis on vulnerable populations, however, reflects learning from prior\r\nemergency food crises projects, which had weak targeting strategies: they targeted school\r\n“canteens” equipped with running water and latrines, rather than vulnerable persons or areas\r\nwhere vulnerable persons were anticipated to be during the school day (including out of\r\nschool). This project corrected for this by including specific targets to reach pregnant and\r\nlactating women and malnourished children through targeted feeding programs, but the entry\r\npoints were still based on existing infrastructure (such as schools and hospitals). Following\r\nthe crisis in the Central African Republic, most vulnerable rural inhabitants remained in the\r\nforests to which they had fled for up to a year following the cessation of warring activities.\r\nDuring and following the crisis, vulnerable populations were slow to return to formal\r\nhospitals or schools. Though this was due to the situation of protracted displacement, it also\r\nhad social underpinnings, related to shame. Fieldwork for this assessment revealed that a\r\nmother’s shame often led families to seek informal treatment or to hide malnutrition or\r\nillness. In these cases, the most vulnerable children would have been unidentified as the\r\nproject did not target households.\r\n\r\n9.4 Based on these observations, although the use of WFP as an executing agency for\r\nemergency school feeding was an obvious choice, the use of other child-focused agencies\r\nlike UNICEF or churches could have been included in the project to augment the results of\r\nthe targeted feeding programs (as opposed to general food distribution). Instead, the project\r\nlinked WFP goals to FAO’s distribution strategy—a strategy that relied on local public\r\nagricultural agents and their relationship with farmer cooperatives to reach needy households.\r\nThe mantra of “provide food so they don’t eat their seed” may have done a disservice by\r\nlinking the activities not just conceptually but in terms of implementation agencies.\r\n\r\n9.5 Quality of supervision is rated unsatisfactory. The World Bank rated the project\r\noutcome fully unsatisfactory. There were seven supervision missions over two years that\r\nrated the project fully satisfactory except for the final mission which rated the project\r\nmoderately satisfactory. Also, according to the Implementation Status and Results reports the\r\nproject was never at risk.\r\n\r\n9.6 There were seven missions but only 3.5 weeks of supervision recorded over the\r\nproject period. For a project such as this, with hasty preparation, most of the adjustments\r\nwould have had to be made during implementation. Instead, the amount of time spent on\r\nsupervision—in terms of time charged—equaled the short amount of time spent for project\r\npreparation. Altogether, the World Bank spent less than two months preparing and\r\nsupervising this complex emergency operation. This issue may be linked to the disconnect\r\nbetween supervision ratings and ICR ratings. The take-away from the PPAR mission is that\r\nbecause the funds were fully dispersed, the usual triggers for a project at risk did not apply,\r\n\f 19\r\n\r\n\r\nand additionally, with regard to supervision, the World Bank simply assumed the UN\r\nagencies would perform.\r\n\r\n9.7 Together, these ratings lead to an overall rating of Bank performance of\r\nunsatisfactory.\r\n\r\nBorrower Performance\r\nGovernment Performance\r\n\r\n9.8 The government showed high interest in the operation. However, the Agence\r\nGénérale d’Exécution des Travaux d’Intérêt Publics (AGETIP), which was assigned to\r\nprovide coordination and financial management on behalf of the government to make sure\r\nthat the project would be implemented, failed to provide its expected role.\r\n\r\n9.9 In view of the crisis and the low government capacity for service delivery after the\r\ncrisis, the Ministry of Rural Development contracted WFP to implement component A and\r\nFAO to implement component B. AGETIP, part of the Ministry in charge of infrastructure,\r\nwas assigned the coordination and financial management of the project, including by helping\r\nthe UN agencies to follow World Bank procedures. But AGETIP’s role was undermined\r\nbecause all project management costs were included in the components managed by the UN\r\nagencies. According to interviews, in the absence of separate and discrete financial support,\r\nAGETIP officials felt like they were doing the World Bank “a favor.” At the time, funds for\r\noperating expenses in AGETIP were scarce, and many of the costs incurred in support of the\r\nproject were not covered. An emergency operation, the World Bank project was not able to\r\nallocate funds directly to the agency; this would have required an assessment and an audit,\r\nwhich would have delayed project implementation. As noted in the ICR, “without any\r\nincentives to do the job it was asked to perform, AGETIP never really followed up,\r\ncoordinated, or supervised WFP and FAO.”\r\n\r\n9.10 IEG’s mission revealed that agricultural technical agents, for example in M’Baiki,\r\nwere familiar with the project communities, and some had even returned quickly after the\r\ncrisis to personally support these communities with their basic humanitarian needs. However,\r\nalthough IEG found that across the project areas deconcentrated crop and livestock services\r\nwere in place, they are still not funded. Technical services agents with whom the evaluation\r\nteam met were well trained and eager to work but remain unable to carry out most basic\r\nservices owing to a lack of vehicles and equipment, which were not provided by the project\r\nbecause all of the project financing went to the UN.\r\n\r\n9.11 Government performance is rated as unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\nIMPLEMENTING AGENCY PERFORMANCE\r\n\r\n9.12 The implementing agencies were WFP and FAO, and the coordination of activities\r\nwas supposed to be overseen by AGETIP. The WFP performed moderately well given the\r\nacuity of the crisis, but most targets were not achieved compared to the original targets,\r\nespecially with regard to feeding vulnerable groups. FAO showed poor performance in\r\n\f 20\r\n\r\n\r\nimplementing activities under component 2, with very limited achievements, very significant\r\nproblems with monitoring and reporting, unsatisfactory financial management, failing to\r\nprovide a refund to the World Bank (with regard to ineligible expenditures), and the lack of\r\nresponse to World Bank requests for performance data. Finally, the AGETIP suffered from\r\nlimited institutional capacity and failed to provide any role in coordinating and monitoring\r\nproject implementation. Therefore, implementing agency performance is rated\r\nunsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n9.13 Together, these ratings lead to an overall rating of borrower performance of\r\nunsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n10. Lessons\r\n10.1 Standard agreements between World Bank clients and UN executing agencies\r\ncan facilitate success if they include a common vision about intended objectives, a clear\r\nand achievable results framework and related outcome indicators, and a clear\r\narticulation of how risks to the environment and social framework will be monitored,\r\nreported on, and managed. In the Central African Republic, the World Bank over-relied on\r\nUN reporting mechanisms after the humanitarian crisis, and did not fulfill its supervision\r\nresponsibility, undermining opportunities to address ongoing project implementation\r\nchallenges.\r\n\r\n10.2 Efficient seed procurement for conflict-affected countries is complex because\r\ntrading networks and normal supply and demand signals are disrupted, and hence the\r\nrecruitment and funding of a technical team needs to be a prior condition of project\r\neffectiveness. The experience in the Central African Republic shows that procuring the\r\ncorrect seeds for specific geographic locations and their associated soil and agro-climatic\r\nconditions is technically demanding and time consuming. It also requires deep local and\r\nregional knowledge of supply and demand. Upstream diagnostic work on effective seed\r\nprocurement (quality and realistic timeframe for procurement), including the availability and\r\nquality of technical support, is needed. This should involve a candid review of the World\r\nBank’s existing partnerships and ways of doing business (e.g. FAO execution) but also fine-\r\ngrained institutional analysis and mapping of capable government technical services and\r\npartners in the NGO community (some NGOs are much more capable than others and they\r\nneed to be identified before crisis hits). The few dispersed agricultural technical services that\r\nremained after the crisis, including many well-trained and capable agents, should have been\r\nbetter incorporated into the emergency response.\r\n\r\n10.3 Emergency food security operations do not necessarily require food agency\r\ncoupling (such as WFP and FAO). Depending on the stage of recovery, emergency\r\noperations may be better served by pairing a food agency with a social agency (such as\r\nUNICEF or the Red Cross) to achieve more effective targeting and service delivery for the\r\nmost vulnerable populations.\r\n\r\n10.4 Post-conflict emergency assistance in highly agrarian economies should try to\r\nmaximize synergies across sectoral operations to optimize the delivery of food aid while\r\n\f 21\r\n\r\n\r\nlaying a foundation for growth of the agricultural sector. In the Central African Republic,\r\ninterviews with UN relief agencies and development actors revealed that opportunities were\r\nmissed after the 2012 coup to link humanitarian interventions with wider development aims,\r\nfor example, by identifying transport interventions that could have increased market access\r\nwhile achieving stabilization aims. To achieve more effective harmonization, lessons from\r\nthe Central African Republic suggest that aid could have been better coordinated through a\r\nmultidonor strategy and funding tool designed to support the recovery while bridging the\r\nhumanitarian relief–development divide.\r\n\r\nReferences\r\nBhutta, Z.A., T. Ahmed, R.E. Black, S. Cousens, K. Dewey, E. Giugliani, B.A. Haider, B. Kirkwood, S.S.\r\n Morris, H.P.S. Sachdev, and M. Shekar. 2008. “What Works? Interventions for Maternal and Child\r\n Undernutrition and Survival.” Lancet 371 (9610): 417–40. https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-\r\n 6736(07)61693-6/abstract\r\nHorton, Richard. 2008. “Maternal and child undernutrition: an urgent opportunity ”. The Lancet. Volume 371,\r\n No. 9608, p179, 19 January 2008.\r\n https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61869-8/fulltext\r\nIndependent Evaluation Group. 2013. “The World Bank Group and the Global Food Crisis.” World Bank,\r\n Washington DC.\r\n http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/reports/food_crisis_eval_1.pdf\r\nInternational Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 2010. “Rural Poverty Report 2011”. Rome, Italy:\r\n International Fund for Agricultural Development.\r\n https://www.ifad.org/documents/10180/c47f2607-3fb9-4736-8e6a-a7ccf3dc7c5b\r\nKaul, Husain, Tyrell and Gaarder. 2018. “Synthesis of Impact Evaluations of the World Food Programme’ s\r\n Nutrition Interventions in Humanitarian Settings in the Sahel.”\r\nSun Movement. 2015. “Strategy and Roadmap (2016-2020).” Milan: Sun Movement.\r\n http://nutritioncluster.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/10/SUN_Strategy_and_Roadmap_2016-\r\n 2020.pdf\r\nTranchant, J.P., A. Gelli, L. Bliznashka, A.S. Diallo, M. Sacko, A. Assima, E. Siegel, E. Aurino, and E. Masset.\r\n In press. “The Impact of Food Assistance on Food Insecure Populations during Conflict: Evidence\r\n from a Quasi-Experiment in Mali. World Development.\r\n https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X18300378?via%3Dihub\r\nWorld Bank. 2013a. “Central African Republic – Food Crisis Response Project.” Implementation Completion\r\n and Results Report ICR986, World Bank, Washington DC.\r\n http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/479641468011158217/pdf/NonAsciiFileName0.pdf\r\n–––––––. 2013b. “Central African Republic – Food Crisis Response Project.” Implementation Completion and\r\n Results Report Review ICRR 14143, World Bank, Washington DC.\r\n http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/198851474904087110/pdf/000020051-\r\n 20140626001454.pdf\r\n–––––––. 2014. “Central African Republic for an Emergency Food Crisis Response and Agriculture Re-Launch\r\n Project.” Project Appraisal Document PAD948, World Bank, Washington DC.\r\n http://documents.worldbank.org/ CAR for an Emergency Food Crisis PAD\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ni\r\n http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/communications/wfp255508.pdf\r\n\f 22\r\n\r\n\r\nAppendix A. Basic Data Sheet\r\nCENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC EMERGENCY FOOD CRISIS RESPONSE AND\r\nAGRICULTURE RE-LAUNCH PROJECT\r\n\r\nKey Project Data (amounts in US$, millions)\r\n\r\n Appraisal Actual or Actual as Percent\r\n Estimate Current Estimate of\r\n Appraisal\r\n Estimate\r\nTotal project costs 20 20 100%\r\nGrant amount\r\n\r\nCumulative Estimated and Actual Disbursements\r\n\r\n FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18\r\n\r\nAppraisal estimate (US$ millions) 18.9 26.8 68.3 11.73 17.01\r\n\r\nActual (US$ millions) 17.75 20.0 20.0 19.70 19.70\r\n\r\nActual as percent of appraisal 93.9% 74.6 % 29.2% 167.9 % 115%\r\n\r\nDate of final disbursement 1/1/2019\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Dates\r\n Original Actual\r\nConcept Review 01/7/2014\r\nBoard approval – 3/7/2014\r\nSigning – 3/31/2014\r\nEffectiveness 04/2/2014 04/2/2014\r\nClosing date 9/30/2015 3/31/2016\r\n\f 23 APPENDIX A\r\n\r\n\r\nStaff Time and Cost\r\n Staff Time and Cost (Bank Budget Only)\r\n Stage of Project Cycle USD Thousands (including\r\n No. of staff weeks\r\n travel and consultant costs)\r\nLending\r\n FY14 20.65 81.20\r\n FY15 17.55 79.10\r\n Total: 38.2 160.30\r\nSupervision/ICR\r\n FY14 0.5 9.92\r\n FY15 0.45 31.76\r\n FY16 2.5 71.77\r\n FY17 0 0.16\r\n Total: 3.45 113.61\r\n\r\n\r\n Responsibility/\r\n Names Title Unit\r\n Specialty\r\nLending\r\nManievel Sene Rural Development Specialist AFTA2 Task Team Leader\r\n Food Policy\r\nLynn R Brown Consultant AES\r\n Specialist\r\n Senior Operations\r\nJuvenal Nzambimana Senior Operations Officer AFTA1\r\n Officer\r\n Senior Social\r\n Senior Social Development\r\nLucienne M M’Baipor AFTCS Development\r\n Specialist\r\n Specialist\r\nEvelyne Huguette Madozein Team Assistant AFMCF Team Assistant\r\n Operations and\r\nMarie Jeanne Uwanyarwaya Senior Executive Assistant AFTA2\r\n quality\r\nSiobhan McInerney-Lankford Senior Counsel LEGAM Senior Counsel\r\n Senior Finance\r\nAissatou Diallo Senior Finance Officer CTRLA\r\n Officer\r\n Senior Procurement\r\nKouami Hounsinou Messan Senior Procurement Specialist AFTPW\r\n Specialist\r\n Senior\r\nEmeran Serge M. Menang\r\n Senior Environmental Specialist AFTN1 Environmental\r\nEvouna\r\n Specialist\r\nLova Niaina Ravaoarimino Procurement Specialist AFTPE Procurement\r\nKolie Ousmane Maurice Senior Financial Management Financial\r\n AFTMW\r\nMegnan Specialist management\r\nMelissa C. Landesz Operations Officer AFTSG Safeguards\r\n\fAPPENDIX A 24\r\n\r\n\r\nSupervision/ICR\r\n Responsibility/\r\nNames Title Unit\r\n Specialty\r\nNicaise Ehoué Senior Agriculture Economist GFA01 Task Team Leader\r\n Technical aspects\r\nThéodore Mianzé Agricultural Specialist GGOPS on production\r\n capacity\r\n Financial\r\nJosué Akré Financial Management Specialist GGO26\r\n management\r\nHuguette Evelyne\r\n Program Assistant AFMCF –\r\nMadozein\r\n Financial\r\nKolie Ousmane Maurice Senior Financial Management\r\n GGO26 management and\r\nMegnan Specialist\r\n general matters\r\nTchaoussala Haoussia Senior Procurement Specialist GGO07 Procurement\r\nBenjamin Billard Operations Officer GFA01 Review of ICR\r\n Senior Rural Development Responsible for\r\nSoulemane Fofana GFA01\r\n Specialist ICR\r\n\f 25\r\n\r\n\r\nAppendix B. List of Persons Met\r\n\r\nGovernment of the Central Republic of Africa\r\nMr. Félix Moloua Ministre de lEconomie du Ministère de lEconomie du Plan et de la Coopération\r\n Plan et de la Coopération\r\nMr. Honoré Feizouré/ Ministre de lAgriculture et Ministère de lAgriculture et du Développement Rural\r\nInspecteur general du Développement Rural\r\nDr. Alphonse KOTA- Project Manager Ministère de lElevage et de la Santé Animale\r\nGUINZA\r\nMme Aline Gisèle Pana Ministre de la Promotion de Ministère de la Promotion de la Femme, de la Famille et de\r\n la Femme, de la Famille et la Protection de lEnfant\r\n de la Protection de lEnfant\r\nM Robert PANI Director Cabinet Ministère de lEconomie du Plan et de la Coopération\r\n\r\n\r\nUnited Nations, Bilateral and Regional Development Banks\r\nJean Alexandre Scaglia Representative FAO\r\n\r\nFelix Bona Fogah GOMEZ Representative WFP\r\nDominique Burgeon FAO\r\nMr Juneja WFP\r\nM. Marcel Nganassem Directeur General AGETIP\r\nRocco Leone Deputy Director WFP\r\nIbrahama Diallo Program Unit Supervisor WFP\r\nDr. Mehoundo FATON Chief, Child Survival and UNICEF\r\n Development\r\nDr. Speciose Hakizimana Deputy Representative UNICEF\r\nNdabihore\r\nM. Bonaventure Nutrition Specialist UNICEF\r\nMUHIMFURA\r\nMilan Trojanovic Director of Mission Support MINUSCA\r\n\r\n Bakary Cisse, Transhumance and animal Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)\r\n production coordinator\r\n District director Livestock and Animal Production Agency (ANPE)\r\n District director Agency for Veterinary and Animal Health\r\n Director General and AGETIP, Livestock and Animal Production Agency (ANPE)\r\n adjoints\r\n Inspecteur General Livestock and Animal Production Agency (ANPE)\r\n Director General Livestock and Animal Production Agency (ANPE)\r\n\fAPPENDIX B 26\r\n\r\n NGOs\r\nDr Salomon Directeur Général ICRA\r\nNAMKOSSERENA\r\n representative Concern NGO representative\r\nWorld Bank\r\nNicaise Ehoué TTL WBG Washington\r\nRobert Jaoude Country Manager WBG CMU\r\nSosthene RM WBG CMU\r\nSilvio Giroud RPBA Expert WBG Cameroon\r\nLuis Felipe Duchicela Advisor on Indigenous WBG Washington\r\n Peoples\r\nFranck Laurent SOVIDE Security Specialist WBG Cameroon\r\n\r\n\r\nInternational NGOs\r\n Eric Batonon Country Director NRC (Norwegian Refugee Council)\r\n M. Pascal BROUILLET Representative Agence Francaise de Development\r\n M Joseph TANGA KOTI Director Caritas\r\n Christine Muhigana Representative Unicef\r\n Joseph INGANJI Head of Office Ocha\r\n National Coordinator Action Against Hunger (ACF)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAstrid Jakobs de Padua Minister counselor Embassy of Germany\r\nAllaramadji DJERINGA Technical assistant European Union\r\nDr. Alphonse KOTA-GUINZA Project manager\r\n director and secretary Union of Communal Agricultural Producers\r\nErik Force French Embassy, Development directorate\r\n\f" }, "D30042914": { "id": "30042914", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Madagascar", "docty": "Implementation Completion Report Review", "theme": "Human development,Population and reproductive health,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Education for all,Child health", "docdt": "2018-06-15T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/825401529101979917/pdf/Madagascar-MG-Emerg-Supp-to-Critical-Ed-Health-Nu.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/825401529101979917/text/Madagascar-MG-Emerg-Supp-to-Critical-Ed-Health-Nu.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/825401529101979917/Madagascar-MG-Emerg-Supp-to-Critical-Ed-Health-Nu", "projectid": "P131945", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/825401529101979917/Madagascar-MG-Emerg-Supp-to-Critical-Ed-Health-Nu", "doc-text": " Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Report Number : ICRR0021136\r\n\r\n1. Project Data\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project ID Project Name\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health,\r\n P131945\r\n Nu\r\n\r\n Country Practice Area(Lead) Additional Financing\r\n Madagascar Health, Nutrition & Population P148749,P160666\r\n\r\n\r\n L/C/TF Number(s) Closing Date (Original) Total Project Cost (USD)\r\n IDA-51860,IDA-53820 31-Jul-2016 75,000,000.00\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date Closing Date (Actual)\r\n 29-Nov-2012 30-Jul-2017\r\n\r\n IBRD/IDA (USD) Grants (USD)\r\n\r\n Original Commitment 65,000,000.00 0.00\r\n\r\n Revised Commitment 72,917,077.14 0.00\r\n\r\n Actual 68,112,651.76 0.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Prepared by Reviewed by ICR Review Coordinator Group\r\n Gisela M. Garcia Judyth L. Twigg Joy Behrens IEGHC (Unit 2)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2. Project Objectives and Components\r\n\r\na. Objectives\r\n The project development objective (PDO) as stated in the Legal Agreement (p.5) was to preserve critical\r\n education, health and nutrition service delivery in targeted vulnerable areas in the Recipients\r\n territory. The PDO stated in the Project Paper was identical. The PDO did not change during\r\n implementation.\r\n\r\n Target values for two key outcome indicators associated with nutrition were revised upwards (increased)\r\n under the Additional Financing in March 2014. The targeted number of project beneficiaries was also\r\n increased and subsequently decreased through a third restructuring in July 2016.\r\n\r\n Page 1 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The project originally targeted five regions with the highest poverty rates as per the 2011 Poverty Map.\r\n Twenty-four percent of the total population of Madagascar lives in these regions. The Additional Financing\r\n targeted two of these five regions and three additional regions.\r\n\r\n The project was extended once and had three restructurings. Although these changes impacted some of\r\n the targets of key outcome indicators, there is no need for a split rating because all targets were met or\r\n exceeded.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nb. Were the project objectives/key associated outcome targets revised during implementation?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHEVALUNDERTAKENLBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nc. Will a split evaluation be undertaken?\r\n No\r\n\r\nd. Components\r\n Component 1: Preserving Critical Education Services (original cost of $ 23.50 million, actual cost of\r\n $22.02 million), was to include four subcomponents/activities:\r\n • Subsidies of community teacher salaries;\r\n • School grants;\r\n • School health and nutrition interventions, i.e. the distribution of treatment against neglected tropical\r\n diseases (NTDs); and\r\n • Capacity strengthening, project management, and monitoring and evaluation.\r\n\r\n Component 2: Preserving Critical Health Services (original cost of $ 25 million, actual cost of\r\n $24.81 million), was to include two subcomponents:\r\n • Support to the delivery of a critical package for pregnant women and children under five at the health\r\n facility level. This sub-component was to include the following activities: (i) rehabilitation of and\r\n procurement of basic equipment for primary health care facilities; (ii) procurement of essential obstetric and\r\n neonatal equipment; (iii) training on obstetric and neonatal care for medical staff at the facility, district and\r\n regional levels; (iv) procurement of safe delivery kits; (v) procurement of transport and medical equipment\r\n for community outreach; (vi) recapitalization/restocking of public pharmacies at the facility level; (vii)\r\n establishment of a fee exemption system for pregnant women and children under 5 years old; and (viii)\r\n distribution of treatment against NTDs through participation in school health and nutrition interventions,\r\n including the procurement of drugs, and through mass drug administration at the community level; and\r\n • Project management and monitoring and evaluation.\r\n\r\n Component 3: Preserving Critical Nutrition Services (original cost of $ 10.50 million, received\r\n Additional Financing of $ 10 million; actual cost of $21.28 million), was to include two sub-\r\n components:\r\n • Support to basic community nutrition services. This sub-component was to include the following key\r\n activities: (i) establishment of new community nutrition sites (identification of vulnerable\r\n\r\n Page 2 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n communities,awareness campaign, and selection of community nutrition workers); (ii) support to existing\r\n and new community nutrition sites, including the development and distribution of manuals, posters, and\r\n other communication materials to support awareness presentations delivered by community nutrition\r\n workers, as well as the procurement of cooking kits for culinary demonstrations, scales, and so forth; (iii)\r\n the recruitment of non-governmental organizations to supervise and support community nutrition sites; (iv)\r\n the testing of different approaches, namely intensive counselling through household visits, lipid-based\r\n nutrient supplementation for children, lipid-based nutrient supplementation for pregnant and breast-feeding\r\n women, and early childhood stimulation, which were to be evaluated through a randomized controlled trial;\r\n and (v) participation in the distribution of treatment against NTDs, including provision of small meals prior\r\n to administering NTD medication and sensitization of communities on the NTD campaigns. In addition, a\r\n new set of food security activities at the community and household levels, including home gardens, short-\r\n cycle farming and agriculture, and food conservation, were introduced under the Additional Financing; and\r\n • Project management and monitoring and evaluation.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ne. Comments on Project Cost, Financing, Borrower Contribution, and Dates\r\n The original project was to be financed by a US$ 65 million International Development Association (IDA)\r\n Credit, of which US$ 59.1 million was disbursed. The Additional Financing was in the form of a US$ 10\r\n million IDA Credit, of which US$ 9.0 million was disbursed. Total actual financing was therefore US$ 68.1\r\n million. No Recipient contribution was planned or made. Project costs were similar to estimates at\r\n appraisal, when considering the Additional Financing for component 3. The March 2014 Additional\r\n Financing expanded Component 3 to introduce a new set of food security activities at community and\r\n household levels, and to add geographic coverage to regions that had been severely affected by a locust\r\n infestation. Consequently, the targets for three nutrition-related outcome indicators were revised upward\r\n (increased).\r\n\r\n The project was approved on November 29, 2012 and became effective on April 25, 2013. An Additional\r\n Financing in February 2014 was approved to address rising risks of food insecurity by adding food\r\n security activities in five regions (three new regions, and two of the five that were part of the original\r\n project) and financing an additional 837 community nutrition sites and related interventions at the\r\n community and household levels in three new regions. Targets were increased for:\r\n\r\n • The number of direct project beneficiaries\r\n • Number of people with access to a basic package of nutrition services\r\n • Number of children under 2 years old benefiting from improved infant and young child feeding\r\n practice.\r\n\r\n\r\n A first restructuring was approved in July 2015 to introduce activities to improve quality and expand\r\n coverage of Component 3. The Additional Financing closing date was extended by one year (from July\r\n 31, 2016 to July 30, 2017). Key changes in components included:\r\n\r\n • Component 1: provision of school manuals and trainings for community teachers;\r\n\r\n Page 3 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n • Component 2: continuation of a results-based financing pilot initiated under an STI/HIV/AIDS\r\n Prevention Project (P090615);\r\n • Component 3: introduction of behavior change communication to improve utilization of nutrition\r\n messages at the household level, and expansion of the geographical scope of nutrition activities to one\r\n more region.\r\n\r\n\r\n A second restructuring was approved in June 2016 to reassign unallocated resources to Component 3\r\n to intensify efforts in the South through the identification and treatment of children under five years old\r\n who had acute malnutrition (in partnership with the World Food Program).\r\n\r\n A third restructuring was approved in July 2016 to allow for the completion of activities in Components 1\r\n & 2. Target values for the indicators on direct project beneficiaries and for two intermediate results\r\n indicators were decreased to reflect changes in population projections.\r\n\r\n\r\n3. Relevance of Objectives\r\n\r\n Rationale\r\n The PDO was highly relevant to the detailed description of the country context at appraisal, as reflected in the\r\n Project Paper (pp. 2-6) and in the ICR (p. 5-6). The PDO was highly relevant to the FY12-13 Interim Strategy\r\n Note (ISN). As per the ISN, Madagascars health/nutrition and education sector were in a state of affairs\r\n already close to an emergency situation... with the poorest bearing the brunt of the political crisis and\r\n suspension of aid...The severity of the situation was denounced by the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to\r\n food in July 2011, who alerted that 68 percent of the population in the South of the country is food insecure\r\n and that Madagascar has one of the highest levels of child malnutrition in the world (ISN pp. 9-10).\r\n\r\n As per the ICR, country development challenges did not significantly change during implementation (ICR\r\n p.14). The PDO was highly relevant to the priorities and recommendations identified in the 2015 Systematic\r\n Country Diagnostic that included a renewed focus on nutrition and improving the quality and equity of\r\n education (ICR p. 6, Country Partnership Framework, CPF p. 29). Moreover, the PDO was aligned with the\r\n 2015-19 National Development Plan, which included “adequate human capital for the development process”\r\n as one of five strategic areas (ICR p. 14; CPF p. 24). The PDO remained highly relevant to the CPF for FY17-\r\n FY21, and in particular to the CPFs objective to Increase resilience and reduce fragility. Given that this\r\n project funded a combination of health, nutrition, and education investments in children’s “early years,” it also\r\n contributed to the CPF objective of strengthening children’s human development. (CPF pp. 25, 31-32).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Rating\r\n High\r\n4. Achievement of Objectives (Efficacy)\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 4 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\nPHEFFICACYTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n Objective 1\r\n Objective\r\n Preserve critical education service delivery in targeted vulnerable areas\r\n\r\n Rationale\r\n As envisioned in the projects theory of change, supply-side activities financed by the project (such as the\r\n subsidies of community teacher salaries, and school grants to meet basic operational needs and minor\r\n infrastructure repairs) helped ensure that primary school services were available and functional. In addition,\r\n health and nutrition interventions delivered in schools helped stimulate demand for primary school services.\r\n These interventions helped preserve critical education services as measured by the number of functional\r\n schools and the number of students enrolled, to be maintained at 2012 levels.\r\n\r\n This objective exceeded its targets as measured by the following outcome indicators:\r\n\r\n • 1,131,353 students were enrolled in primary schools (surpassing the target of 974,300); and\r\n • 6,682 schools received grants (surpassing the target of 6,050).\r\n\r\n\r\n Outputs that contributed to the achievement of the objective included: (i) 100% of school grants were paid on\r\n time; (ii) 16,999 community teacher salaries were subsidized; (iii) 6,688 parents associations/school\r\n management committees were trained on teacher accountability processes and school grants; (iv) 626,583\r\n school manuals were purchased; and (v) 19,852 community teachers were trained.\r\n\r\n\r\n Rating\r\n High\r\n PHREVDELTBL\r\n\r\nPHEFFICACYTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n Objective 2\r\n Objective\r\n Preserve critical health service delivery in targeted vulnerable areas\r\n\r\n Rationale\r\n As envisioned in the projects theory of change, supply-side activities financed by the project included the\r\n rehabilitation and equipment of primary health care facilities; training of medical staff; the\r\n recapitalization/restocking of public pharmacies; and capacity building of district services to ensure that\r\n primary health care services were available and functional. Demand-side activities included the\r\n establishment of a fee exemption for maternal and child health interventions; the distribution of free safe\r\n delivery kits; and the provision of transportation and equipment to expand the radius of community outreach\r\n services. These interventions helped preserve critical health services, as measured by the number of births\r\n attended by skilled health personnel and the number of children immunized, which increased and reached\r\n pre-crisis levels.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 5 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n This objective exceeded its targets as measured by the following outcome indicators:\r\n\r\n • 131,434 deliveries were attended by skilled health personnel (surpassing a low target of 12,600);\r\n • 286,194 children under 12 months were immunized against DTP3 (surpassing a low target of 18,300);\r\n and\r\n • 113,131 pregnant women received antenatal care during a visit to a health provider (surpassing a low\r\n target of 18,283).\r\n\r\n\r\n Forty-eight percent of women attending antenatal clinics were tested for syphilis (half of the revised target of\r\n 90%, but surpassing the original target of 36%). The ICR (p. 17) explained that syphilis tests and treatments\r\n were procured as an emergency measure under the project, but that these inputs were not delivered in time\r\n to compensate for shortages caused by a delay in Global Fund resources.\r\n\r\n Outputs that contributed to the achievement of the objective included: (i) 347 primary health care facilities\r\n were rehabilitated and provided with basic equipment; (ii) heads of 347 primary health care facilities were\r\n trained on obstetric and neonatal care, the fee exemption system, medical waste management, and\r\n administrative data collection; (iii) 157,251 safe delivery kits were distributed; (iv) 347 primary health care\r\n facilities were provided with transport and medical equipment for community outreach; and (v) 296 solar-\r\n powered refrigerators were procured for primary health care facilities located in remote areas.\r\n\r\n\r\n Rating\r\n Substantial\r\n PHREVDELTBL\r\n\r\nPHEFFICACYTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n Objective 3\r\n Objective\r\n Preserve critical nutrition service delivery in targeted vulnerable areas\r\n\r\n Rationale\r\n As envisioned in the projects theory of change, supply-side activities financed by the project included the\r\n functionalization of new and existing local community nutrition sites to deliver nutrition services (i.e.\r\n weighing, nutritional counseling, and cooking demonstrations), and the recruitment of non-governmental\r\n organizations (NGOs) to support and supervise community nutrition agents at community nutrition sites.\r\n Demand-side activities included targeted household visits. Activities also included support for the design and\r\n evaluation of various interventions to improve the quality of nutritional counseling services. These\r\n interventions helped preserved critical nutrition services as measured by the number of people with access\r\n to a basic package of health, nutrition, or reproductive health services, and the number of children benefiting\r\n from improved child feeding practices, all of which increased and reached pre-crisis levels.\r\n\r\n This objective was exceeded its targets as measured by the following outcome indicators:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 6 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n • 2,268,854 people with were provided with access to a basic package of health, nutrition, or reproductive\r\n health services (surpassing the revised and initial targets of 1,619,303 and 932,426 respectively); and\r\n • 425,360 children under the age of 24 months benefited from improved infant and young child feeding\r\n practices (surpassing the revised and initial targets of 289,340 and 164,220 respectively).\r\n\r\n\r\n Outputs that contributed to the achievement of the objective included: (i) 462,315 children under two years\r\n old were enrolled in a growth monitoring program; (ii) 515,764 children between two and five years old were\r\n enrolled in a mid-upper arm circumference program; (iii) 3,582 community nutrition agents were trained to\r\n provide health and nutrition education; (iv) 92 percent of nutrition sites complied with the requirement of\r\n submitting monthly reports; (v) 6,587 schools were supported by community nutrition agents during\r\n deworming sessions; (vi) 23,114 households received support kits for short-cycle agriculture and livestock\r\n activities; and, (v) 1,005 new community nutrition sites were established and equipped with scales, manuals,\r\n cooking kits, and work clothes.\r\n\r\n\r\n Rating\r\n High\r\n PHREVDELTBL\r\n\r\n PHOVRLEFFRATTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Rationale\r\n The project maintained social service delivery in targeted areas, using and strengthening existing country\r\n systems and contributing to removing geographical and financial barriers to access through supply- and demand-\r\n side activities in health, education and nutrition. The project exceeded or fully achieved the target values for all\r\n outcome indicators. The project contributed to increased access and utilization of services at the primary health\r\n center level, and increased access to cost-effective nutrition interventions for pregnant women and children under\r\n five in the poorest areas of the country. In total, more than 2 million children and mothers benefited from essential\r\n maternal and child health and nutrition and education services (around 10 percent of the countrys population).\r\n Achievement of the education and nutrition objectives is rated High. Achievement of the health objective is rated\r\n Substantial due to shortcomings in the syphilis testing and treatment activity, and because outcome targets were\r\n set relatively low. Overall Efficacy is therefore rated High.\r\n\r\n The ICR noted that there were no other interventions in the areas targeted by the project that could have\r\n impacted the observed outcomes (ICR p.14). Yet, the efficacy discussion in the ICR might have benefited from\r\n presenting data on outcomes in non-targeted areas and compared them to the ones observed in project areas to\r\n make the attribution discussion stronger.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Efficacy Rating\r\n High\r\nPHREVISEDTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 7 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n5. Efficiency\r\n\r\nThe ICR discussed both economic and implementation efficiency in detail, devoting 17 pages in an annex (ICR\r\nAnnex 4).\r\n\r\nEconomic efficiency. The ICR used a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to assess project economic efficiency,\r\ncomparing the situation before project implementation (2013) with the situation at project closure (2016/17). No\r\nCBA was conducted at appraisal due to the emergency conditions under which the project was prepared;\r\nrather, only benefit-cost ratios of education, nutrition, and health services were presented at appraisal (Project\r\nPaper pp. 117-126). The ICR followed current guidelines and described the assumptions and methods used in\r\nthe CBA, its limitations, and the sensitivity analysis performed.\r\n\r\nThe CBA used actual population, service utilization, and cost data from project implementation and surveys.\r\nThe CBA followed the logic presented in the projects theory of change between project components,\r\nintermediate outcomes, and objectives. There was a good discussion of the potential impacts based on\r\nanalysis of a wide scope of benefits and relevant literature. In addition to using available information from the\r\nbroader literature to estimate benefits, the CBA used information available from the projects impact evaluation\r\nin one region that, given its characteristics, was considered representative of the project-targeted areas.\r\nExpected benefits were estimated using long-term returns on investment based on the literature and\r\ninformation on student performance in Madagascar.\r\n\r\nThe analysis found a benefit-to-cost ratio for the project of 3.1. The investment was found to be justified on\r\neconomic grounds, even when the CBA likely underestimated the benefits of the project as it captured only the\r\nimpact of nutrition interventions on under 5 mortality (and not on maternal mortality), it did not count the impact\r\nof nutrition interventions on future productivity, and it did not capture potential changes in morbidity/disability\r\ndue to project interventions. The investments rate of return varied from 14-18% based on different scenarios,\r\nsignificantly higher than the cost of capital in Madagascar as reported by the ICR (ICR p. 62, table A.13).\r\n\r\nImplementation/operational efficiency. The ICR highlighted that the project leveraged existing interventions\r\nand institutional arrangements for project implementation, which included a cross-sectoral steering committee\r\nthat created synergies between sectors, provided overall guidance, and ensured service delivery, which in turn\r\ncontributed to smooth implementation and a fast disbursement rate (ICR p. 23). The also stressed that little\r\ntime elapsed between approval and effectiveness (less than 5 months) and between effectiveness and first\r\ndisbursement (1.3 months), well below other projects in Madagascar and in Africa in general (ICR p. 63). The\r\nICR also pointed to the fast disbursement rate of the project (3.5 years) and low staff turnover (on both the\r\ngovernment and Bank side). Procurement of vehicles and information technology was performed through the\r\nUnited Nations Office for Project Service, which allowed for timely completion of procurement processes and\r\nreduced costs (ICR p .27). Some procurement challenges emerged during implementation that may have\r\ncontributed to delays, yet these procurement challenges were handled following the Bank’s procurement\r\nguidelines (ICR p.28).\r\n\r\nOperating costs amounted to 12% of total project costs. In addition, the project benefited from changes in the\r\nexchange rate that lead to a devaluation of the local currency (most costs were paid in local currency) (ICR p.\r\n29).\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 8 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAs discussed in more detail in Section 10, some challenges emerged at the end of the implementation period\r\nthat may have reduced operational efficiency: (i) shortcomings in budget monitoring by the Education Project\r\nImplementation Unit that resulted in unexpected undisbursed resources at the end of the project; (ii)\r\nweaknesses in contract management related to the food security activities in Component 3; and (iii) delays in\r\nthe collection of required documentation on expenditures. The ICR also noted challenges related to Project\r\nImplementation Unit staffing that contributed to delays that, in turn, led to the extension of the closing date (ICR\r\np. 27).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEfficiency Rating\r\nSubstantial\r\n\r\n\r\na. If available, enter the Economic Rate of Return (ERR) and/or Financial Rate of Return (FRR) at appraisal\r\n and the re-estimated value at evaluation:\r\n Rate Available? Point value (%) *Coverage/Scope (%)\r\n 0\r\nAppraisal 0\r\n Not Applicable\r\n 0\r\nICR Estimate 0\r\n Not Applicable\r\n\r\n* Refers to percent of total project cost for which ERR/FRR was calculated.\r\n\r\n\r\n6. Outcome\r\n\r\nConsidering that the project exceeded or fully achieved the target values for all the outcome indicators, the high\r\nproject relevance given the country context and national development program, the strong project design as\r\nreflected in the projects theory of change/results logic, and the substantial efficiency rating, the overall outcome\r\nrating is Highly Satisfactory.\r\n\r\n\r\na. Outcome Rating\r\n Highly Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n7. Risk to Development Outcome\r\n\r\nAs per the ICR, despite the risks associated with country fragility, the risk to development outcome is low due to\r\nthe many activities that have continued after project completion (e.g. subsidies to community teacher salaries,\r\ntransfer of school grants, and stationary and mobile maternal and child care consultations),\r\nstrengthened government capacity thanks to project efforts, and existing demand from the population for the\r\n\r\n Page 9 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ninterventions supported by the project. In addition, the ICR mentioned that two new Bank projects, one in\r\neducation and another one in health and nutrition (the Basic Education Support Project, approved in March 2018\r\nfor $55 million; and the Multiphase Programmatic Approach to Improving Nutrition Outcomes, approved in\r\nDecember 2017 for $90 million) will guarantee continuation of some of the activities supported by the project (ICR\r\np. 35).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8. Assessment of Bank Performance\r\n\r\na. Quality-at-Entry\r\n Quality at entry is satisfactory, given the clarity of project objectives; the straightforward design and\r\n associated theory of change; the attention to M&E and use of existing administrative data to select the\r\n indicators to be included in the results framework; the attention to ensuring inter-sectoral coordination and\r\n buy-in from local stakeholders; and the reliance on existing evidence and lessons learned to inform project\r\n design. The project paper included a comprehensive risk assessment that discussed potential stakeholder,\r\n social, and environmental risks; risks associated with local capacity, policy, and governance; risks\r\n associated with the multi-sectoral nature of the operation; and risks associated with monitoring and\r\n sustainability (Project Paper, Annex 4). The operations overall risk was rated Substantial, and detailed\r\n mitigation measures were included in project design.\r\n\r\n The Bank team followed OP/BP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies), as the project aimed at\r\n preserving essential services and not addressing long-term economic issues. Yet the project team\r\n integrated lessons from analytical work in the education and health sectors in the country as well as from\r\n other projects in the sectors in Madagascar and elsewhere. Lessons included the importance of specifying\r\n indicators with reliable data and then using that data for decision making; being flexible in project design to\r\n respond to changes in urgent needs; community involvement and capacity building to local stakeholders to\r\n improve accountability and governance; support to decentralized levels of health and nutrition; and\r\n collaboration with NGOs, among others (Project Paper, Annex 11).\r\n\r\n Minor shortcomings in quality at entry had to do with the issues mentioned in M&E design (Section 9a): lack\r\n of definitions or formulae for some indicators, as well as low targets for the indicators on number of assisted\r\n deliveries and number of children immunized .\r\n\r\n\r\n Quality-at-Entry Rating\r\n Satisfactory\r\n\r\nb. Quality of supervision\r\n Evidence presented in the ICR suggested adequate supervision by Bank teams, including supervision\r\n visits held every six months; monthly videoconferences held after the mid-term review; continuity in the\r\n project team (co-task team leaders in the health and education sectors ensured this continuity); and use\r\n of aides-memoire discussing implementation progress and issues, fiduciary aspects, environmental\r\n\r\n Page 10 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n safeguards, an update about the issues discussed in the previous aide-memoire, and pending issues with\r\n responsibilities and deadlines (ICR p. 33-34). Moreover, procurement challenges that emerged during\r\n implementation were handled following the Bank’s procurement guidelines (ICR p. 28). Additionally, the\r\n Bank team showed proactivity in adjusting target values to reflect changes in project scale. During the\r\n February 2014 additional financing, target values of indicators were increased to reflect the revised scale of\r\n the project, and then lowered during the third restructuring of July 2016 to reflect changes in population\r\n projections (ICR p. 13).\r\n\r\n However, the ICR highlighted some areas where the Bank could have been more responsive or\r\n provided more timely support and clear guidance to avoid delays. These included more flexible procurement\r\n policies, and better guidance on contracting with NGOs and on the disclosure of the updated medical waste\r\n management plan and the implementation of mitigation measures (ICR p. 29).\r\n\r\n\r\n Quality of Supervision Rating\r\n Satisfactory\r\n\r\n Overall Bank Performance Rating\r\n Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n9. M&E Design, Implementation, & Utilization\r\n\r\na. M&E Design\r\n The project’s theory of change was clearly articulated in the results framework defined at appraisal,\r\n capturing expected outcomes as well as the outputs and activities contributing to their achievement.\r\n Indicators selected were chosen based on available administrative data, and thus included baselines and\r\n targets. As per the ICR, considering the emergency nature and short-term focus of the operation and the\r\n fragile context, the PDO indicators were selected based on a principle of being simple, realistically\r\n achievable, and measurable using existing credible sources (ICR p. 13). However, the ICR pointed to\r\n some shortcomings in that a few indicators lacked definitions or a formula (ICR p. 30), and the targets at\r\n appraisal for some of the indicators were very low (in particular, for the number of deliveries assisted by\r\n health professionals and number of children immunized).\r\n\r\n Despite the emergency conditions under which the project was designed, the importance of M&E was\r\n embedded in project design, and the project included innovative features both in the instruments used for\r\n data collection and on the institutional arrangements for M&E. The project included M&E activities under\r\n all components to ensure regular supervision, along with timely, regular data collection to measure\r\n progress and results and to inform sector policy dialogue with the goal of facilitating the capture\r\n and integration of lessons learned during implementation (Project Paper p. 13). Existing\r\n Project Implementation Units (PIUs), one per sector, were used to facilitate implementation and\r\n monitoring. Each PIU was responsible for monitoring activities and results related to its sector (i.e the\r\n\r\n Page 11 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n education PIU monitored activities and results under component 1, the health PIU did the same for\r\n component 2, and the nutrition PIU for component 3). A cross-sectoral technical steering committee and a\r\n project coordination cell ensured cross-sectoral coordination and approved all progress reports. Besides\r\n activities to strengthen the existing monitoring and evaluation system that would allow for relying\r\n on existing administrative data, M&E activities included rapid data collection via mobile phones, periodic\r\n surveys and assessments, and community involvement and third-party verification by NGOs to ensure\r\n accountability.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nb. M&E Implementation\r\n Until the Mid-Term Review, there were some issues associated with high turnover of the M&E specialist in the\r\n Project Management Unit, as well as some shortcomings (mentioned above) in terms of indicators that lacked\r\n definitions or a formula (ICR p. 30). However, data was collected as planned using administrative databases.\r\n As per the ICR, evidence of achievement of targets was regularly monitored in supervision missions that\r\n happened every six months (ICR p. 30). Administrative data used to report on indicators was found reliable in\r\n the independent verifications conducted by the Bank (ICR p. 30).\r\n\r\n As per the ICR, the cross-sectoral Technical Steering Committee met biannually, in accordance with the\r\n Financing Agreement, including to approve annual work plans and review project implementation progress\r\n (ICR p. 27).\r\n\r\n The project benefited from an impact evaluation (Garchitorena et al, 2017) funded by the Strategic Impact\r\n Evaluation Fund, the Early Learning Partnership Program, a World Bank Innovation Grant, Grand Challenges\r\n Canada, the World Bank Research Committee, the Japan Nutrition Trust Fund, and the Power of Nutrition\r\n Trust Fund. The impact evaluation reported positive changes in service utilization in the region of Vatovavy-\r\n Fitovinany that the project team used to extrapolate the benefits of the whole project in its efficiency analysis\r\n (ICR p. 11, 57).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nc. M&E Utilization\r\n As per the ICR, data on performance and results was used to inform project management and decision-\r\n making, and even other operations (ICR p. 31). The changes implemented with the additional financing, first\r\n restructuring, and after the Mid-Term Review are examples of the regular use of monitoring data to inform\r\n project management and decision making.\r\n\r\n There was no reference in the ICR to the use of the data from the impact evaluation, except for the CBA as\r\n noted above.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n M&E Quality Rating\r\n Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 12 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n10. Other Issues\r\n\r\na. Safeguards\r\n The project was classified as “Category B, Partial Assessment” at appraisal (Project Paper pp. 81-82).\r\n OP/BP 4.01 (Environmental Assessment) was triggered (Project Paper p. 82, ICR p. 28), requiring a revision\r\n of the existing medical waste management plan. As per the ICR, the Government complied with safeguards\r\n requirements, although at a slower pace than expected. The ICR cited a 22-month delay in the\r\n public disclosure of the revised waste management plan and, consequently, in the implementation of\r\n mitigation measures (ICR pp. 28, 31).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nb. Fiduciary Compliance\r\n The ICR suggested project compliance with Bank policies on financial management (OP/BP 10.02),\r\n procurement (OP/BP 11.00), and disbursement (OP/BP 12.00). The government complied with regular\r\n financial management reporting: reports were prepared and transmitted to the Bank in a timely manner, and\r\n audit reports had unqualified opinion (ICR p. 32). Yet, some challenges emerged at the end of the\r\n implementation period: (i) shortcomings in budget monitoring by the Education PIU that resulted in\r\n unexpected undisbursed resources at the end of the project; (ii) weaknesses in contract management related\r\n to food security activities in Component 3; and (iii) delays in the collection of required documentation on\r\n expenditures. These shortcomings led to an increase in the projects financial management risk in April 2016\r\n (from Moderate to Substantial) and, consequently, to a downgrade of the financial management rating in\r\n April 2017 (from Satisfactory to Moderately Satisfactory) (ICR p. 32).\r\n\r\n Procurement of vehicles and information technology was performed through the United Nations Office for\r\n Project Service, following the financing agreement, which allowed for timely completion of procurement\r\n processes and reduced costs (ICR p. 27). Some procurement challenges emerged during implementation,\r\n that, as per the ICR, were under the governments control. Despite having contributed to delays, these\r\n procurement challenges were handled following the Bank’s procurement guidelines (ICR p. 28).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nc. Unintended impacts (Positive or Negative)\r\n None reported.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nd. Other\r\n ---\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 13 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n11. Ratings\r\n Reason for\r\nRatings ICR IEG\r\n Disagreements/Comment\r\n High relevance and high\r\n achievement of two out of the\r\n projects three objectives,\r\nOutcome Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory combined with a rating of\r\n substantial on efficiency,\r\n produce an Outcome rating of\r\n Highly Satisfactory.\r\nBank Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory ---\r\nQuality of M&E Substantial Substantial ---\r\nQuality of ICR High ---\r\n\r\n12. Lessons\r\n\r\nUseful lessons are derived from the ICR:\r\n\r\nIt is important for an emergency operation to have a realistic objective and a simple and flexible design. As per\r\nthe ICR, and given the emergency context of the operation, setting a realistic objective and maintaining\r\nflexibility, by keeping a significant unallocated amount of resources, were key to the successful implementation\r\nand outcomes of this operation (ICR p. 35). This project incorporated lessons learned from another emergency\r\noperation in Madagascar, and changes during implementation proved the usefulness of having the flexibility of\r\nunallocated resources to respond to a locus infestation. In addition, a simple design for a multi-sectoral\r\noperation not only benefited from previous experience but also tapped into government ownership and\r\nwillingness to experiment with innovative interventions (ICR p. 35).\r\n\r\nProcurement rules are prudently adapted to country characteristics. Small countries like Madagascar may not\r\nhave the scale to follow standard procurement rules that require international and competitive bidding. While\r\ntransparency and due diligence in procurement has to be assured, the Bank could show more flexibility and\r\nunderstanding in such cases and provide government teams with realistic solutions to avoid unnecessary\r\ndelays.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n13. Assessment Recommended?\r\n\r\nNo\r\n\r\n14. Comments on Quality of ICR\r\n\r\nThe ICR was candid in its analysis of the evidence and very comprehensive in the quality and discussion of\r\nthe evidence, yet was concise and outcome-driven. The ICR followed guidance and was internally\r\n\r\n Page 14 of 15\r\n\f Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Implementation Completion Report (ICR) Review\r\n MG-Emerg Supp to Critical Ed, Health, Nu (P131945)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nconsistent. The theory of change visual derived by the ICR clearly indicated how activities led to outputs, and\r\nhow outputs led to intermediate outcomes and outcomes, through the use of specific arrows leading from\r\none element to the next. The efficiency discussion was of particularly high quality: it followed current\r\nguidelines and described the assumptions and methods used in the CBA, its limitations, and the sensitivity\r\nanalysis performed in great detail; such detail is rarely seen in ICRs, thus this analysis could be considered\r\nbest practice. Derived lessons were based on the analysis and discussion of the evidence. The ICR\r\ndiscussed attribution by noting that there were no other interventions in the areas targeted by the project that\r\ncould have impacted the observed outcomes (ICR p. 14). Yet, the discussion might have benefited from\r\npresenting data on outcomes in non-targeted areas and comparing them to the results observed in project\r\nareas to make the attribution discussion stronger.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\na. Quality of ICR Rating\r\n High\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 15 of 15\r\n\f" }, "D29984645": { "id": "29984645", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Niger", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-13T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/340221528904785765/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/340221528904785765/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/340221528904785765/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399", "projectid": "P123399", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/340221528904785765/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-Safety-Net-Project-P123399", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES31851\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n NIGER SAFETY NET PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON MAY 19, 2011\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF NIGER\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & LABOR\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Soukeyna Kane\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Jehan Arulpragasam\r\n Task Team Leader: Carlo Del Ninno\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP123399 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n19-May-2011 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nRepublic of Niger Cellule Filets Sociaux, Cabinet du Premier Ministre\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe project development objective (PDO) is to establish and support an effective safety net system which will increase\r\naccess of poor and food insecure people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\nCurrent PDO\r\nThe project development objective is to establish and support an effective and adaptive safety net system that will\r\nincrease access of poor and vulnerable people to cash transfer and cash for work programs.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-D1130 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 26-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2019 22.50 14.04 8.99\r\nIDA-49200 19-May-2011 14-Jul-2011 11-Oct-2011 30-Jun-2017 68.32 62.91 0\r\nTF-A2304 07-Apr-2016 15-Apr-2016 28-Jun-2016 30-Jun-2018 8.50 5.02 3.48\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nThe project overall performance remains satisfactory at the time of the March 2018 supervision mission. The overall\r\ndisbursement rate as of April 24, 2018, was 82.44 percent (97 percent on IDA 4920-NE, 50 percent on IDA D1130 and\r\n57 percent on TF-A2304 trust funds). The project is on track to achieve its development objective. So far it has made\r\nsubstantial progress in the achievement of its key results indicators, which have already been met or exceeded. The\r\ntotal number of beneficiaries covered since the beginning of the project in all 8 regions of Niger has reached\r\napproximately 1,085,000 people (51 percent women).\r\n\r\nThe World Bank provides technical support and financial resources to the Government of Niger to establish and\r\nsupport an effective and adaptive safety nets system that will increase access of poor and vulnerable people to cash\r\ntransfers and cash for work programs. These activities contribute to making households more responsive to shocks,\r\nbuild human capital for young children, promote resilience, and foster more productive income-generating activities.\r\nThe project is also supported by the Adaptive Social Protection Program, which supports a range of related analytical\r\nactivities on poverty and vulnerability, new tools and instruments for resilience, learning from innovative approaches\r\nand impact evaluations.\r\n\r\nUnder the Adaptive Social Protection Program an emergency cash transfers was scheduled for 5,000 households. This\r\nshock responsive program was first tested in 2016 in Diffa region which is affected by the attacks from Boko Haram.\r\nThe region is under pressure from both the refugees and returnees from northern Nigeria and internally displaced\r\npopulation fleeing insecurity due to Boko Haram attacks. In response to the request from the Government of Niger,\r\n2,456 households received an emergency cash transfers in Diffa. In, 2017, the program was extended to the region of\r\nAgadez to benefit 2,500 households located in the northern regions impacted by the insecurity from Mali. The Cash\r\nfor work (CfW) activities are ongoing. Within the second phase of CfW 2017, 24 micro-project proposals were\r\ndeveloped for the benefit of 25 villages. Out of these 24 proposals, ten (10) are socio-economic infrastructure micro-\r\nprojects (class construction, housing for teachers, grain banks, cattle feed banks, health center fences, schools). The\r\nfinalization of the process of land securing for the work sites and their development is also ongoing. To promote the\r\ndevelopment of the human capital of children from poorest households, the safety nets project has supported the\r\nimplementation of the behavioral accompanying measures as part of the cash transfers component. By March 2018,\r\nthe training on Pregnancy, Childbirth and Spacing of Births was delivered in all the villages. The productive inclusion\r\nagenda is also ongoing: five out of the seven support packages planned are being implemented including (a) coaching,\r\n(b) facilitation of VSLA groups, (c) community sensitization on aspirations and social norms, (d) life skills training and\r\n(e) Basic business management skills training. The first wave of cash injection is scheduled for May 2018.\r\n\r\nRegarding the institutional support to the National Institution for the Prevention and Management of Food Crisis\r\n(Dispositif National de Prevention et de Gestion des Crises Alimentaires DNPGCA or DN), the World Bank organized a\r\nlarge consultation of all the stakeholders to reach an agreement on the terms of reference (TOR) to conduct a\r\ndiagnostic on the information system available at the Dispositif level and to help refining the World bank support. This\r\nsupport aims to assist the DN in setting up an information management center within the Permanent Secretariat,\r\nwhich ensures both the management of information on crisis situations and the monitoring and evaluation of all the\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n activities of the DNPGCA and social safety net programs. To conduct such diagnostic an international consultant plus\r\n two national consultants will be hired by the beginning of September for six months.\r\n\r\n The World Bank also provides support to the Government on the implementation of a Unified Social Registry (USR). To\r\n achieve this goal, an international consultant has been recruited in February 2017 by the World Bank. He built on the\r\n work already done within the informal working group which included the main stakeholders. A harmonized\r\n questionnaire was build considering a minimum set of variables required to implement both HEA and PMT targeting\r\n methodologies. This questionnaire was already tested by the Safety Nets Project on more than 100,000 households. A\r\n clear roadmap and a detailed action plan were provided by the consultant to allow the implementation of the USR\r\n within the next two years. Recently (April 2018), the Government has drafted two decrees to set up the technical\r\n working group and the Steering Committee on USR.\r\n\r\n In addition, large-scale evaluations have documented the effectiveness of the project in facilitating savings and\r\n investments, promoting parenting practices for early childhood development, as well as its targeting performance: (a)\r\n Impact evaluation on cash transfers and resilience; (b) Impact evaluation report on the value-added of behavioral\r\n accompanying measures to the cash transfer project; (c) Impact evaluation of cash transfers and productive inclusion;\r\n (d) Impact evaluation on cash for work component; (e) a prospective targeting assessment; and (f) a price study.\r\n Finally, the World Bank launched in April 2018 a Public Expenditure Review on Social Protection (PER). The objective of\r\n this activity is to contribute to generating the information on the financing structure of SPJ spending in Niger that\r\n policy makers need in formulating policies towards improving efficiency of existing spending and in improving fiscal\r\n sustainability of the SPL system. In 2017, a data collection for the Atlas of Social protection indicators (ASPIRE) was\r\n conducted with the objective of improving SPL data quality comparability and availability across all countries to better\r\n inform the design of SPL policies, programs, and systems. The review was completed in April 2017 and will inform the\r\n PER.\r\n\r\n As per the request from the Government of Niger dated March 30, 2018, the proposed restructuring aims to: (a)\r\n extend the closing date of TF0A2304 to June 30, 2019 to be in line with the extension of the Sahel Adaptive Social\r\n Protection Program closing date; and (b) reallocate funds between disbursement categories. By the end of April 2018,\r\n almost 83 percent of the project resources of US$101 million have been spent and the rest have been committed as of\r\n March 2018. This initial resource programming was done considering the initial closing date of the ASP MDTF which\r\n was June 2018. The extension of this closing date to June 2019 will allow the safety nets project to continue\r\n performing its activities. Indeed, the proposed reallocation will allow performing: (a) the productive accompanying\r\n measures till the end of 2018; (b) implementing cash transfer, cash for work and accompanying measures; (c) ensuring\r\n the project to reach its performance indicators and to continue its normal activities till the new safety nets project\r\n becomes effective in early 2019. This extension and reallocation will allow the project to reach all expected results.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-49200 Closed 30-Jun-2017 17-May-2018\r\nIDA-D1130 Effective 30-Jun-2019\r\nTF-A2304 Effective 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Oct-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Current\r\n Current Actuals + Proposed Disbursement %\r\nLn/Cr/TF Expenditure\r\n Allocation Committed Allocation (Type Total)\r\n Category\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\n\r\n IDA-D1130- OP COTS, GD,\r\n 001 WRK, NCS, 7,400,000.00 3,871,942.23 6,500,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n Currency: CONSULT, TR\r\n XDR GD/WRK/CONS/\r\n TR/OC PART 2,100,000.00 1,471,402.36 3,000,000.00 66.00 66.00\r\n 1.2/2.2\r\n CASH TRANSFER\r\n 4,900,000.00 2,458,119.92 4,900,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n PART 2.1\r\n GD/CS/NCS/RISK\r\n CASH TRANS P 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10\r\n 2.3\r\n CASH FOR\r\n 1,900,000.00 926,719.04 1,900,000.00 32.00 32.00\r\n WORK PART 3\r\n Total 16,300,000.00 8,728,183.55 16,300,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n TF-A2304- OP COTS, GD,\r\n 001 WRK, NCS, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10\r\n Currency: CONSULT, TR\r\n USD GD/WRK/CONS/\r\n TR/OC PART 1,500,000.00 1,023,611.50 2,000,000.00 34.00 34.00\r\n 1.2/2.2\r\n CASH TRANSFER\r\n 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10\r\n PART 2.1\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nNiger Safety Net Project (P123399)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n GD/CS/NCS/RISK\r\n CASH TRANS P 1,250,000.00 913,491.08 1,250,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n 2.3\r\n CASH FOR\r\n 5,750,000.00 2,727,185.90 5,250,000.00 68.00 68.00\r\n WORK PART 3\r\n Total 8,500,000.00 4,664,288.48 8,500,000.00\r\n\f" }, "D29979052": { "id": "29979052", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Benin", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Human development,Other rural development,Population and reproductive health,Nutrition and food security,Child health", "docdt": "2018-06-12T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/624711528800731013/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Benin-Multisectoral-Food-Health-Nutrition-Project-P143652.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/624711528800731013/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Benin-Multisectoral-Food-Health-Nutrition-Project-P143652.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/624711528800731013/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Benin-Multisectoral-Food-Health-Nutrition-Project-P143652", "projectid": "P143652", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/624711528800731013/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Benin-Multisectoral-Food-Health-Nutrition-Project-P143652", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES30306\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n BENIN MULTISECTORAL FOOD HEALTH NUTRITION PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 19, 2013\r\n TO\r\n\r\n MINISTRY OF ECONOMY AND FINANCE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Gaston Sorgho\r\n Task Team Leader: Menno Mulder-Sibanda, Jenny R. Gold\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n i\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\n\r\nGAN Nutritional Care Group\r\nMAM Moderate Acute Malnutrition or Malnutrition Aigüe Modérée\r\nPECMAC Management of Acute Community-Based Malnutrition or Prise en Charge de la Malnutrition Aigüe à base\r\n Communautaire\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPMASN Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project\r\nSANC Community-based Health, Food and Nutrition or Sante, Alimentation et Nutrition à base Communautaire\r\nSP CAN Permanent Secretariat of the National Food and Nutrition Council or Secrétariat Permanent du Conseil de\r\n l’Alimentation et de la Nutrition\r\nCCC Multisectoral Coordination Platform or Cadre Communal de Concertation\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n BENIN\r\n MULTISECTORAL FOOD HEALTH AND NUTRITION PROJECT\r\n CONTENTS\r\n\r\n\r\n Page\r\nI. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING……………………………………………………………………………………1\r\nII. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1\r\nIII. SUMMARY OF CHANGES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2\r\nIV. DETAILED CHANGES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3\r\n\r\nANNEX 1: RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING………………………………………………………………………………………………………9\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n iii\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP143652 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nNot Required (C) Not Required (C)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n19-Dec-2013 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Secretariat Permanent du Conseil de lAlimentation et de\r\nRepublic of Benin\r\n la Nutrition\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe development objective of the new project is to increase the coverage and utilization of community-based child\r\ngrowth andnutrition interventions in selected areas in the Recipient’s territory.\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-53370 19-Dec-2013 11-Feb-2014 08-Apr-2014 31-Jul-2019 28.00 17.00 8.99\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n iv\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n I. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n A. PROJECT STATUS\r\n\r\n 1. The Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (PMASN) is on track to meet its Project Development Objective\r\n (PDO), and progress is only accelerating as the project moves toward its final year. Disbursement also is on track,\r\n doubling from 29% to 65% in the last year. The project is expected to fully disburse by the July 2019 Closing Date.\r\n Further, the project will very likely exceed many of the targets for the results indicators because of the increasing\r\n intensity of the nutritional services now being delivered in communities and the extensive work done in the earlier\r\n years of the project to reinforce these services, and overcome initial delays.\r\n\r\n 2. Notably, Component 1, Policy and Program Development, and Management and Coordination has\r\n institutionalized the multisectoral coordination of nutrition policies and programs with strong government\r\n leadership, and Component 2, Community Mobilization and Service Delivery Strengthening has expanded the\r\n coverage of community-based nutrition and growth promotion services for young children across over 50% of the\r\n country. The community-based services are fully active in 40 out of the nation’s 77 districts or Communes1, and\r\n currently reach about 82% of young children in these areas. Moreover, all 77 Communes have planned nutritional\r\n activities in the new generation of their Development Plans (PDC) to ensure countrywide spillover of the project’s\r\n benefits. The 40 Communes in the project have also established multisectoral coordination platforms (i.e., “Cadre\r\n Communal de Concertation” or CCC) to deliver the nutrition and child growth promotion services.\r\n\r\n\r\n B. RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n 3. The rationale of the proposed restructuring is to make minor improvements to the Results Framework (RF) to\r\n better capture the project’s contribution to the expansion of the community-based nutritional services at the\r\n Commune level. The main change is the addition of one PDO indicator to better assess the coverage of the\r\n expanded community-based services. There are also minor revisions to several of the intermediate indicators.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1 Benin is subdivided in 12 administrative regions (Département) and 77 districts (communes). The districts are local authorities\r\nwith legal status and financial autonomy and are governed freely by an elected council. The Mayor is the head of the district.\r\n\r\n 1\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nII. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n C. RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\r\n 4. At the PDO level, the project will add one indicator to help to assess the coverage of the expanded community-\r\n based nutritional and growth promotion services attributed to the project. The project will now monitor the\r\n indicator “Nutritional Care Group (GAN) members in place for delivering community-based services (number)”.\r\n This indicator assesses the coverage of GAN to deliver services in villages, outside facility structures. The GAN\r\n network being developed through the project is critical for long-term establishment of nutrition and growth\r\n promotion services in villages. Currently, one GAN member covers about 17 households and this ratio is expected\r\n to improve to further extend coverage to remote areas.\r\n\r\n 5. The following changes will be made to the intermediate outcome indicators:\r\n (a) Indicator number 5 is revised to reduce the target for number of households having established a hand\r\n washing stations, from 15,000 to 10,000, since handwashing stations are often established in shared areas\r\n in villages, rather than at the level of each household.\r\n (b) Indicator number 7 is revised to specifically measure the participation of women with children under 5\r\n and pregnant women in education sessions, given that these are the key beneficiary groups for the\r\n project, rather than the general population.\r\n (c) Indicator number 9 is revised to specifically track the training of GAN, given the project’s reinforcement\r\n of the GAN to deliver services.\r\n (d) The project will also delete outdated Core Sector Indicators and replace them with the new Corporate\r\n Results Indicators.\r\n\r\nThe above-mentioned changes do not affect the scope of the project and don’t change the expected project outcomes.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\n Change in Results Framework ✔\r\n Change in Implementing Agency ✔\r\n Change in DDO Status ✔\r\n Change in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\n Change in Components and Cost ✔\r\n Change in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\n Cancellations Proposed ✔\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\n Change in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n 2\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Change in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\n Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\n Change of EA category ✔\r\n Change in Legal Covenants ✔\r\n Change in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Financial Management ✔\r\n Change in Procurement ✔\r\n Change in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\n Other Change(s) ✔\r\n Change in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Technical Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Social Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_RESULTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\nPDO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Children 0-23 months who benefit from a minimum package of monthly community-based growth promotion\r\n activities in targeted Communes\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 59.05 25.00 No Change\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n Women with under-five children trained and engaged in the production and transformation of diversified and\r\n nutrient-rich foods\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 352.00 9000.00 No Change\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 3\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n Children 0-5 months who are exclusively breastfed in targeted Communes\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 33.00 41.00 45.00 No Change\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 31-Mar-2015 31-Jul-2019\r\n Communes with at least 25% execution rate of their joint annual work plan\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 7.00 12.00 30.00 No Change\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n Nutritional Care Group members in place for delivering community-based services\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 10693.00 17000.00 New\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2014 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Indicators\r\nIO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Communes that disbursed funding for food and nutrition security development\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 10.00 21.00 55.00 No Change\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n Multisectoral strategy document for community-based health, food and nutrition standardizing roles and\r\n responsibilities of stakeholders\r\n Unit of Measure: Yes/No\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n\r\n 4\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue No No Yes No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\nProtocol for community management of moderate acute malnutrition finalized and validated\r\nUnit of Measure: Yes/No\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue No Yes Yes No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2017\r\nDirect project beneficiaries\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 6857417.00 8500500.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n Female beneficiaries\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Supplement\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 55.00 67.35 55.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\n\r\nHouseholds in targeted Communes which established a designated hand washing station\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 3369.00 10000.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nChildren under five with diarrhea who are treated with ORT in targeted Communes\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 5\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 54.00 33.00 65.00 No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 31-Mar-2015 31-Jul-2019\r\nWomen with children under-five and pregnant women attending community nutrition education sessions in\r\ntargeted Communes\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 56.00 75.00 70.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nSocial and Health Workers (re-)trained on CMAM\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 94.00 565.00 500.00 No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nGAN members trained in community-based nutritional services\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 67.00 80.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nChildren 6 -59 months who received a vitamin A supplement in the past 6 months\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 104.00 95.00 80.00 No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nPregnant/lactating women, adolescent girls and/or children under age five-reached by basic nutrition services\r\n(number)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n\r\n 6\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 9956454.00 8500500.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n Children between the age of 6 and 59 months receiving Vitamin A supplementation (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 9680202.00 8000000.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n Children under the age of 24 months benefiting from improved infant and young child feeding (IYCF) practices\r\n (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 44575.00 500000.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n Children under age five treated for moderate or severe acute malnutrition (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 28445.00 500.00 Marked for Deletion\r\n\r\n Date 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\nPeople who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Corporate\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 9956454.00 8000000.00 No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n Number of women and children who have received basic nutrition services\r\n\r\n 7\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Corporate Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 9956454.00 8000000.00 No Change\r\n\r\nDate 14-Nov-2013 30-Oct-2017 31-Jul-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 8\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 1 : Results Framework and Monitoring/ Cadre de Résultats et Suivi\r\n BÉNIN: Projet Multisectoriel de lAlimentation, de la Santé et de la Nutrition\r\n\r\nObjectif de Développement du Projet (ODP) : accroître la couverture et l’utilisation des interventions à base communautaire relatives à la\r\nnutrition et à la croissance des enfants dans les zones ciblées sur le territoire du bénéficiaire\r\n\r\n Unité de Valeur Description (Définition des Type de\r\nIndicateurs de Résultat de l’ODP* mesure Référence Cible Indicateurs etc.) changement\r\n\r\n Proportion d’enfants de 0 à 23 Pas de\r\nIODP#1 : Enfants de 0 à 23 mois bénéficiant\r\n mois ayant fait l’objet de suivi changement\r\nd’un paquet minimum d’activités mensuels Pourcentage 0 25\r\n de la croissance dans le mois\r\nde promotion de la croissance dans les\r\n dernier\r\nCommunes ciblées\r\n\r\nIODP#2 : Femmes ayant des enfants de La formation fait référence à un Pas de\r\nmoins de cinq ans formées et engagées dans cours authentifié. Etre engagé changement\r\n Nombre 0 9,000\r\ndes activités de production ou de fait référence à une production\r\ntransformation d’aliments diversifiés et ou transformation à petite\r\nriches en nutriments échelle d’aliments\r\nIODP#3 : Enfants de 0-6 mois qui sont Proportion des nourrissons de 0 Pas de\r\n Pourcentage 33 45\r\nexclusivement allaités au sein maternel dans à 5 mois nourris exclusivement changement\r\nles Communes ciblées au lait maternel\r\n Les plans de travail conjoint Pas de\r\nIODP#4 : Communes ayant atteint un taux\r\n sont extraits du cadre commun changement\r\nd’exécution d’au moins 25% de leur plan Nombre 7 30\r\n de résultats du CCC et validé par\r\ncommun annuel de travail\r\n le SP CAN\r\n\r\nIODP#5 : Membres des Groupes Nombre des membres des GAN Nouvel indicateur\r\nd’Assistance en Nutrition (GAN) en place dans les villages et organisés\r\n Nombre 0 17,000\r\npour fournir les services à base pour fournir les services de\r\ncommunautaire nutrition.\r\n\r\nRESULTATS INTERMEDIAIRES\r\n\r\n\r\nComposante 1 : Elaboration, gestion et coordination de politique et des programmes\r\n\r\n Nombre de Communes ayant Pas de\r\n décaissées des fonds dans leur changement\r\nIRI#1 : Communes qui décaissent des fonds\r\n Nombre 10 55 budget pour la sécurité\r\nen faveur du développement de la sécurité\r\n alimentaire et nutritionnelle au\r\nalimentaire et nutritionnelle\r\n cours du dernier exercice fiscal\r\n\r\nIRI#2 : Document de stratégie Pas de\r\n Confirmation de la finalisation\r\nmultisectorielle pour la santé, l’alimentation changement\r\n Y/N N Y et de la validation du document\r\net la nutrition à base communautaires qui\r\n de stratégie multisectoriel pour\r\nstandardise les rôles et responsabilités des\r\n la SANC\r\nacteurs\r\n Confirmation de la finalisation Pas de\r\nIRI#3 : Protocole pour la prise en charge\r\n Y/N N Y et de la validation du protocole changement\r\ncommunautaire de la malnutrition aigüe\r\n de prise en charge de la MAM\r\nmodérée (MAM) finalisé et validé\r\n au niveau communautaire\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Benin Multisectoral Food Health Nutrition Project (P143652)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComposante 2 : Mobilisation communautaire et renforcement des prestations de services\r\n\r\n Nombre, 8,500,500 Marqué pour être\r\nIRI#4: Bénéficiaires directes, dont 0\r\nféminines Pas applicable supprimé\r\n Pourcentage 50%\r\n\r\nIRI#5 : Ménages se trouvant dans les 15,000 Nombre de ménages dans les Révision de la\r\nCommunes ciblées et qui ont aménagé un Nombre 0 zones d’intervention du projet cible du 15,000 à\r\nendroit affecté au lavage des mains 10,000 ayant aménagé un endroit 10,000\r\n affecté au lavage des mains\r\n N. d’enfants de moins de 5 ans Pas de\r\nIRI#6 : Enfants de moins de 5 ans souffrant\r\n Pourcentage 54 65 ayant souffert de la diarrhée au changement\r\nde la diarrhée et traités à la TRO dans les\r\n cours des 2 dernières semaines\r\nCommunes cibles\r\n traité par la TRO\r\n Proportion de parents et Révision de\r\nIRI#7 : Personnes Femmes avec enfant moins\r\n substituts femmes avec enfant l’indicateur :\r\nde cinq ans et femmes enceinte participants\r\n Pourcentage 56 70 moins de cinq ans qui ont pris « Femmes avec\r\naux séances d’éducation nutritionnelle à\r\n part aux séances mensuelles enfant moins de 5\r\nbase communautaire dans les Communes\r\n d’éducation nutritionnelle au ans » au lieu de\r\nciblées\r\n mois dernier « Personnes »\r\nIRI#8 : Agents socio-sanitaires formés et Nombre 94 500 Nombre d’agents socio-sanitaire Pas de\r\nrecyclés en PECMAC formés ou recyclés en PECMAC changement\r\n Nombre d’agent de santé Révision de\r\n formés Nombre de membres de l’indicateur :\r\n GAN formés pour délivrer les « Membres de\r\n services de promotion de GAN formés en\r\nIRI#9 : Personnel de santé ayant reçu une\r\n Nombre 0 1,200 croissance et nutrition dans les nutrition à base\r\nformation Membres de GAN formés en\r\n villages communautaire »\r\nnutrition a base communautaire\r\n au lieu de\r\n « Personnel de\r\n santé ayant reçu\r\n une formation »\r\n Proportion d’enfants de 6 à 59 Pas de\r\nIRI#10 : Enfants de 6 à 59 mois ayant reçu un\r\n Pourcentage 104 80 mois ayant reçu un supplément changement\r\nsupplément en vitamine A au cours des 6\r\n en vitamine A au cours des 6\r\nderniers mois\r\n derniers mois\r\n N. de femmes enceintes/ Marqué pour être\r\nIRI#11 : Femmes enceints/allaitantes,\r\n allaitantes, d’adolescentes supprimé\r\nadolescentes et/ou enfants de moins de 5 Nombre 0 N/A\r\n et/ou d’enfants de moins de 5\r\nans touchés par les services de nutrition de\r\n ans touchés par les services de\r\nbase\r\n nutrition de base\r\n\f" }, "D29968621": { "id": "29968621", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Education for all,Child health,Social Protection and Labor Policy & Systems,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-07T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/283661528392075813/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/283661528392075813/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/283661528392075813/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597", "projectid": "P133597", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/283661528392075813/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES32658\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n SENEGAL SAFETY NET OPERATION\r\n APPROVED ON APRIL 29, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n MINISTERE DE L’ECONOMIE ET DES FINANCES ET DU PLAN\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & LABOR\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Louise J. Cord\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Jehan Arulpragasam\r\n Task Team Leader: Solene Marie Paule Rougeaux, Aline\r\n Coudouel\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP133597 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nNot Required (C) Not Required (C)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n29-Apr-2014 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Delegation Generale a la Protection Sociale et la\r\nMinistere de l’Economie et des Finances et du Plan\r\n Solidarite Nationale\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe development objectives of the proposed Project are to support the establishment of building blocks for the social\r\nsafety net system and to provide targeted cash transfers to poor and vulnerable households.\r\nCurrent PDO\r\nTThe objectives of the Project are to: (a) support the establishment of building blocks for the social safety net system;\r\nand (b) increase the access of poor and vulnerable households to targeted and adaptive cash transfers programs.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-54330 29-Apr-2014 30-May-2014 07-Aug-2014 30-Jun-2019 40.50 27.03 10.23\r\nTF-A2849 24-Aug-2016 08-Oct-2016 08-Oct-2016 29-Jun-2018 11.05 3.27 7.78\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n The Senegal Safety Net Operation (SNO) is progressing well. The activities are financed through IDA and subsequently\r\n through an additional financing from the Adaptive Social Protection Multi Donor Trust fund. The activities funded\r\n under the additional financing are facing delays. These delays are due to the complexity in the design of the activities\r\n (especially the productive safety nets pilot) and impact evaluation methodological constraints. , The closing date of the\r\n IDA credit is June 30, 2019 and the multi donor trust fund June 29, 2018. The project submitted the 2016 audit report\r\n in June 2017. The 2017 audit report is under preparation and will be submitted before the end of June 2018.\r\n\r\n The government requested the extension of the additional financing until the end of June 2019, in line with the\r\n existing IDA safety net operation, in a letter dated May 15th 2018. However, as the multi donor trust fund extended\r\n the country executed grants until the end of September 2019, and as an additional financing to the IDA operation\r\n would extend implementation until June 2023, it was agreed that the trust fund would be extended for 3 additional\r\n months to coincide with those dates. The extension of the multi donor trust fund will provide more time for the\r\n government to execute the grant and achieve its development objectives\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-54330 Effective 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019 30-Oct-2019\r\nTF-A2849 Effective 29-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019 30-Jan-2020\r\n\f" }, "D32028885": { "id": "32028885", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Mauritania", "docty": "Report", "theme": "Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Climate change,Nutrition and food security,Other social protection and risk management", "docdt": "2018-06-01T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Publications & Research,Publications & Research", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/233171589379619244/pdf/Analyse-des-Determinants-de-la-Vulnerabilit-des-Systemes-Pastoraux-et-leur-Implication-sur-les-Menages-Pastoraux-et-le-Travail-des-Enfants-dans-l-Assaba-le-Guidimakha-le-Hodh-El-Chargui-et-Le-Hodh-El-Gharbi.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/233171589379619244/text/Analyse-des-Determinants-de-la-Vulnerabilit-des-Systemes-Pastoraux-et-leur-Implication-sur-les-Menages-Pastoraux-et-le-Travail-des-Enfants-dans-l-Assaba-le-Guidimakha-le-Hodh-El-Chargui-et-Le-Hodh-El-Gharbi.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/233171589379619244/Analyse-des-Determinants-de-la-Vulnerabilit-des-Systemes-Pastoraux-et-leur-Implication-sur-les-Menages-Pastoraux-et-le-Travail-des-Enfants-dans-l-Assaba-le-Guidimakha-le-Hodh-El-Chargui-et-Le-Hodh-El-Gharbi", "projectid": "P153182", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/233171589379619244/Analyse-des-Determinants-de-la-Vulnerabilit-des-Systemes-Pastoraux-et-leur-Implication-sur-les-Menages-Pastoraux-et-le-Travail-des-Enfants-dans-l-Assaba-le-Guidimakha-le-Hodh-El-Chargui-et-Le-Hodh-El-Gharbi", "doc-text": " Analyse des déterminants de la vulnérabilité des systèmes\r\n pastoraux et leur implication sur les ménages pastoraux et le\r\n travail des enfants dans l’Assaba, le Guidimakha, le Hodh El\r\nRAPPORT FINAL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Chargui et le Hodh El Gharbi\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Mohamed El Moctar Ould Mohamed AHMED (RIMRAP-UE/UCAD)\r\n Francesco CECON (Save the Children)\r\n Saidou Ousman BA (Save the Children)\r\n Henri LETURQUE (BM/IRAM)\r\n Bertrand GUIBERT (RIMRAP-UE/IRAM) Juin 2018\r\n\r\n Institut de Recherche et\r\n Unité Conseil appui au\r\n Version provisoire le 20 avril 2018\r\n d’Application des Méthodes de\r\n\r\n Développement : 49 Rue de la UCAD Développement :28 avenue\r\n\r\n\r\n Glacière 75013 Paris France, Conseil Faycal Ibn Abdel Nouakchott\r\n\r\n Mauritanie, tel : 222 45 04 22 88,\r\n Tel :33144086767,\r\n email : ucadconseil@yahoo.fr\r\n email :iram@iram.fr.org\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 1\r\n\f Sommaire\r\n Avertissement ................................................................................................................................... 5\r\n Remerciements ................................................................................................................................. 5\r\n\r\n\r\n1. Résumé ....................................................................................................................... 6\r\n\r\n2. Objectifs, méthode et déroulement ............................................................................ 8\r\n\r\n 2.1. Rappel des termes de référence........................................................................................ 8\r\n 2.2. Quelques éléments de cadrage en début de mission ..................................................... 8\r\n 2.3. Déroulement de la mission ............................................................................................... 8\r\n 2.4. Structure du document ...................................................................................................... 9\r\n3. Diagnostic général.................................................................................................... 10\r\n\r\n 3.1. Contexte général, politique et stratégique ..................................................................... 10\r\n 3.2. Place du secteur de l’élevage dans l’économie nationale ............................................ 12\r\n 3.3. Contexte du secteur rural dans les régions cibles ........................................................ 13\r\n 3.4. Diversité des systèmes d’élevage et évolutions récentes ............................................ 15\r\n 3.5. Problématiques sanitaires et sociales ............................................................................. 25\r\n 3.6. Catégorisation des ménages ............................................................................................ 38\r\n 3.7. Expositions aux risques ................................................................................................... 48\r\n 3.8. Synthèse générale par système ........................................................................................ 51\r\n 3.9. Adéquation du registre social avec la situation socio-économique des ménages\r\n pastoraux et agro-pastoraux ......................................................................................................... 53\r\n4. Conclusions et recommandations ......................................................................... 58\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 2\r\n\f Annexes\r\nAnnexe 1 : Termes de référence de la mission .......................................................................... 63\r\nAnnexe 2 : Bibliographie consultée ............................................................................................. 69\r\nAnnexe 3 : Calendrier de la mission et institutions rencontrées ............................................. 72\r\nAnnexe 4 : Liste des personnes rencontrées .............................................................................. 75\r\nAnnexe 5 : Liste des projets dans les quatre régions ................................................................ 78\r\nAnnexe 6 : Quelques faits historiques marquants ..................................................................... 79\r\nAnnexe 7 : Esquisse de la liste des tribus et des alliances ........................................................ 80\r\nAnnexe 8 : Catégorisation détaillée des ménages selon les 3 types de systèmes .................. 82\r\nAnnexe 9 : Correspondance des typologies des systèmes et des ménages proposées avec\r\nune catégorisation détaillée des systèmes d’élevage (IEPC, 2002).......................................... 90\r\nAnnexe 10 : Type de système dominant dans les communes couvertes par le Registre\r\nSocial ................................................................................................................................................ 91\r\nAnnexe 11 : Analyse comparative du filtre bétail actuellement utilisé par le programme\r\nTekavoul et d’un filtre reposant sur les propositions de catégorisation des systèmes et des\r\nménages présentées dans ce rapport. .......................................................................................... 93\r\nAnnexe 12 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux services de santé dans les\r\nrégions couvertes par le RIMRAP. .............................................................................................. 97\r\nAnnexe 13 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux services d’éducation formelle\r\ndans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP. ............................................................................. 103\r\nAnnexe 14 : Listes de sigles et des abréviations ...................................................................... 107\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 3\r\n\f Table des illustrations\r\nTableau 1 : Calendrier de la mission de terrain ........................................................................... 9\r\nTableau 2: Régions (wilayas) concernées et indicateurs démographiques et agraires .......... 13\r\nTableau 3 : Grandes évolutions des élevages et des pratiques ................................................ 22\r\nTableau 4 : Catégorisation des éleveurs grands transhumants ................................................ 45\r\nTableau 5 : Catégorisation des agro-pasteurs et agro-Eleveurs............................................... 46\r\nTableau 6: Catégorisation des éleveurs péri-urbains ................................................................. 46\r\nTableau 7: Synthèse des risques, résiliences et perspectives de dialogue politique en vue de\r\nl’aménagement du territoire par grand système......................................................................... 52\r\nTableau 8: Evolution du nombre de localités habitées de 2000 à 2013 ................................. 54\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 1: Unités éco pastorales (PRAPS, 2017)......................................................................... 20\r\nFigure 2: Cartographie des zones de moyens dexistence ........................................................ 21\r\nFigure 3 : Carte des acteurs du pastoralisme aux échelles régional-national ......................... 25\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 4\r\n\fAvertissement\r\nLes constatations, interprétations et conclusions exprimées dans le présent document sont\r\ncelles de ses auteurs et ne reflètent pas nécessairement le point de vue de la République de\r\nMauritanie, de la Commission Européenne, du Groupe de la Banque mondiale, de son Con-\r\nseil dadministration ou des gouvernements quils représentent. La République de Mauritanie,\r\nde la Commission Européenne, la Banque mondiale ne garantit pas lexactitude, la fiabilité ou\r\nlexhaustivité du contenu inclus dans ce travail et naccepte aucune responsabilité pour toute\r\nomission ou erreur (y compris, sans sy limiter, les erreurs typographiques et techniques) dans\r\nle contenu de quelque nature que ce soit.\r\n\r\nRemerciements\r\nLa mission IRAM – UCAD - Save the Children tient à remercier de leur collaboration et de\r\nleur disponibilité tout au long du calendrier d’échanges les nombreux acteurs rencontrés :\r\ncadres des ministères et agences nationales concernés et du Registre Social, les organisations\r\nprofessionnelles, les représentants de différents projets et ONG ainsi que les partenaires\r\nfinanciers, dont en premier lieu la DUE, la Banque mondiale et bien sûr l’équipe du Pro-\r\ngramme RIMRAP et celle du bureau UCAD-conseil avec lesquelles qui nous avons large-\r\nment partagé les constats et les observations et échangé sur les analyses faites ci-après.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 5\r\n\f1. Résumé\r\nL’objectif poursuivi par cette étude était de mettre en exergue les caractéristiques sociales et\r\néconomiques des ménages dont le pastoralisme constitue le principal moyen d’existence et de\r\ncomprendre les contraintes d’accès de ces ménages aux services de bases, dont le système de\r\nprotection sociale.\r\n\r\nTrois grands systèmes d’élevages ont été mis en exergue : (1) Les systèmes transhumants\r\npastoraux, post nomades : dominante cameline, dominante bovine ou petits ruminants selon\r\nles zones, cas particuliers des systèmes commerciaux, et ceux de « prestige-luxe » (2) Les sys-\r\ntèmes agro pastoraux ou agro éleveurs de plus ou moins grande amplitude, (3) Les systèmes\r\npéri urbains ou en proximité des routes (plus ou moins en lien avec les autres systèmes). Une\r\ndiversité de sous-systèmes existe apportant des nuances en termes d’effectifs d’espèces (do-\r\nminante cameline ou de ruminants : petits et grands) et de types de tactiques d’élevage (desti-\r\nnée à la vente, etc.). La description des trois grands systèmes souligne les points suivants et\r\ndes pistes de solutions.\r\n\r\nPour les grands transhumants, la mission relève une faible accessibilité des parcours (conflits,\r\nproblème d’accès à l’eau). Cette réalité se couple avec une perte de savoirs (capacité à\r\ntranshumer) et ainsi que d’une baisse de valorisation des espaces-ressources, notamment liée\r\nà la faible disponibilité en points d’eau. Ces systèmes sont marqués par un faible accès au\r\nservice de base des pasteurs, notamment une scolarisation insuffisante des filles, et un accès\r\nrare à la santé animale et humaine. L’inclusion citoyenne reste faible, ce tte donnée devra être\r\nprise en compte par la plateforme. Enfin, la stagnation économique et commerciale de ses\r\nsystèmes provient du manque d’infrastructures de vente mais aussi de manque de promotion\r\net de label des produits animaux qui en sont issus. Une synergie est attendue avec le PRAPS\r\n(C3), le RIMRAP-RIMFIL et le PRODEFI.\r\n\r\nLes zones agro-pastorales voient se multiplier les barrières à la mobilité. La diffusion de lois\r\net décrets, d’accords et conventions locales et transfrontalières est insuffisante ou inexistante\r\nselon les cas. Cette difficulté devra être comblée par des actions communes avec le PRAPS\r\n(C2) et le RIMDIR, en particulier. Concernant les tracasseries et les tensions entre certains\r\nacteurs, des animations ciblées et des informations sur les droits, sur l’appui aux organisa-\r\ntions, doivent permettre d’améliorer les mobilités avec l’aide du PRAPS (C4) et du RIMFIL.\r\nAu sujet de la stagnation économique pour ces systèmes, là également des infrastructures, un\r\nmécanisme d’aliment bétail, et des innovations sur les produits animaux sont attendus.\r\n\r\nPour les systèmes périurbains, il est mis en évidence une faible productivité (baisse des res-\r\nsources, déséquilibre alimentaire, désorganisation de la filière aliment bétail). Par ailleurs, les\r\nsoins vétérinaires sont largement insatisfaits. De plus, on note une faible valorisation des\r\nproduits liée à une organisation peu performante des transformations de produits et d’un\r\nenvironnement peu favorable (bancarisation faible, animation limitée, information ineffi-\r\ncace). Des connexions sont attendues avec le PRAPS (C3), le RIMFIL et le PRODEFI.\r\n\r\nIl est ensuite présenté une analyse de l’accès aux services de base (et notamment éducation et\r\nsanté) selon ces différents milieux. L’accès à ces services est très limité en milieu pastoral, ce\r\nqui constitue un des facteurs important de stagnation économique des ménages. Les implica-\r\ntions et risques associés au travail des enfants dans le cadre de la conduite des activités pasto-\r\n 6\r\n\frales sont détaillés. Néanmoins, cette implication conditionne la transmission des savoirs et la\r\nreproduction des systèmes pastoraux.\r\n\r\nPar ailleurs l’étude propose une analyse des critères et des facteurs de différentiation des mé-\r\nnages au sein des trois grands systèmes répertoriés. Sur cette base, une typologie des ménages\r\nau sein de chaque système est proposée. L’analyse croisée entre systèmes, catégories de mé-\r\nnages, et évaluation des risques permet de mettre en évidence un certain nombre de perspec-\r\ntives de dialogue en vue de renforcer la résilience des systèmes et ménages pastoraux.\r\n\r\nLes implications de cette analyse des systèmes et des ménages pastoraux pour la prise en\r\ncompte des problématiques pastorales par les Registre Social (registre social) sont analysées et\r\ndiscutées. Dans une certaine mesure, le processus de construction du registre social est atten-\r\ntif à la saisonnalité des mouvements de population liés aux activités pastorales, mais cette\r\nattention pourrait être renforcée. Les choix des critères de ciblage communautaire tiennent\r\ncompte des principaux facteurs de vulnérabilité pastorale. Néanmoins, les outils développés\r\ndans le cadre de la construction du registre social ne tiennent pas compte des pratiques de\r\nconfiage des animaux de la diversité des modes de gestion des troupeaux. Enfin une analyse\r\ncomparée du « filtre bétail » et d’un prototype de filtre alternatif basé sur l’analyse des sys-\r\ntèmes et des catégories de ménages détaillées dans ce rapport souligne l’utilité d’une concep-\r\ntion de filtres spécifiques à chaque zone de moyen d’existence dominant.\r\n\r\nEnfin, quatre séries de recommandations sont formulées (1) Disponibilité et règles d’accès\r\naux services (eau – y compris pastorale, santé humaine et animale, éducation, etc…). (2)\r\nHarmonisation et coordination des actions d’appui à la productivité et aux chaines de valeur\r\nautour des services techniques de l’élevage dans les régions et dans les préfectures. (3) Re-\r\ngistre social et filets sociaux - calendrier de mise en œuvre à adapter en fonction des périodes\r\nde mobilité, questionnaires de vérification à adapter pour tenir compte des pratiques de con-\r\nfiage et de la diversité des modes de gestion. (4) Protection des enfants : approfondissement\r\nde la problématique et des enjeux par des concertations (plateforme) et des études complé-\r\nmentaires sur les mécanismes endogènes de protection.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 7\r\n\f2. Objectifs, méthode et déroulement\r\n2.1. Rappel des termes de référence\r\nL’objectif poursuivi par cette étude était de mettre en exergue les caractéristiques sociales et écono-\r\nmiques des ménages dont le pastoralisme constitue le principal moyen d’existence et de com-\r\nprendre les contraintes d’accès de ces ménages aux services de bases, dont le système de protection\r\nsociale.\r\n\r\nFace à cet objectif, l’analyse s’est appuyée sur les différents travaux réalisés en Mauritanie en\r\nlien avec la vulnérabilité et la résilience des élevages pastoraux ; diagnostic récents réalisés\r\ndans le cadre du RIMRAP (ONG) et du PRAPS (diagnostics pastoraux par UEP) notam-\r\nment, étude Initiative élevage pauvreté et croissance (RIM-FAO 2002), systèmes d’élevage\r\ndans le Hodh el Gharbi (VSF, 2000), pastoralisme et sécurité alimentaire (RESAL UE,\r\n1998)…\r\n\r\nCette analyse traduit le souhait d’alimenter les échanges et le dialogue sectoriel entre acteurs de la plate-\r\nforme de dialogue sectoriel. Elle doit permettre d’approfondir les réflexions prospectives sur les\r\npriorités de renforcement de la résilience des systèmes pastoraux particulièrement vulné-\r\nrables.\r\n\r\nPar ailleurs, il était demandé de présenter des recommandations générales pour faciliter\r\nl’intégration des ménages pastoraux dans les programmes / projets développés par les co m-\r\nmanditaires de l’étude (définition d’actions structurantes et résilientes, définition de modalités\r\nd’interventions permettant de réduire la pénibilité et l’intensité du travail des enfants, définition\r\nd’actions ou de processus ad hoc aux méthodes existantes pour identifier les ménages pauvres et\r\nleur apporter un appui de base).\r\n\r\nLes termes de référence détaillés sont présentés en annexe n° 1.\r\n\r\n2.2. Quelques éléments de cadrage en début de mission\r\nUne réunion de cadrage de la mission s’est tenue à la DUE le lundi 16 mars 2018 en présence\r\ndu chargé de programme Agriculture, Elevage et Sécurité Alimentaire. Les objectifs de la\r\nmission et la méthodologie envisagée ont été présentés ce qui a donné lieu à l’exposé du con-\r\ntenu synthétique d’une note méthodologique de démarrage (méthodologie, ébauche de ca-\r\nlendrier de terrain, liste des contacts envisagés, cadrage du questionnement, point bibliogra-\r\nphique).\r\n\r\n2.3. Déroulement de la mission\r\nLa mission de terrain en Mauritanie s’est déroulée du 26 mars au 15 avril suivant les étapes\r\ndéfinies dans les termes de référence en adaptant le programme proposé en fonction des\r\nréalités de terrain (possibilités et disponibilités de rendez-vous avec les parties prenantes).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 8\r\n\fTableau 1 : Calendrier de la mission de terrain\r\n Activités 25-mars 26-mars 27-mars 28-mars 29-mars 30-mars 31-mars 01-avr 02-avr 03-avr 04-avr 05-avr 06-avr 07-avr 08-avr 09-avr 10-avr 11-avr 12-avr 13-avr 14-avr\r\n\r\n Arrivée\r\n\r\nDebriefing DUE\r\n Rencontres\r\n partenaires\r\n Présentation\r\nnote de cadrage\r\ndocumentation\r\n\r\n Terrain Ayoun\r\n\r\n Terrain Nema\r\n\r\n Terrain Kiffa\r\n\r\nTerrain Selibabi\r\n Préparation et\r\nprésentation des\r\n propositions\r\n\r\nFin de la mission\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nLa mission était composée au départ de Bertrand GUIBERT, agro-pastoraliste, chef de mis-\r\nsion de l’IRAM, Henri LETURQUE expert en filets sociaux de l’IRAM mobilisé par la Banque\r\nmondiale et de Mohamed El Moctar Mohamed Ould HAMED, consultant socio-pastoraliste\r\nde l’UCAD Conseil. Après une séance de briefing effectuée à Nouakchott avec Dr Abder\r\nBENDERDOUCHE (chef de mission du Programme RIMRAP), une première réunion de brie-\r\nfing a eu lieu à la DUE en présence du Chargé de Programme Agriculture et Elevage, le lundi\r\n26 mars, suivie par des échanges électroniques avec les représentants de la Banque mondiale,\r\net le 27 en direct avec l’équipe de Save the Children. Il y a eu ensuite des échanges avec les par-\r\nties prenantes du Ministère de l’Élevage (DPSEC), le 27 mars. Le terrain sur les wilayas a pu\r\nse tenir avec le couplage de deux consultants additionnels de Save the Children, Francesco CE-\r\nCON et Saidou Ousman BA, sur Kiffa (Assaba) et Sélibabi (Guidimaka). Après les investiga-\r\ntions progressives de la documentation disponible (annexe 2) et les échanges avec les per-\r\nsonnes et institutions rencontrées (voir annexes 4 et 3, respectivement), les conclusions et\r\npropositions de la mission ont été présentées lors de la réunion du vendredi 13 avril 2018 à la\r\nBanque Mondiale, en présence des différentes parties prenantes.\r\n\r\nLe déroulement de la mission s’est situé à la conjonction de plusieurs diffic ultés : sécheresse\r\névidente pour cette campagne avec une difficulté de trouver les transhumants partis préco-\r\ncement en transhumance au sud, rencontres de pasteurs en difficulté, à la recherche d’aliment\r\nde bétail et d’aide, peu enclins à discuter. De plus, la mission a coïncidé avec la campagne\r\npolitique d’adhésion à un parti, mobilisant certains leaders locaux, concomitamment à la mi s-\r\nsion.\r\n\r\n2.4. Structure du document\r\nLe présent rapport s’organise en trois grands chapitres, hors annexes :\r\n  Cette première partie introductive ;\r\n  Les principaux diagnostics (systèmes d’élevage, catégorisation des ménages, risques et\r\n résilience des acteurs, etc.) et avec un traitement simultané du questionnement spéci-\r\n fique indiqué dans les termes de références ;\r\n  Les recommandations.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 9\r\n\f3. Diagnostic général\r\n3.1.1. Contexte général, politique et stratégique1\r\n\r\nAu cours des quinze dernières années (2001-2015), le taux annuel de croissance économique\r\nréelle en Mauritanie a été en moyenne de 4,5%. Celle-ci a été portée principalement par les\r\nactivités extractives, les Bâtiments et Travaux Publics (BTP), les transports et communica-\r\ntions et par les services. Cette croissance a été davantage soutenue au cours des cinq der-\r\nnières années (2011-2015) enregistrant ainsi un taux réel estimé à 5,2%, tirée principalement\r\npar la vitalité du secteur du BTP en liaison avec le développement des infrastructures, consé-\r\nquence d’un programme d’investissement public intensif (les investissements publics sont\r\npassés de 23% du budget de l’État en 2009 à 43% en 2015) et de la hausse des prix des mine-\r\nrais de fer, de cuivre et de l’or sur les marchés internationaux. Cette tendance économique\r\nfavorable a été interrompue en 2015 et 2016, notamment du fait de l’effondrement des cours\r\nmondiaux du fer, atteignant son niveau le plus bas début 2016. Le retour actuel de la crois-\r\nsance à un taux annuel proche de 4% desserre les contraintes sur les finances publiques con-\r\nnues pendant des années 2015-2017.\r\n\r\nLe secteur primaire (agriculture, élevage, pêche, exploitation forestière), représentant en\r\nmoyenne 31% du Produit Intérieur Brut (PIB) entre 2001 et 2015, a enregistré une croissance\r\nd’environ 2,7% sur la période avec des fluctuations irrégulières, suite aux contreperformances\r\nrésultant des facteurs climatiques. Il constitue l’un des piliers de l’économie mauritanienne,\r\ngénérant des emplois pour environ 28% de la population active en 2013, selon les données\r\ndu dernier recensement général de la population (RGPH).\r\n\r\nMalgré sa place occupée dans l’économie, la spécificité du secteur primaire reste trop insuffi-\r\nsamment considérée à sa juste place. En effet, l’alimentation commune mauritanienne est\r\nmarquée par un mode de vie pastoral dans un milieu aride. Cette lecture singulière reconnait,\r\nau moins dans l’inconscient collectif, les mutations des modes alimentaires liés à cette spéci-\r\nficité. Le lait, la viande rouge, issus de l’élevage pastoral diversifié (espaces et races spéc i-\r\nfiques), les céréales (mil, sorgho, maïs) et la datte sont les principaux piliers de l’alimentat ion.\r\nÀ cela et par le biais d’échanges ancestraux de migrations de populations et de mutations liés\r\naux aléas climatiques sahéliens, se greffent la cueillette des produits de brousse (gomme ara-\r\nbique, par ex.) et la pratique du maraîchage.\r\n\r\nLes filières lait, viande (excédentaire), céréale et datte constituent donc un ensemble qui réu-\r\nnit les mauritaniens dans le renforcement de leur identité. Les représentations symboliques de\r\nces filières sont de nature à stimuler la fierté nationale et ainsi à doper leur plus grande inclu-\r\nsion dans le marché national en vue d’atteindre la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle, tout\r\nen s’ouvrant au monde globalisé et inter connecté.\r\n\r\nLe taux de croissance moyen annuel de la population de l’ordre de 3% au début des années\r\n1980 demeure élevé et serait encore proche de 2,5% aujourd’hui. Mais le phénomène majeur\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1 Ce chapitre reprend en partie la situation décrite dans les rapports de formulation du RIMDIR (fév.\r\n 2017) et du RIMFIL (avril 2017), pour le RIRAP, rédigés par IRAM-UCAD Conseils.\r\n\r\n 10\r\n\fconcerne le processus d’urbanisation accéléré que connait la population Mauritanienne : de\r\nmoins de 10% au début des années 1960 à près de 60% aujourd’hui, le niveau d’urbanisation\r\nde la population mauritanienne est proche de celui des pays du Maghreb. La population reste\r\nmarquée par la continuité du phénomène de fixation principalement urbaine, parfois tempo-\r\nraire, des éleveurs et agro-pasteurs vers les centres villes (Kiffa, Ayoûn, Sélibabi et Néma\r\npour la zone considérée, en plus de la capitale). En effet, la part de la population nomade\r\ndans la population nationale a effectivement connu une baisse continue en passant de 36,4%\r\nen 1977 à 12,1% en 1988 et 1,9% en 2013. Il s’agit bien d’un phénomène majeur.\r\n\r\nSelon les chiffres de la SCAPP (2016-2020), on note une forte et rapide réduction de la part\r\nde la population nationale travaillant dans le secteur de l’agriculture et de l’élevage, secteurs\r\nreprésentant plus de 50% de l’emploi à la fin des années 1980 (avec une part de l’agriculture\r\ndominante) à moins de 25% en 2013. Bien que ces deux activités soient en partie exercées\r\npar les mêmes actifs, c’est surtout la proportion des emplois dans l’agriculture qui aurait d i-\r\nminué alors que la part des emplois associés à l’élevage est beaucoup plus stable (ce qui en\r\nnombre d’emplois correspond à une augmentation). Dans le même temps les emplois dans\r\nles autres secteurs du commerce, du BTP, et industries manufacturières ont fortement aug-\r\nmenté.\r\n\r\nAu plan social, des avancées importantes ont été enregistrées puisque le taux national de\r\npauvreté monétaire est passé de 51% en 2000, 46% en 2004, 42% en 2008 puis 31% en 2014.\r\nLa pauvreté monétaire en Mauritanie reste particulièrement importante dans les régions sahé-\r\nliennes (49% de la population incluse dans les régions du Tagant et du Guidimakha mais\r\nseulement 14% dans les villes de Nouakchott et Nouadhibou) et elle est généralement accen-\r\ntuée chez les agriculteurs (59,6%) et chez les éleveurs (41,8%), particulièrement là où les fa-\r\nmilles dépendent de l’agriculture pluviale et du petit élevage. Ces deux activités ne bénéficient\r\ngénéralement pas des principaux investissements productifs publics, concentrés davantage\r\nsur les systèmes agraires consacrés à l’agriculture irriguée.\r\n\r\nMais la succession de crises multiformes renforce le maintien d’une population de pa ysans\r\nsans terre dans les régions proches des aménagements hydro-agricoles de plus en plus vé-\r\ntustes et inadaptés… La résultante de cette crise se traduit par un appauvrissement d’une\r\npartie de la population et une plus grande vulnérabilité de fait d’une frange oubliée de la p o-\r\npulation.\r\n\r\nCette pauvreté chronique mauritanienne se trouve donc, soit en périphérie des villes\r\nmoyennes ou en capitale, soit dans les zones agricoles paradoxalement assez riches. Ces der-\r\nnières constituent des zones d’accueil massif de population qui deviennent, en années défic i-\r\ntaires, des territoires d’expression de la pauvreté. Ces pauvres chroniques cherchent alors par\r\ntous les moyens de diversifier leurs revenus, poursuivant ainsi des aventures de survie. La\r\npauvreté touche les populations les plus vulnérables dans l’échelle sociale (cadets sociaux,\r\nfamilles monoparentales, prolétariat rural dans les zones irriguées, mais également les popula-\r\ntions « déracinées »). Ces dernières n’ont plus les réseaux sociaux activés et se trouvent sans\r\ncapital social, sans trésorerie de secours mobilisable traditionnellement au sein de la famille\r\nélargie. Pour ces populations déshéritées, les alternatives individuelles restent la diversifica-\r\ntion des stratégies de risques : location de sa force de travail, trafic en tous genres, mendicité\r\net prostitution… L’exode reste, bien sûr, un ultime recours, même si le risque est grand (les\r\névénements dramatiques dans les tentatives d’émigration transcontinentale le confirment tous\r\nles jours). En effet, pour beaucoup de familles mauritaniennes pauvres, l’espoir de survie\r\n\r\n 11\r\n\fréside dans le fait d’avoir au moins un membre de la famille en situation d’émigré au G abon,\r\naux USA ou bien en Europe (ancrage de futures ramifications de diasporas). Les transferts\r\nfinanciers liés à l’exode prouvent d’ailleurs ce phénomène important dans l’économie natio-\r\nnale…\r\n\r\nLa nouvelle Stratégie de Croissance Accélérée et de Prospérité Partagée (SCAPP 2016-2020),\r\nadoptée début 2018, remplace le précédent Cadre Stratégique de Lutte contre la Pauvreté\r\n(CSLP, 2001-2015). Cette Stratégie nationale vise notamment d’ici 2030 à éliminer la faim,\r\nd’assurer la sécurité alimentaire, d’améliorer la nutrition et de promouvoir l’agriculture du-\r\nrable. La priorité sera donnée à la culture du riz et du blé afin de réduire le recours à\r\nl’importation des céréales. Pour l’élevage, d’ici à 2030, l’objectif est de doubler la productivité\r\net les revenus des éleveurs et de couvrir, au minimum, les besoins du pays en lait, en viande\r\nrouge et en volaille.\r\n\r\nPour l’intérieur du pays, la SCAPP prévoit que l’agriculture de subsistance, l’exploitation des\r\nproduits forestiers et la culture oasienne soient optimisées, notamment par la « mise à ni-\r\nveau » des exploitations familiales et par une meilleure commercialisation des produits. Des\r\nefforts soutenus devront être déployés dans le domaine de la compétitivité des filières, no-\r\ntamment par la mise en place d’infrastructures de transformation et de commercialisation et\r\nl’appui aux producteurs (exploitations familiales, micros, petites et moyennes entreprises). Il\r\nest aussi prévu que les superficies en culture hivernale et de contre saison augmentent de plus\r\nde 20%.\r\n\r\nDans cette présentation, diffusée de la SCAPP et préparée par le MEF, le Gouvernement\r\nmauritanien a ainsi défini sa politique stratégique de Développement Rural à l’horizon 2020.\r\nCette directive doit orienter les actions du Gouvernement dans ce secteur et au travers des\r\ndifférents financements (PIN du 11e FED, prêts et programme de la Banque Mondiale,\r\nautres financements, etc.).\r\n\r\n3.2. Place du secteur de l’élevage dans l’économie nationale\r\nLa Sécurité Alimentaire et Nutritionnelle et l’Agriculture Durable (SANAD) est le premier\r\nsecteur de concentration (78 M€) de la coopération entre l’Union Européenne et la Répu-\r\nblique Islamique de Mauritanie pour la période 2014-2020 dans le cadre du Plan Indicatif\r\nNational (PIN) du 11e FED (178 M€). Par ailleurs, la Banque Mondiale investi dans le pasto-\r\nralisme à travers le Projet Régional d’Appui au Pastoralisme au Sahel (PRAPS) exécuté de\r\n2016 à 2021 dans 6 pays de la région, et pour environ 45 millions de $ en Mauritanie\r\n\r\nÀ l’instar des autres secteurs productifs ruraux (agriculture, pêche), l’élevage évolue dans un\r\ncontexte de changement climatique. L’action du Gouvernement s’inscrit dans la droite ligne\r\ndes stratégies nationales (Stratégie Nationale de Sécurité Alimentaire : SNSA 2011-2015, Stra-\r\ntégie du Développement Rural à l’horizon 2020) et de la récente Loi d’Orientation Agro-\r\nPastorale (LOAP) et restera fidèle aux recommandations des récentes (i) Revue Institution-\r\nnelle du Secteur Agricole et Pastoral (RISAP), et (ii) Revue Institutionnelle du Secteur de\r\nl’Environnement (RISE) d’octobre 2010.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 12\r\n\f3.3. Contexte du secteur rural dans les régions cibles\r\nL’Étude se concentre sur quatre régions ou wilayas de la région sahélienne et saharo-\r\nsahélienne du Sud-Est (Assaba, Guidimakha, Hodh Ech Chargui, Hodh el Gharbi).\r\n\r\nAu-delà du phénomène d’urbanisation centré sur les pôles urbains ruraux (le recensement\r\n2013 souligne que 33 à 55% des habitants des 4 régions vivraient dans des localités de plus de\r\n1.000 habitants), les vocations agricoles, pastorales et sylvicoles restent encore primordiales et\r\nse trouvent fortement interconnectées à ces pôles de croissance. L’importance numérique des\r\npopulations qui y vivent est assez élevée puisqu’avec un total de 1.317.703 hab itants, elles\r\nconcentrent plus de 37% de la population mauritanienne (RGPH, 2013). Ces régions font\r\npartie des zones les plus pauvres du pays.\r\n\r\nTableau 2: Régions (wilayas) concernées et indicateurs démographiques et agraires\r\n\r\n % de la population Systèmes agraires do-\r\n Région (wilaya) Population totale\r\n nationale minants\r\n\r\n Hodh El Chargui 430.668 12,1% Pastoral\r\n\r\n Hodh El Gharbi 294.109 8,3% Pastoral et oasien\r\n\r\n Assaba 325.897 9,2% Pastoral et oasien\r\n\r\n Guidimakha 267.029 7,5% Agro pastoral\r\n\r\n Total 4 Wilayas 1.317.703 37,2%\r\n\r\nRappelons que le pays importe la majorité de son alimentation, tandis quon estime que 70%\r\ndes terres cultivées sont mal ou pas aménagées. Par ailleurs, grâce à des dynamiques diverses,\r\ndes bassins de production émergent autour de spéculations intéressantes (ruminants en voie\r\nde finition, collecte de lait, oignon, tomate, niébé, par exemple) mais le manque\r\nd’infrastructure, d’appui conseil et de financements adaptés freine la collecte ou la transfor-\r\nmation et, in fine, la perspective d’une vente rémunératrice. Des quantités conséquentes de\r\nproduction sont ainsi perdues, ou mal valorisées pour l’économie locale.\r\n\r\nMalgré un secteur informel assez dynamique, la désorganisation économique accentue\r\nl’exclusion des plus pauvres dans la croissance pourtant déclarée visible au niveau national2.\r\nL’éloignement (ou le coût trop élevé) des services productifs tels que l’électricité, l’eau cou-\r\nrante, les matières premières handicapent le développement d’un secteur artisanal et de m i-\r\ncros entreprises transformatrices (conservation et conditionnement de lait, atelier de viande\r\nséchée, etc.), représentant pourtant une alternative possible pour les exclus du foncier. La\r\ntrop faible présence de systèmes financiers décentralisés3 prive les plus pauvres d’une trésore-\r\n\r\n\r\n2 En effet, les taux de croissance affichés se situent régulièrement en dessus de 5%. Mais quelles activités\r\n et populations concernent-elles ?\r\n3 Les banques commerciales ne prêtent pas aux vulnérables et les quelques systèmes de micro crédits en\r\n direction des populations n’exigeant pas de garanties matérielles, sont encore insuffisants dans les quatre\r\n régions (2 à 3 institutions de micro finances sur la dizaine de structures reconnues par la Banque centrale\r\n et réellement actives en milieu rural en Mauritanie et des agences de banques commerciales seulement\r\n présentes dans les chefs-lieux des régions).\r\n\r\n 13\r\n\frie indispensable pour se lancer dans les affaires, même à un faible niveau d’investissement\r\n(transformation ou commerce de tout petit détail). L’endettement des plus pauvres, les taux\r\nusuraires élevés, une productivité du travail toujours plus restreinte, dans une économie de\r\nplus en plus mondialisée, ne rendent pas compétitives les activités de la grande majorité de la\r\npopulation rurale. Fuir son village pour aller, soit au bord du fleuve, soit dans la tentaculaire\r\npériphérie de Nouakchott ou ailleurs, devient alors la parade des plus pauvres. Plusieurs tac-\r\ntiques ou stratégies de survies se rencontrent (différents travaux artisanaux, amorce d’un petit\r\ncommerce de revente, petits travaux ponctuels…). Mais l’arrivée en ville fait bien souvent\r\nbasculer les migrants internes dans des difficultés inattendues. Hors de leur milieu d’origine,\r\nl’expression des solidarités inter familiales sont largement plus hypothétiques4. La quête ef-\r\nfrénée de nourriture devient journalière dans un milieu nouveau. Les perspectives sont la\r\nsurvie dans le court terme et dans un environnement perçu comme de plus en plus hostile.\r\n\r\nPour l’agriculture pluviale dans les quatre régions on peut avancer deux problématiques so-\r\ncio-économiques de grande ampleur. Les populations des régions au sud du Hodh El Ghar-\r\nbi, du Hodh El Chargui et de l’Assaba ont développé une activité d’agriculture pluviale. Elles\r\nprésentent de grandes concentrations de paysans H’ratine (anciens esclaves), notamment dans\r\nles zones de l’Affolé et dans la bande frontalière avec le Mali. Dans leurs villages « Adwaba »,\r\nbeaucoup de femmes démunies sont chefs de famille et leurs modes de production de mil\r\npluvial sur sol sableux5 nécessitent des appuis pour une meilleure adaptation au changement\r\nclimatique et leur insertion dans le marché.\r\n\r\nAu Guidimakha, on assiste à un certain déclin de l’agriculture pluviale sur les sols du diéri,\r\nalors que le potentiel de production et les techniques de mise en valeur des terres méridio-\r\nnales plus arrosées existent. De plus, les politiques publiques sont défavorables aux filières\r\nlocales (contrôle des prix des aliments de base). Ainsi, en réponse à des politiques publiques\r\npeu incitatrices mais aussi par tradition sociale pour certains groupes, les jeunes tournent le\r\ndos depuis plusieurs générations aux activités agricoles traditionnelles6 et y préfèrent les re-\r\nvenus de la migration interne, continentale (notamment vers les pays du golfe de Guinée), ou\r\nextracontinentale. Mais cette dernière apparaît de moins en moins comme une alternative\r\npossible en raison des surveillances migratoires accrues7. Par ailleurs et en dehors des pro-\r\nblèmes de bras valides, les contraintes foncières impactant sur le développement de filières\r\nproductives et l’absence d’ateliers de transformation empêchent également la mise en valeur\r\nde vastes terroirs agricoles de cette région.\r\n\r\nAlors que l’on observe dans ces zones un certain retour des pluies depuis les années 1990 qui\r\ns’accompagne d’une régénération de nombreuses espèces ligneuses (au Karakoro, par ex.), il\r\napparaît clairement que les ressources fourragères valorisées par l’élevage et l’exploitation des\r\nproduits forestiers non ligneux (gomme arabique, jujube, pain de singe, Balanites, fruits de\r\n\r\n\r\n4 On retrouve toutefois dans les bidonvilles une logique de regroupement par clan ou par tribu d’origine.\r\n Là, les solidarités s’expriment encore mais sont certainement plus pécuniaires et plus conditionnelles.\r\n5 Dépôts éoliens du quaternaire, visible sur l’imagerie satellitaire.\r\n6 Un autre phénomène joue également : les jeunes Soninké, nés en France, veulent plutôt rester avec leurs\r\n mères sur la terre d’émigration plutôt que de revenir dans la concession du père pour cultiver malgré\r\n l’investissement souvent spectaculaire réalisé par ce dernier au village d’origine. Ce phénomène est\r\n d’autant plus accentué que des mouvements d’émancipation des mères en France dans les banlieues\r\n émergent et accompagnent certaines à la rupture de la tradition (retrouver le vieux mari rentré au village\r\n au Guidimaka).\r\n7 La complexification de la reconnaissance d’identité rendent plus difficile les regroupements familiaux,\r\n par exemple.\r\n\r\n 14\r\n\fdoum, diverses gousses…) constituent des ressources clés pour les familles. La durabilité de\r\nces perspectives pourrait être largement facilitée si les expériences de responsabilisation des\r\ncommunautés dans la gestion des ressources communes étaient développées à large échelle,\r\ncomme au Guidimakha où plus de la moitié du territoire fait déjà l’objet d’un transfert de\r\nresponsabilités de l’État au profit des communes et des organisations locales (associations\r\nlocales de gestion des ressources naturelles).\r\n\r\n3.4. Diversité des systèmes d’élevage et évolutions récentes\r\n3.4.1. Typologie générale de l’élevage à l’échelle nationale et grandes évolutions\r\n\r\nUne typologie précise a été dressée en 2002 sur l’ensemble du pays8. Le secteur de l’élevage\r\nse trouve ainsi décrit (RIM, 2002 : 5) à travers 12 modèles représentatifs de systèmes de pro-\r\nduction répartis en 6 grands groupes: (i) systèmes pastoraux nomades; (ii) systèmes pastoraux\r\ntranshumants; (iii) systèmes sédentaires associés à l’agriculture; (iv) systèmes extensifs ur-\r\nbains; (v) systèmes semi-intensifs et; (vi) systèmes intensif.\r\n\r\nCette typologie nationale des systèmes de production proposée s’appuie sur cinq critères de\r\ndifférenciation principaux (mobilité des animaux, mobilité de la famille avec son troupeau,\r\nniveau dintensification des systèmes d’élevage pratiqués et lien avec l’agriculture, propriété\r\ndes animaux et spéculation principale) et deux critères de caractérisation (activité agricole et\r\nzones concernées).\r\n\r\nÀ notre analyse cette typologie nationale, quoique relativement ancienne, reste valable. Elle a\r\nl’intérêt de faire apparaître des transformations durant deux décennies dans les quatre wilayas\r\nmettant en évidence des facteurs de vulnérabilité et des risques récents pour les groupes et les\r\nménages.\r\n\r\nLes facteurs majeurs ayant fait évoluer les systèmes d’élevage sont pluriels. Comme partout\r\ndans la bande sahélienne, le phénomène démographique rural pèse, même si l’exode vers les\r\nvilles contrecarre ses effets. Pour ce dernier phénomène, l’urbanité pour la Mauritanie se si-\r\ntue à 60% de la population, au même niveau que celle du Maroc en 2015 (Banque mondiale9),\r\nde 10 points supérieur aux autre pays sahéliens. La même source souligne la fulgurante muta-\r\ntion urbaine mauritanienne passant ainsi de 7% en 1960 à 60 %, 55 ans plus tard (2015).\r\n\r\nUn autre facteur d’ordre systémique est relatif à l’écosystème oasien (Nord-Ouest Assaba\r\nTagant et Adrar) qui se trouve impacté par le changement climatique, les érosions hydriques\r\net éoliennes avec surtout la baisse des nappes. L’enclavement des oasis centraux se traduit\r\nalors par l’échec d’un modèle oasien ancestral dans un monde globalisé, ce qui porte préj u-\r\ndice aux itinéraires techniques culturaux et commerciaux10 des palmeraies et aux systèmes\r\nd’élevage périphériques. De ces facteurs, le plus crucial reste l’eau. De nombreuses palme-\r\nraies sont en train de sécher du fait du manque d’eau. Il y a des nappes plus profondes mais\r\nle coût du forage et ensuite de l’exhaure sont sans aucune mesure avec la situation du siècle\r\ndernier. Le captage de l’eau de profondeur est un défi qui concerne de nombreux ch apelets\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8 RIM, 2002, Initiative élevage pauvreté et croissance (IEPC), Proposition pour un document national, 71 p.\r\n9 In, Collectif 2017, L’Afrique du Sahel et du Sahara à la Méditerranée, Édition Armand Colin, Paris, 287 p\r\n10 Concurrence avec les dattes d’origine magrébine (largement utilisées lors de fêtes) et saoudienne.\r\n\r\n 15\r\n\fd’oasis (Nord-Assaba pour ce qui nous concerne). Cet enjeu est couplé avec la nature du parc\r\narboré (source : Projet de Développement Durable des Oasis, 2016).\r\n\r\nCette baisse des nappes se traduit par la rupture d’arrêt de certains points d’abreuvement\r\navec, pour conséquence la modification des circuits de transhumance, avec l’obligation pour\r\nles transhumants de nouer de nouvelles alliances. Cette modification de l’usage des parcours\r\nse traduit également par l’évolution des ressources pâturables, et donc le changement\r\nd’espèces (bovine au profit de la cameline).\r\n\r\nUn dernier facteur majeur constitue la montée de l’insécurité. La Mauritanie déploie de gros\r\nefforts pour garantir la sécurité de vastes zones. Pour l’instant, les poches de réelles insécuri-\r\ntés se localisent à proximité de la frontière malienne (Hodh ElChargui). Dans ces zones, pro-\r\nfitant de la pauvreté chronique, les mouvements extrémistes disposent de facilités pour recru-\r\nter leurs effectifs dans la jeunesse déçue et les laissés pour compte de la modernité. La multi-\r\nplication des armes et des postures belliqueuses ont induit une montée en puissance du ban-\r\nditisme chronique, terreau de nombreux trafics de produits illicites. De fait, ces revenus illé-\r\ngaux entrainent des inégalités criantes. De plus, la conjonction de la violence et de la variabili-\r\nté climatique installent durablement l’insécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle pour des dizaines\r\nde milliers de personnes. Les grandes migrations humaines, également sources de revenus\r\nillicites, viennent complexifier le tableau alarmant des espaces éloignés.\r\n\r\n3.4.2. Les systèmes d’élevage présents dans les quatre wilayas\r\n\r\n3.4.2.1. Le système des grands transhumants et ses nuances\r\n\r\nIl semble que le grand nomadisme d’antan (cycles de déplacement de grande envergure sans\r\nlieu de fixation) ne soit plus guère effectif mais que l’on a affaire davantage à des pasteurs\r\neffectuant pour une partie de la famille de grandes transhumances, d’orientation plus ou\r\nmoins méridienne, au gré de la disponibilité des ressources et des contraintes de déplace-\r\nment. À ce titre nous parlerons plutôt d’un système qualifié de post nomade. Le caractère trans-\r\nfrontalier des circuits de transhumance n’est pas systématique11 et ne permet pas de distin-\r\nguer utilement des sous-groupes dans notre problématique. La question se situe davantage\r\nsur la capacité de partir en transhumance (effectif minimal, main d’œuvre et animaux-\r\néquipement de bât). Par contre les espèces animales ont évolué pour cette catégorie de pas-\r\nteurs.\r\n\r\nLes parcours de l’Est (Hodh Echargui) rassemblent des pasteurs ayant une forte prédomi-\r\nnance de camelins et de caprins. Ils transhument vers le Mali voisin. Pour les grands\r\ntranshumants évoluant dans le Hodh El Gharbi vers la vallée du fleuve ou le Mali, les espèces\r\nanimales constituant les troupeaux sont plus diverses, toutefois avec encore beaucoup de\r\ncamélidés qui valorisent facilement les pâturages aériens. Le mouvement des troupeaux est\r\nsaisonnier de forme pendulaire, lié aux opportunités de parcours, d’accès à l’eau et de condi-\r\ntions de sécurité.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n11 Ce constat fait écho aux conclusions d’études régionale s, entre autres celle coordonnée par NCG\r\n 2017 qui souligne en page 9 que La longue durée des transhumances ne signifie pas pour autant qu’elles sont systéma-\r\n tiquement transfrontalières.\r\n\r\n 16\r\n\fL’insécurité de certains parcours notamment en bordure de la frontière malienne constitue\r\nune entrave dans les transhumances. Si l’insécurité perdure, l’exclusion de certaines zones du\r\npastoralisme sur un longue période risque d’impliquer une perte de parcours pour l’avenir,\r\npar manque de connaissance des circuits.\r\n\r\nDans les deux Hodhs, la descente des nappes mais aussi un ensablement partiel de certains\r\ntamourths, impliquent également la suppression de nombreuses étapes, rentant ainsi plus déli-\r\ncat les grands déplacements.\r\n\r\nPar ailleurs, la succession des sécheresses a rendu l’élevage bovin plus fragile, même dans les\r\ncontrées auparavant favorables tels que le Karakoro ou l’Afolé. À l’assèchement de puits ou\r\nde résurgences oasiennes (Nord-Assaba), sont venues se cumuler des contraintes\r\nd’abreuvement dans les zones irriguées du fleuve Sénégal et de ses bras. Le franchissement\r\nde la vallée s’anticipe de plus en plus car il implique bien souvent de s pertes et des conflits\r\nd’usage. Les zones de repli sont donc moins accessibles, ce qui fragilise d’autant de no m-\r\nbreux troupeaux. Les tensions entre agriculteurs et pasteurs créent de graves amalgames et\r\ncomplexifient les relations, rendant difficile les règlements à l’amiable des dégâts champêtres\r\nou sur les animaux, et vice versa en représailles.\r\n\r\nPar ailleurs, la réforme du Code de l’eau incluant désormais un droit d’exhaure privilégié aux\r\nayant droits fonciers visant l’emploi local, créée des tensions entre locaux et transhumants.\r\nEn effet, cette situation favorise la tarification différentielle de l’eau au détriment de récipro-\r\ncités habituelles, plus ou moins ancrées au travers d’alliances et donc de comportement socia-\r\nlement admis par des liens agnatiques, qualifié d’habitus tribal12.\r\n\r\nLa répétition des difficultés d’accès aux ressources ont accompagné la diversification des\r\nmodes d’élevage des grands transhumants en incluant la possibilité stratégique d’une palette\r\nd’activités urbaines ou encore d’une fixation plus ou moins durable d’une partie de la famille\r\net d’un troupeau avec quelques allaitantes à proximité d’un marché. Les grands transhumants\r\nn’ont pas pour autant perdu de leur vitalité et font preuve de résilience face aux risques di-\r\nvers.\r\n\r\nCas particulier des élevages de « prestige et de luxe » : il s’agit de propriétaires résidents le\r\nplus souvent en ville mais qui, en fonction des opportunités d’achats d’animaux, constituent\r\nle troupeau (espèces de prestige soit en camelins, soit en bovins). L’élevage n’est pas vital\r\npour cette catégorie qui représentent peu de monde mais regroupant des troupeaux\r\nd’effectifs conséquents (plusieurs centaines de têtes). Il s’agit d’un élevage qui présente un\r\nmode de gestion et d’exploitation généralement peu performant (jugement porté par un re-\r\nprésentant de groupement d’organisations d’éleveurs). Le troupeau est mené par des bergers\r\nsalariés (classiquement d’anciens éleveurs ayant perdus leur cheptel), souvent en lien\r\nd’alliance tribale avec le propriétaire. En raison de forts effectifs, cette catégorie de troupeaux\r\ninduit des tensions à la période chaude autour des points d’eau offrant un faible débit.\r\n\r\nCas particulier des élevages destinés à la « vente sur le court terme » : Il s’agit d’animaux finis\r\nou en voie de finition possédés par les commerçants qui constituent progressivement les\r\ntroupeaux au gré des achats en vue de la constitution des lots homogènes d’animaux (gabarit\r\n\r\n\r\n12 L’habitus tribal, caractérisé par la compétition et la hiérarchie, l’casabiyya, peut se définir par des solidarités\r\n agnatiques légitimées par une généalogie commune ou nasab, (Bonte, 2008).\r\n\r\n 17\r\n\fet phénotypes semblables, état d’engraissement et de finition comparables, etc.) en fonction\r\nde la demande et des niches commerciales. Ils sont utilisateurs d’aliment bétail (plus ou\r\nmoins adaptés à la complémentation)13 et se font aider par des convoyeurs ou courtiers, qui\r\nsont souvent des bergers temporaires en manque d’emploi. Le réseau routier a permis de\r\ndévelopper le transport en camion d’animaux vendus vers les capitales (marchés terminaux),\r\nmême si certains acheminements se font encore en convoyage classique.\r\n\r\nCes deux cas de système d’élevage (élevages de prestige et élevage destinés à la vente) sont\r\nparticuliers et concernent des populations singulières. Si les ménages propriétaires de ces\r\nanimaux, le plus souvent urbains, ne doivent pas constituer une préoccupation pour le Re-\r\ngistre Social, les bergers de leurs troupeaux et leurs ménages sont, pour certains, en situation\r\nde vulnérabilité.\r\n\r\n3.4.2.2. Les systèmes agro pastoraux et leurs diversités\r\n\r\nLes contraintes diverses (sécheresses, irruption de la modernité avec impacts négatifs, insécu-\r\nrité chronique, fluctuation défavorable du ratio viande-céréales, épizooties incontrôlées, di-\r\nvers ravageurs des cultures14, etc.) qui ont pesé sur les économies régionales et les écosys-\r\ntèmes ces dernières décennies ont transformé le paysage agraire des quatre wilayas.\r\n\r\nLa recherche de diversification des revenus a incontestablement accompagné le développe-\r\nment de l’agro-élevage pour les agriculteurs et de l’agro-pastoralisme pour les anciens pas-\r\nteurs nomades.\r\n\r\nL’agriculture pluviale, en fonction de la pluviosité, est caractérisée par des assolements de mil\r\nou de sorgho de décru (aval des barrages et des mares, par ex.) avec des légumineuses ainsi\r\nque la pratique du maraichage ou de l’arboriculture, associée à un élevage oasien ou fluvial.\r\n\r\nBien sûr, les pratiques différenciées de ses types d’élevage s’observent mais toutes imposent\r\nune conduite des animaux en troupeau durant certains mois de l’année en fonction du cale n-\r\ndrier cultural (main d’œuvre) et des ressources pâturables (vaine pâture sur les champs a près\r\nrécolte, éteules, pâturage sur nouvelles jachères). Le recours, soit au confiage durant quelques\r\nmois, soit à un gardiennage, salarié ou pas, s’impose selon les géo-systèmes (Karakoro, etc.)\r\net la présence de parcours adéquats ainsi qu’en fonction de la densité animale.\r\n\r\nLes échanges, plus fluides, entre l’urbain et le rural ont accentué l’enjeu sur les résidus de\r\nculture car un véritable marché est apparu en ville afin de satisfaire la demande en fourrages\r\ndes élevages péri urbains ou urbains. Le recours à la vaine pâture, mais aussi à la collecte par\r\nratissage, puis au stockage, éventuellement à la revente au détail des résidus de cultures et de\r\nla paille de brousse en faveur des systèmes péri urbains bouleverse le système de production\r\n(cycle de la fertilité, par ex.) et le système d’élevage (conduite avec affouragement en conten-\r\ntion dans un parc de nuit) et même le système agraire (enclosure). En effet, différentes enclo-\r\nsures (privés, collectives) se retrouvent dans certaines zones telles que le Karakoro, ou\r\nl’Afolé. Il s’agit d’enclosure en épineux (principalement pour la culture pluviale), en barbelé\r\nou même en grillage pour constituer des réserves fourragères. Il faut les distinguer des jardins\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n13 Sous forme de graines de coton, de tourteaux de coton et également d’aliment reconstitué. La filière\r\n mériterait une étude plus poussée.\r\n14 Schistocerca gregaria (sauteriaux), Quelea quelea (oiseaux mange-mil)…\r\n\r\n 18\r\n\fmaraichers ou des vergers qui, eux aussi, sont localisés dans les zones humides offrant des\r\nnappes perchées pour l’irrigation.\r\n\r\nL’ensemble de ses enclosures bouleverse l’espace pastoral dans les grandes mobilités (con-\r\ntournement imposé des troupeaux hors des axes de transhumance habituels). Pour les enclo-\r\nsures confectionnées à base d’arbres et d’arbustes fraichement abattus, elles remettent en\r\ncause la préservation même des zones de repli. Les ressources contenues dans ces milieux\r\nd’exception favorisent, pour les animaux d’élevage15, le retour de chaleurs, ou le démarrage\r\nd’une bonne lactation pour les femelles nouvellement allaitantes. Ce phénomène de mutation\r\nagraire au détriment de l’espace pastoral affecte en premier lieu les dépressions riches en p â-\r\nturage aérien et en flore herbacée d’appétence reconnue. En effet, ces pâturages précoces en\r\ndébut d’hivernage sont fondamentaux sur l’aspect nutritionnel. Globalement, les zones hu-\r\nmides jouent un rôle fondamental en termes de complément alimentaire de qualité (fourrages\r\naériens avec les fruits), même pour les bovins, et bien sûr en ombrage pour les phases indis-\r\npensables de rumination (8 heures pour les gros ruminants16), et de repos.\r\n\r\nCertes encore marginales, les pratiques de complémentation de la ration et de soins vétéri-\r\nnaires dans ces systèmes d’élevage agro-pasteurs est à souligner même si le prix et l’accès\r\nrestent une contrainte. Le départ sur de grandes transhumances est conditionné à la taille du\r\ntroupeau, à la disponibilité d’une main d’œuvre de gardiennage et à la possession d’animaux\r\nde bât ou d’attelage (charrettes).\r\n\r\n3.4.2.3. Les systèmes périurbains et leurs spécificités dictées par la demande\r\n\r\nLes différentes mutations font apparaître le développement d’élevages péri urbains, proche s\r\nde demandes spécifiques en produits animaux (viande rouge, lait et dérivés, volailles). Ces\r\nregroupements se situent dans les auréoles d’influence des villes moyennes et des gros vi l-\r\nlages jouant un rôle commercial primordial (lieu de marchés à bétail et de produits transfor-\r\nmés) ainsi que le long des routes goudronnées.\r\n\r\nLes conditions et motivations d’installation dans ces lieux privilégiés de croissance mérite-\r\nraient plus d’attention de recherche. De nos premières investigations, il ressort que les popu-\r\nlations du sud visent à établir un ancrage péri urbain en activant les réseaux nécessaires (liens\r\nancestraux entre groupes sociaux, clientélisme politique, transfert monétaire et animaux, etc.).\r\nLa tactique d’un ancrage permet de diversifier son élevage grâce à la proximité de la ville tout\r\nen maintenant, pour certains, un espace pastoral en brousse favorisant ainsi le maintien d’un\r\ntroupeau transhumant classique et en prélevant, au gré des mises bas, le rapprochement de\r\nquelques allaitantes près de la ville.\r\n\r\nPour les types laitiers, cet élevage localise le plus souvent des animaux allaitants permettant\r\nainsi d’exploiter le surplus de lait et les dérivés (caillé, beurre) à un prix rémunérateur.\r\nL’alimentation des animaux exige l’achat d’aliment du bétail, en complément d’un pâturage\r\npéri urbain journalier. Les animaux en phase de tarissement repartent généralement en\r\nbrousse afin de reprendre leur conduite transhumante jusqu’à la prochaine mise bas. On peut\r\nparler d’une certaine intensification d’un élevage opportuniste et pragmatique, porté par\r\nl’existence d’un débouché rémunérateur.\r\n\r\n\r\n15 Mais également la faune sauvage.\r\n16 Source Manuel d’élevage tropical, Payot.\r\n\r\n 19\r\n\fPour les cas de viande rouge, il s’agit d’embouches destinées à une finition avant abattage ou\r\nvente (Tabaski, par ex.). Localement, les circuits courts destinés aux rôtisseries constituent\r\naussi un marché d’appel pour les petits ruminants, principalement. On observe également\r\npour les petits ruminants des petits troupeaux en émergence qui gravitent autour des villages\r\net campements et ne sont pas à proprement gardés. Ils sont parqués seulement la nuit et di-\r\nvaguent le jour.\r\n\r\nPour les élevages de volailles (poulets de chair et pondeuses), il s’agit d’éleveurs possédant un\r\nsavoir-faire et susceptibles d’être accompagnés par certains projets (PRODEFI pour les él e-\r\nvages poulets de chairs).\r\n\r\n3.4.2.4. Essai d’indication des dernières grandes évolutions\r\nLes unités éco pastorales définies dans les années 1990 (Projet élevage 2 sur financement\r\nBanque mondiale) ont été conservées pour le développement du PRAPS-BM. Bâties sur une\r\nlogique socio tribale17, elles ont l’avantage de se baser sur les grandes aires de parcours des\r\ngrands transhumants, même si elles ne se prolongent pas suffisamment au-delà des deux\r\nfrontières (malienne et sénégalaise).\r\n\r\nFigure 1: Unités éco pastorales (PRAPS, 2017)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCes unités sont cohérentes, tout en étant variables bien sûr d’une année à l’autre selon la plu-\r\nviosité et le disponible fourrager. Au sein d’une même unité, plusieurs systèmes d’élevage\r\ncohabitent. Les mécanismes d’alliances (de l’intra fraction à l’inter tribus), de droits de réc i-\r\n\r\n\r\n17\r\n À leur création (1985-1995) lors du projet Élevage II, une AP [Association Pastorale] associait des éleveurs\r\n relevant d’une même tribu ou de fractions de tribus différentes mais ayant une tradition d’alliance (Bonte, 2009 : 157).\r\n Voir une esquisse de la liste des tribus en annexe 8 et leurs alliances majeures.\r\n\r\n 20\r\n\fprocités structurent l’espace pastoral en autant d’espaces relationnels. Les accords sociaux et\r\nautres conventions de gestion concertée des ressources naturelles doivent être négociés avant\r\ntout aménagement (puits, forages-sondages, mares, marchés, etc.) au sein de ces grandes uni-\r\ntés et des différentes associations pastorales correspondantes.\r\n\r\nLes principaux parcours de transhumance s’inscrivent dans ces unités pastorales, et, pour\r\ncertains, se prolongent au Sénégal ou au Mali. Ces unités pastorales et les parcours de\r\ntranshumance qu’elles recouvrent, sont largement orthogonaux avec les Zones de Moyens\r\nd’Existence (ZDME) cartographiées ci-dessous et notamment utilisées dans le cadre du zo-\r\nnage des travaux de diagnostic en matière de sécurité alimentaire. La superposition de cartes\r\ndes unités éco-pastorales et de ZDME, illustre à la fois que les zones éco-pastorales ne sont\r\npas des ensembles homogènes, et que les ZDME sont fortement connectées et interdépen-\r\ndantes, notamment à travers les parcours de transhumance. Il est à noter que l’élevage, y\r\ncompris transhumant, joue un rôle beaucoup plus important que l’agriculture dans\r\nl’économie des ménages en zone « agropastorale » (MR07), et qu’il joue un rôle croissant en\r\nzone dite de culture « pluviale » (MR09).\r\n\r\nFigure 2: Cartographie des zones de moyens dexistence\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nLes grandes sècheresses et les mutations climatiques ont induit des changements dans les\r\nconduites classiques des troupeaux aux échelles locales et régionales, voire transnationales. Le\r\ncentre et nord du pays ont connu plus précocement les aléas et leurs conséquences. Au sud\r\nles mutations sont encore en cours, notamment autour de systèmes agro pastoraux (stagna-\r\ntion, voire baisse de l’agriculture pluviale) et surtout de modèles péri-urbains très diversifiés,\r\nstimulés par la présence de la ville (circuits courts ou vente directe, opportunités d’achat\r\nd’aliment et de transaction de bétail, recherche de confiage d’animaux, pluri activités permet-\r\ntant l’achat d’animaux à terme, etc.). L’échelon international reste actif, même si les facteurs\r\n\r\n 21\r\n\fd’insécurité qui sévissent dans la sous-région impliquent de nouvelles postures (modification\r\ndes circuits vers l’Est notamment) et alliances en vue de la sécurisation des hommes et des\r\ntroupeaux.\r\n\r\nTableau 3 : Grandes évolutions des élevages et des pratiques\r\n\r\n Les élevages en fin de XXe siècle Les constats sur la situation actuelle\r\n  Diminution de l’usage de la tente  Usage marginal de la tente traditionnelle, au\r\n Habitat profil de nouveaux habitats fixes\r\n\r\n  Régression du commerce caravanier  Système commercial camelin (voitures) vers\r\n Maroc-Algérie, Mali, flux commerciaux ur-\r\n  Atteinte des sècheresses avec trans-\r\n bains\r\n fert de propriété et paupérisation, et\r\n Caractéris- résilience  Forte fixation en péri urbain et routier avec\r\n tiques des hangar (négociation)\r\n systèmes  Progression du tracé du goudron-\r\n d’élevage nage  Diversification des revenus (commerce,\r\n salariat)\r\n  Evolution des répartitions des es-\r\n pèces  Usage-stock des pailles, aliment bétail et\r\n vente lait\r\n  Emergence des organisations pasto-  Développement d’un plaidoyer national et\r\n rales international\r\n Services,\r\n structures  Services sociaux-sanitaires éloignés  Plus de services de proximité mais qualité\r\n d’appui variable\r\n  Zones pastorales hors exploitation (insécurité\r\n et enclavement : Dhar, Aouker, Batan, etc.)\r\nCommunica-  Emergence de communication  Généralisation de la téléphonie\r\n tion (radios)\r\n\r\n Statut des  Berger tâcheron avec rémunération  Berger salarié temporaire ou permanent,\r\n bergers en nature (chevrette/trimestre, gé- rémunéré et pris en charge (alimentation, ha-\r\n nisse/an) billement, soins)\r\n\r\nCes quelques évolutions ont fait naître de nouvelles relations entre les éleveurs dans leurs\r\ndiversités et les autres acteurs du pastoralisme. Il s’agit le plus souvent de relations inclusives,\r\nporteuses d’intégration des pasteurs dans la modernité, de monétarisation et de transactions\r\ndiverses dans les réseaux commerciaux liés à l’urbanisation croissante et aux nouvelles pra-\r\ntiques alimentaires. Ces dynamiques18 sont d’ampleur sociétale car elles affectent les grands\r\néquilibres entre les différents groupes sociaux, allant bien au-delà des seuls systèmes de pro-\r\nduction.\r\n\r\n3.4.3. Les autres acteurs du pastoralisme et leurs stratégies\r\n\r\nLe développement agro-pastoral dépend à la fois des dynamiques d’acteurs professionnels\r\nque sont les producteurs (agro-éleveurs, pasteurs, transformateurs…), les commerçants, les\r\nfournisseurs de services, qu’ils soient sous statut public ou privé et, par ailleurs, des organisa-\r\ntions et des actions conduites par les institutions publiques.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n18 On pourrait faire référence aux prémices de ces mutations sociales, déjà observées au milieu du siècle\r\n dernier, et évoquées chez les africanistes tels que Balandier, en anthropologie dynamique.\r\n\r\n 22\r\n\fDans cet ensemble, les projets de développement constituent des entités singulières dans la\r\nmesure où ils sont des opérateurs de développement chargés par l’État, ou par des structures\r\nde la société civile, aptes à mener des interventions en substitution aux autres acteurs. Ils ne\r\nviennent pas en complément mais plutôt pallient les carences des autres acteurs et, dans le\r\nmeilleur des cas, les appuient en les renforçant afin d’assurer l’intégralité de leurs missions.\r\n\r\nTous ces acteurs interviennent simultanément à l’échelle des régions en entretenant des rel a-\r\ntions complexes et dynamiques. Parfois, les grands transhumants éprouvent des difficultés\r\nd’insertion, inhérentes à leur mobilité, dans les processus du développement.\r\n\r\nDu fait de leurs fonctions de représentants de l’État, les Gouverneurs (Waly) ont en charge la\r\ncoordination, via le Comité Régional de Développement (CRD), des actions de développe-\r\nment à l’échelle des régions. Devant la complexité de diverses interventions, un appui instit u-\r\ntionnel à la planification et à la concertation régionale s’avère indispensable.\r\n\r\nLa situation du personnel des directions régionales de l’Élevage reste préoccupante. Si les\r\nniveaux régionaux sont relativement couverts en personnel, ce n’est pas le cas des mughataas\r\n(préfectures). En plus du manque d’agents de base, le personnel est, soit jeune et peu qualifié,\r\nsoit proche de la retraite. Cette situation s’explique par l’absence de recrutements et/ou de\r\nformations dans la fonction publique pendant des années. Il y a donc un important besoin de\r\nformation et d’accompagnement technique pour les nouveaux agents déjà en poste ou qui\r\nvont être recrutés dans les années qui viennent. La fonction d’encadrement et de vulgarisa-\r\ntion est extrêmement faible à l’heure actuelle, réduite à un appui-conseil parcellaire, plus ou\r\nmoins efficace selon la qualité des projets et du personnel impliqué, qu’assurent les interve-\r\nnants d’aide extérieure. Il n’existe pas de programme de recherche pour l’adaptation de\r\nl’agriculture pluviale et du pastoralisme au changement climatique. Des appuis en renforce-\r\nment de capacité et en moyens roulants sont à prévoir au niveau des services déconcentrés de\r\nl’Agriculture et de l’Élevage (niveau, Inspection notamment).\r\n\r\nL’État a encouragé les communes à préparer des Plans de Développement Communaux\r\n(PDC). Les communes souffrent toutefois d’un déficit de compétences car les ressources\r\nhumaines et financières mises à leur disposition demeurent limitées. Elles sont encore large-\r\nment en phase d’apprentissage de la gouvernance locale et d’appropriation des compétences\r\nqui leurs sont dévolues. Les préoccupations économiques sont rarement prises en compte,\r\ntant l’urgence du social prime.\r\n\r\nLes commerçants d’animaux et de produits animaux sont assez fortement implantés dans les\r\nquatre régions autour de multiples lieux de regroupement. De nombreux intermédiaires tra-\r\nvaillent pour le compte de commerçants étrangers (sénégalais, maliens, guinéens…), le plus\r\nsouvent installés à l’étranger.\r\n\r\nConcernant le monde rural, il est aujourd’hui en voie de structuration à l’échelle des terri-\r\ntoires et autour de certaines filières, souvent par l’impulsion de projets ou d’ONG de ma-\r\nnière différenciée. Ce type d’organisation ne revêt toutefois que rarement un caractère for-\r\nmel, mais se fait plutôt auprès d’un commerçant qui va offrir des services spécifiques (crédit\r\nen numéraire ou en nature, enlèvement…) et/ou sur des bases sociales (parenté et alli ance,\r\ngenre, tontine, origine géographique, corporation…). Les organisations peuvent regrouper\r\nspécifiquement des femmes ou des jeunes mais sans que cela soit une règle et toutes les\r\ncombinaisons sont possibles.\r\n\r\n\r\n 23\r\n\fLes associations de producteurs manquent souvent de capacités d’organisation et de com-\r\nmunication et ne contribuent guère à améliorer l’accès des membres aux connaissances tec h-\r\nniques de transformation et de vente de produits (collecte de lait, équipements de séchage de\r\nviande, de conditionnement, étalages de vente, etc.). Parallèlement, la recherche peu probante\r\nde partenariats entre la sphère publique et les opérateurs privés laisse planer plusieurs ques-\r\ntions sur l’avenir de l’élevage familial.\r\n\r\nLes femmes sont fortement impliquées dans la commercialisation et la transformation de\r\ncertains produits de l’élevage, telle que la vente du lait excédentaire qui reste une activité fé-\r\nminine. Leurs activités peuvent s’inscrire dans une logique commerciale ou se situer dans une\r\nlogique de prestation pour les producteurs et ainsi se rémunérer en prenant une part active\r\ndans les produits transformés.\r\n\r\nDes Groupements d’Intérêt Economique (GIE), des bureaux d’études et des organisations\r\nnon gouvernementales apportent chacun à leur manière des appuis et des services techniques\r\ndans des domaines variés comme l’appui en conseil agricole, le montage de micro-projets ou\r\nd’entreprises (entreprenariat agricole, micro entreprise rurale…), les études techniques, le\r\ncontrôle et la supervision de travaux… Ces structures sont très inégalement répa rties dans les\r\nterritoires et offrent des champs d’actions et de compétences disparates.\r\n\r\nUne dizaine de projets ou de programmes, plus ou moins d’envergure, interviennent dans les\r\nquatre régions. En dehors des appuis aux priorités nationales de développement de\r\nl’irrigation (2IS/BM,PARIIS, KFW), on peut noter parmi les appuis au secteur rural qui se\r\ndéveloppent récemment : la Décentralisation (PNIDDLE/BM et UE, l’appui au Pastora-\r\nlisme (PRAPS/BM, RIMRAP/UE), le développement des Filières (PRODEFI et PASK\r\nII/FIDA, etc.), et la mise en place de filets sociaux (ECHO, CSA, PAM, Tadamoune, etc.).\r\nCette situation souligne la nécessité de concertation dans une approche résolument pro-\r\ngrammatique.\r\n\r\nCertains projets et programmes ont des enseignements incontestables dans les quatre régions\r\ncibles. Il y a lieu de citer les aides de l’Allemagne (GIZ) qui ont démontré sur la durée les\r\nimpacts positifs d’une gestion décentralisée des ressources naturelles19, forestières en particu-\r\nlier dans les régions sahéliennes, mais aussi ceux de travaux de réhabilitation de petits bar-\r\nrages (KFW). Enfin des expériences comportent des acquis tels que ceux de la BID, de la\r\nBAD, des fonds arabes FSD, du FADES et également de la FAO qui, elle, appuie principa-\r\nlement les coopératives de producteurs maraichers.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n19 La valorisation des PFNL (Produits Forestiers Non Ligneux) avait été initiée et promue au Guidimakha\r\n et au Hodh el Gharbi dans le cadre d’un volet dit « Programme vert » du grand programme de gestion\r\n décentralisée des ressources naturelles, de la coopération mauritano-allemande, dénommé ProGRN-GH,\r\n et ce à travers l’implication des membres des Associations (39) de Gestion Locale Collective (AGLC)\r\n créées avec l’appui de ce programme financé conjointement par la GIZ et l’UE.\r\n\r\n 24\r\n\fFigure 3 : Carte des acteurs du pastoralisme aux échelles régional-national\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ORGANISATIONS PROFESSIONNELLES\r\n Diversité des AGRICOLES ET PASTORALES\r\n SOCIETE CIVILE ONG\r\n Devpt Rural\r\n acteurs concernés\r\n OSC\r\n par le dialogue Sécu alimentaire\r\n Associations,locales\r\n niveau national\r\n OSP\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n SECTEUR PRIVE Politiques DSCSE MINISTERE\r\n Industriels\r\n MARCHAND\r\n du lait et stratégies AGRICULTURE\r\n\r\n résilience\r\n Agri pluviale\r\n DPCSE Syst Pastoraux MINISTERE DE\r\n L‘INTERIEUR\r\n\r\n MINISTERE ELEVAGE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PTF\r\n MINISTERE DE l’ECONOMIE\r\n ET DES FINANCES (MEF) MINISTERE DE\r\n MINISTERE L‘ENVIRONNEMENT\r\n HYDRAULIQUE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3.5. Problématiques sanitaires et sociales\r\n3.5.1. Accès aux services de base\r\n\r\nAccès aux services de santé\r\n\r\nEléments de diagnostic sanitaire dans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP\r\n\r\nLa santé de la population mauritanienne s’est considérablement améliorée depuis 20 ans. La\r\nmortalité infantile à quasiment été divisée par deux (plus de 80 enfants pour 1000 mouraient\r\navant l’âge de 5 ans avant les années 2000, contre environ 40 aujourd’hui), l’espérance de vie\r\nà la naissance est passée de 50 ans à plus de 54 ans depuis l’an 2000. Bien entendu cette évo-\r\nlution majeure ne concerne pas toutes les composantes de la population mauritanienne de la\r\nmême façon. Une part importante de cette tendance est associée au phénomène\r\nd’urbanisation. De manière générale, les populations urbaines ont un accès facilité aux ser-\r\nvices de santé, dont la qualité est meilleure en ville. Par ailleurs, les populations urbaines sont\r\nmieux sensibilisées et ont, en moyenne, davantage de moyens pour payer les services de san-\r\nté. Qu’en est-il pour les populations pastorales et agropastorales des 4 willayas du sud-est du\r\npays?\r\n\r\nIl n’existe pas de statistiques sur la performance des services de santé désagrégées entre mi-\r\nlieu rural et urbain au niveau des willayas. Néanmoins l’analyse des statistiques par région\r\ndonne une bonne indication sur le niveau d’accès aux soins par les populations pastorales et\r\nagropastorales dans les régions concernées. Les principales tendances sont les suivantes (voir\r\nAnnexe 12) :\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 25\r\n\f  Les principaux indicateurs sanitaires sont moins bons dans les 4 régions du sud-est\r\n que dans le reste du pays. En particulier, les régions de l’Assaba, et des deux Hodhs\r\n présentent les taux de mortalité infantile de 30 à 50% supérieurs à la moyenne du\r\n pays, et seul le Gorgol présente des statistiques de mortalité infantile moins bonnes\r\n que le Guidimaka.\r\n\r\n  Les 4 régions du sud-est sont parmi les plus touchées par la malnutrition infantile,\r\n avec le Gorgol, le Tagant, et le Brakna.\r\n\r\n  Les niveaux de couverture en santé préventive (ex : vaccination des enfants de moins\r\n de deux ans et consultations prénatales) des 4 régions du sud-est comptent parmi les\r\n moins bons du pays (par ex, 11,5 % des enfants de 12-23 mois seraient couverts par\r\n les principaux vaccins dans le Hodh el Chargui, 34,6 % dans l’Assaba, et 30,9% dans\r\n le Guidimaka, contre 48,7 % dans l’ensemble du pays).\r\n\r\n  La couverture sanitaire (population vivant dans un rayon de moins de 5 km d’un\r\n point de santé et ratio habitants/centres de santé) est moins bonne dans les régions\r\n du sud-est (de 55 à 60%) que dans le reste du pays (69%), et de façon plus marquée\r\n encore, le nombre de personnel de santé par habitant y est plus faible que dans le\r\n reste du pays (entre 40 000 et 50 000 habitants par médecin dans le Guidimaka et le\r\n Hodh el Gharbi contre environ 15 000 à l’échelle du pays), sauf pour l’Assaba\r\n compte tenu d’un centre hospitalier important au niveau de Kiffa. Par ailleurs, une\r\n grande majorité des postes de santé des 4 régions du sud-est ne sont pas conformes\r\n aux normes en matière d’infrastructures.\r\n\r\nAu-delà de ces indications générales sur le fonctionnement des services de santé, plusieurs\r\néléments généraux ressortent des échanges avec les services de santé et les usagers :\r\n\r\n  La mise en œuvre de la politique de recouvrement des coûts (pharmacies avec médi-\r\n caments essentiels à prix réduit au niveau des points de santé) ne concerne qu’une\r\n faible proposition des postes et des centres. De plus, lorsque ces services sont dispo-\r\n nibles, les procédures ne sont pas toujours suffisamment suivies et contrôlées. En\r\n conséquence, au-delà de la disponibilité et de la qualité des services, ceux-ci demeu-\r\n rent peu accessibles aux ménages les plus pauvres.\r\n\r\n  Le recours à l’automédication, avec achat de médicament en pharmacie s privées et à\r\n la médecine traditionnelle est prépondérant en milieu rural.\r\n\r\n  La fréquentation des centres de santé au niveau des centres urbains, dont les services\r\n sont jugés de meilleure qualité, et au niveau desquels les prix sont mieux contrôlés,\r\n est très soulignée. Les populations ont tendance à fréquenter les services de santé au\r\n niveau des centres urbains seulement à l’occasion de leurs déplacements pour des be-\r\n soins commerciaux. L’une des conséquences de ces pratiques, d’après le personnel de\r\n santé, est une prise en charge souvent tardive des pathologies, ainsi qu’un engorge-\r\n ment des centres de santé urbains.\r\n\r\n  Exclusion sociale : certaines catégories de population rencontrent des difficultés\r\n d’accès aux services de santé pour des raisons sociales. Par ailleurs, le nombre de pe r-\r\n\r\n\r\n 26\r\n\f sonnel de santé féminin formé est très faible, ce qui constitue une barrière sociale im-\r\n portante.\r\n\r\n  Santé communautaire : le développement de services de santé communautaire est ac-\r\n compagné par des acteurs internationaux visant à pallier la faible couverture du sys-\r\n tème sanitaire, notamment dans le cadre d’actions de prévention et de prise en charge\r\n de la malnutrition. Pour le moment, la mise en œuvre de cette stratégie dépend essen-\r\n tiellement d’appuis extérieurs et n’est pas véritablement internalisée par les services\r\n de l’État.\r\n\r\nÉléments d’analyse spécifiques des populations impliquées dans les 3 grands sys-\r\ntèmes d’élevage.\r\n\r\nLes problématiques d’accès aux services de santé sont globalement communes à l’ensemble\r\ndes populations rurales, néanmoins on peut souligner quelques spécificités aux trois grandes\r\nfamilles de systèmes pastoraux identifiées.\r\n\r\nSystèmes grands-transhumants : en dehors des catégories de populations les plus aisées\r\nqui disposent généralement d’une résidence urbaine, les populations pratiquant ces systèmes\r\ngrand-transhumants sont particulièrement concernées par des difficultés d’accès aux services\r\nde santé. La faible densité de population des zones pastorales, mais aussi la plus forte disper-\r\nsion de l’habitat en sont les principales raisons. Ces caractéristiques sont associées à une cou-\r\nverture du système sanitaire plus faible, mais aussi à une moindre qualité des soins (difficulté\r\nà maintenir du personnel qualifié en zone pastorale). Par ailleurs, certaines difficultés concer-\r\nnent spécifiquement les populations impliquées dans la conduite des troupeaux transhu-\r\nmants : absence totale de services dans certaines zones pastorales (par ex. l’Aouker), difficul-\r\ntés de communication depuis certaines zones pour prévenir un problème de santé et organi-\r\nser le mouvement de la personne malade vers un point de santé, zones de parcours en dehors\r\ndu territoire national qui impliquent des barrières d’accès supplémentaires (coût, difficulté de\r\ncommunication avec les agents de santé, discrimination sociale…).\r\n\r\nSystèmes agro-pastoraux / agro-élevage : La densité de population dans les zones con-\r\ncernées est souvent supérieure à celle des zones pastorales, ce qui est un facteur favorable.\r\nNéanmoins, les barrières culturelles sont plus fortes dans certains milieux sociaux (par\r\nexemple la fréquence des accouchements assistés par du personnel médical ou les pratiques\r\nd’alimentation des jeunes enfants sont significativement différentes dans le Guidimaka, ré-\r\ngion de concentration de la communauté Soninke), et les barrières financières plus fortes\r\npour les catégories les plus pauvres (plus nombreuses en milieu agro-pastoral).\r\n\r\nSystèmes d’élevage péri-urbain : Les populations concernées par ces systèmes bénéficient\r\nd’une disponibilité de services de santé de base relativement meilleure.\r\n\r\nAccès à l’eau potable pour les humains et les animaux\r\n\r\nEléments de diagnostic dans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP\r\n\r\nDe même que pour l’accès aux services de santé, l’accès à l’eau potable a fortement progressé\r\nen Mauritanie lors des deux dernières décennies. Mais pour l’eau également, les progrès réal i-\r\nsés ont principalement bénéficié aux populations urbaines (qui disposent de sources d’eau\r\naméliorée à près de 72% contre 53% des populations rurale à l’échelle du pays). Les 4 wil-\r\n\r\n 27\r\n\flayas couvertes par le RIMRAP sont parmi celles où l’utilisation d’eau de boisson issue de\r\nsources non protégées est la plus fréquente (de 42% en Assaba à 55% au Hodh el Charbi).\r\nOn ne retrouve que des statistiques comparables au Gorgol et dans l’Adrar (en raison de\r\nl’utilisation fréquente du camion-citerne pour l’approvisionnement). L’usage de puits non\r\nprotégés est fréquent, ainsi que de l’eau de pluie.\r\n\r\nEléments d’analyse spécifiques des populations impliquées dans les 3 grands sys-\r\ntèmes d’élevage\r\n\r\nSystèmes pastoraux : Les populations mobiles ne sont pas comptabilisées pour l’ouverture\r\ndes points d’eau potable au travers de l’Office National des Services de l’Eau en milieu rural.\r\nCette réalité implique l’utilisation de points d’eau de surface de qualité très médiocre (mares)\r\nqui augmente le risque de maladies hydro fécales. Même si certaines pratiques préventives\r\ns’avèrent efficaces (eau bouillie pour le thé), la santé humaine et donc la reproduction du\r\ncapital humain en milieu pastoral se trouve remise fortement en cause par le faible accès à de\r\nl’eau potable. Le recours au transport de l’eau à l’aide de charrette, qui demande un soin par-\r\nticulier pour le nettoyage des bidons afin que l’eau ne soit pas contaminée, est fréquent.\r\nL’utilisation de puisards pour l’eau de boisson est régulière, notamment en période de dépla-\r\ncement des troupeaux.\r\n\r\nSystèmes agro-pastoraux / agro-élevage: La problématique de l’accès à l’eau en mobilité\r\nest moins aiguë que pour les populations pastorales, notamment car en système agro-\r\npastoral, seuls les hommes (parfois accompagnés de jeunes garçons) suivent les troupeaux\r\ntranshumants. Les populations agro-pastorales sont donc moins exposées à la consommation\r\nd’eau de pluie pour la boisson. Néanmoins, ces populations sont concernées par les probl é-\r\nmatiques d’hydraulique villageoise au même titre que les populations pastorales. Certains\r\nprojets d’investissement concernent ces problématiques (PDSHR, etc.).\r\n\r\nSystèmes péri-urbain : La disponibilité en eau potable en milieu urbain et péri-urbain fait\r\nl’objet de plusieurs programmes d’investissements dans les régions concernées par le\r\nRIMRAP (Projet Dhar, AEP Gouraye-Sélibabi, AEP Aftout-Chargui, etc.), y compris au\r\nniveau des agglomérations de petite taille. L’eau potable reste chère et surtout inégalement\r\nrépartie dans les villes (faible densité des bornes fontaines). De plus, l’assainissement est pré-\r\noccupant pour les humains mais aussi pour leurs troupeaux (absorption de plastiques par les\r\nruminants).\r\n\r\nAccès problématique mais différencié à l’éducation de base\r\n\r\nEléments de diagnostic du système éducatif dans les régions couvertes par le\r\nRIMRAP\r\n\r\nLe fonctionnement du système éducatif en Mauritanie est largement reconnu comme insatis-\r\nfaisant. Alors que les taux de scolarisation dans le primaire avaient progressé fortement dans\r\nles années 1990, ils ont stagné dans les années 2000 (SCAPP 2016-2030). L’EPVM de 2014\r\nsuggère même une réduction du taux net de scolarisation dans le primaire entre 2008 et 2014.\r\nUn des éléments remarquables au sujet de l’accès à l’éducation en Mauritanie est que les\r\njeunes filles sont davantage scolarisées que les garçons en primaire. Phénomène plus clas-\r\nsique, une tendance inverse est observée dans le secondaire.\r\n\r\nLes principales raisons des difficultés rencontrées sont bien connues :\r\n\r\n 28\r\n\f  Manque de couverture du système éducatif, notamment en milieu rural, combinant :\r\n des difficultés de couverture physique du réseau d’écoles en zone à faible densité de\r\n population, qui couplées à un nombre insuffisant d’enseignants conduisent à la forte\r\n présence d’écoles à cycles incomplets et/ou à double flux et double vacation20.\r\n\r\n  La faible qualité des infrastructures scolaires en milieu rural, et les mauvaises condi-\r\n tions d’accueil des enseignants, conduisent à un absentéisme21 et à turn-over très éle-\r\n vé des enseignants du primaire en millier rural.\r\n\r\n  D’importantes barrières sociales sont soulignées par de nombreux acteurs rencontrés.\r\n Il existe fréquemment de fortes contraintes sociales à la scolarisation d’enfants issus\r\n de localités périphériques à celles où les écoles sont implantées.\r\n\r\n  Plusieurs barrières limitent l’accès à l’enseignement secondaire par les jeunes ruraux :\r\n le nombre réduit d’élèves issus du milieu rural reçu avec succès à l’examen de fin de\r\n primaire, le nombre limité de places dans le secondaire au niveau des chefs-lieux des\r\n départements, la nécessité préalable d’un enregistrement à l’état civil pour pouvoir\r\n s’inscrire dans le secondaire, et le manque de disposition en matière de logement des\r\n élèves collégiens (et notamment collégiennes) en dehors de leur famille.\r\n\r\nDe plus il faut noter que pour l’accès aux services d’éducation, l’ensemble des probléma-\r\ntiques mentionnées ci-dessus sont plus aigües dans les 4 régions du sud-est mauritanien que\r\ndans le reste du pays (voir Annexe 13). Pour l’accès à l’éducation formelle également, la diffé-\r\nrentiation milieu rural-milieu urbain est très forte. Non seulement la disponibilité et la qualité\r\ndu service public éducatif en milieu urbain est meilleure, mais – et cela témoigne des difficul-\r\ntés rencontrées au niveau du service public - il se développe une offre significative de ser-\r\nvices éducatifs privés en milieu urbain. Un grand nombre de ménages rencontrés lors de nos\r\nentretiens indiquent d’ailleurs que l’offre en matière d’éducation est l’un des éléments déter-\r\nminants pris en considération dans le choix des lieux de résidence. Par ailleurs, il est impor-\r\ntant de noter que l’État poursuit une politique d’appui privilégié aux écoles à cycle complet\r\n(cantines scolaires, qualité des infrastructures, affectation des enseignants, etc.). Cette poli-\r\ntique est cohérente face aux enjeux criants en matière de qualité des services éducatifs en\r\nmilieu rural, néanmoins, elle correspond à une concentration géographique des investisse-\r\nments, dans un contexte d’extrême dispersion géographique des populations et de ba rrières à\r\nla scolarisation de certains enfants dans des localités dominées par d’autres groupes sociaux\r\nque les leurs.\r\n\r\nEléments spécifiques d’analyse des populations impliquées dans les 3 grands sys-\r\ntèmes d’élevage\r\n\r\nSystèmes pastoraux : La SCAPP 2016-2020 souligne une statistique alarmante : 9 % des\r\nenfants de « nomades » seraient scolarisés dans le primaire ! La définition du terme « no-\r\nmade » et ainsi les populations concernées par cette statistique n’est pas explicitée dans la\r\nSCAPP. Mais la référence à cette statistique dans ce document de stratégie nationale souligne\r\nclairement le fait qu’il y a un consensus politique sur le fait que le système éducatif n’est pas\r\n\r\n\r\n20 Une classe le matin et une l’après-midi, et également un double niveau pour une même classe avec divi-\r\n sion du tableau.\r\n21 De nombreux parents parlent de présence des enseignants pour quelques mois dans l’année seulement .\r\n\r\n 29\r\n\fadapté aux spécificités du mode de vie des populations mobiles. Compte tenu de la quasi-\r\ngénéralisation des points d’attache physiques et sociaux en zone pastorale, on peut résume r la\r\nproblématique de la façon suivante : (1) absence de mobilité d’une grande partie des jeunes\r\nenfants de familles de bergers, réduisant les contraintes spécifiques liées à la mobilité ; (2)\r\nmobilité beaucoup plus fréquente des enfants (et notamment des garçons) au-delà de l’âge de\r\n10 ans, ce qui les empêche de suivre des cycles primaires complets ; (3) exclusion des enfants\r\nde bergers qui se déplacent en famille avec leurs enfants (de moins en moins fréquent, mais\r\npas exceptionnel car cette option est préférée par les propriétaires de troupeaux) ; (4) cer-\r\ntains enfants de bergers sont parfois confiés à d’autres ménages lors des déplacements, mais\r\nsont alors souvent mobilisés sur des tâches domestiques plutôt que scolarisés. Bien entendu,\r\ncompte tenu de la très faible scolarisation des enfants de ménages transhumants dans le pri-\r\nmaire, leur scolarisation dans le secondaire est extrêmement limitée. Les enfants de familles\r\npastorales aisées sont souvent scolarisées en milieu urbain, où ces ménages disposent d’une\r\ndouble résidence.\r\n\r\nSystèmes agro-pastoraux : Les ménages agro-pastoraux ont dans leur grande majorité\r\nadopté un mode de vie sédentaire. Lors des périodes de transhumance, seules les hommes,\r\nparfois accompagnés de jeunes garçons, se déplacent avec le bétail. Les contraintes associées\r\naux déplacements sont donc moins fortes. Mais les difficultés communes à l’ensemble des\r\nespaces ruraux du sud-est mauritanien mentionnés ci-dessus demeurent des barrières très\r\nfortes. En zone agro-pastorale, une des barrières supplémentaires est parfois la langue.\r\n\r\nSystèmes péri-urbain : L’accès physique et la qualité (assiduité des enseignants, infrastruc-\r\ntures, etc.) sont meilleurs pour les enfants de ménages péri-urbains. La mixité sociale est éga-\r\nlement plus importante, ce qui semble réduire les phénomènes d’exclusion dans les milieux\r\nscolaires urbains. Le coût est alors la principale barrière pour les catégories de ménages les\r\nplus pauvres.\r\n\r\nAccès aux fonctions régaliennes de l’État\r\n\r\nÀ l’échelle du pays, l’enquête MICS de 2016 souligne que 46% des naissances en milieu rural\r\nétaient enregistrées à l’état civil contre 74% en milieu urbain. Il existe donc une forte barrière\r\nd’accès à l’état civil pour l’ensemble des populations rurales. Une politique de déconcentra-\r\ntion des services de l’enrôlement a été adoptée, permettant de délivrer des titres au niveau des\r\ncommunes et des chefs-lieux de moughaata. Les rencontres effectuées au niveau d’un centre\r\nd’enrôlement soulignent que la mise en œuvre de cette politique butte sur des difficultés\r\ntechniques : il s’avère pour le moment difficile de gérer le matériel informatique et de garantir\r\nl’accès à la connexion internet nécessaire au fonctionnement du système d’enrôlement au\r\nniveau de tous les chefs-lieux de moughaata et plus encore au niveau des communes. Le délai\r\nlégal d’enregistrement des naissances est de deux mois. Compte tenu de la faible disponibilité\r\ngéographique du service sur le territoire, ce délai représente une contrainte forte pour les\r\nfamilles.\r\n\r\nDes procédures de mise à jour de l’état civil (demande d’enregistrement pour des adultes ou\r\nenfants passé le délai d’enregistrement des naissances) sont en place. Néanmoins, le respect\r\nde ces procédures, impliquant la recherche de pièces administratives, et dans de nombreux\r\ncas (absence d’enregistrement à l’état civil pour les parents) un traitement judicaire, peut\r\ns’avérer compliqué car les distances et les coûts de transports privés pénalisent les popul a-\r\ntions mobiles qui cherchent à se mettre en conformité avec la loi. Les jours de marché à bé-\r\n\r\n 30\r\n\ftail sont en partie consacrés aux démarches administratives auprès des maires largement mo-\r\nbilisés par cette question (observation de la mission à Oumlah Riad). D’après les dernières\r\ndirectives, l’enrôlement22 est maintenant du ressort de la région (service spécifique) et non\r\ndes départements ou encore des communes, ce qui complexifie la disponibilité du service\r\npour les populations en perpétuel déplacement.\r\n\r\nSi les populations péri-urbaines semblent là encore bénéficier d’un meilleur accès à ces ser-\r\nvices, il n’apparaît pas évident que les populations pastorales soient particulièrement moins\r\nbien loties que les populations agro-pastorales.\r\n\r\n3.5.2. Situation des enfants en milieu pastoral\r\n\r\nLe milieu pastoral en Mauritanie est caractérisé par une participation assez importante des\r\nenfants dans différentes activités de travail à côté de leurs familles. Le travail des enfants dans\r\nce type d’activité constitue en effet un facteur clé pour la résilience et subsistance des familles\r\net des communautés visitées lors de cette étude. Le travail des enfants dans ce domaine est à\r\nla fois une forme d’apprentissage importante pour les enfants et un choix conditionné par le\r\nmanque d’offre éducative (primaire et secondaire) accessible et de qualité pour les enfants de\r\nces communautés.\r\n\r\nLa Mauritanie ne fait pas exception : Selon une étude du 2013 réalisée par l’Organisation des\r\nNations Unies pour l’Alimentation et l’Agriculture (FAO23), le travail des enfants dans le pas-\r\ntoralisme reste fort dans un grand nombre de pays24 et les enfants impliqués dans ces activités\r\nde travail s’occupent de différentes tâches. Le niveau d’implication des enfants dans le travail\r\net le degré d’exposition aux risques peut varier selon chaque situation particulière. Les h o-\r\nraires de travail peuvent également être différents, avec des enfants travaillant juste quelques\r\nheures après l’école (en appuyant leurs familles) et d’autres passant leurs journées avec le\r\nbétail.\r\nLe Comité des Nations Unies pour les Droits de l’Enfant25 souligne que le travail des enfants\r\n– en tant que travail léger et/ou d’aide aux familles – peut constituer un élément important\r\npour le développement social et la formation de l’enfant. Cette forme de travail ne viole donc\r\npas les droits humains de l’enfant et l’enfant accomplit des tâches sûres pour son âge et capa-\r\ncités et avec la supervision d’un adulte. Le travail dangereux des enfants, d’autre part, est d é-\r\nfini par une situation où les droits des enfants sont violés mais où la prévention de ces viola-\r\ntions reste généralement possible à mettre en place.\r\n\r\nDéfinir une ligne de séparation claire entre ce qui constitue le travail des enfants (travail lé-\r\nger/aide aux familles) et le travail dangereux des enfants n’est pas toujours simple et chaque\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n22 L’enrôlement implique une cascade d’étapes pour chaque individu afin d’être reconnu comme un citoyen\r\n à part entière et ainsi prétendre bénéficier des dro its civiques et citoyens : 1) L’extrait de naissance (coût\r\n des copies légalisées par individu) permet l’attribution 2) d’ un numéro d’enregistrement qui conditionne\r\n ensuite l’obtention de 3) La carte individuelle d’identité (photo).\r\n23 FAO, 2013, Children’s work in the livestock sector: Herding and beyond , Knowledge materials – Gender, Equity\r\n and Rural Employment Division, Economic and Social Development Department,\r\n http://www.fao.org/docrep/017/i3098e/i3098e.pdf\r\n24 Y compris la Mauritanie.\r\n25 Organe de traité de la CDE.\r\n\r\n 31\r\n\fsituation peut être plus nuancée que les facteurs qui la définissent. Cela est particulièrement\r\nvrai pour ce qui concerne l’implication des enfants dans les activités de pastoralisme.\r\n3.5.2.1. Le travail des enfants dans le pastoralisme en Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nÀ l’instar d’autres pays, les activités de pastoralisme en Mauritanie concernent plus directe-\r\nment les garçons26. Ce constat de différenciation entre garçons et filles doit toutefois être\r\nnuancé selon les groupes sociaux présents en Mauritanie. Les enfants garçons sont souvent\r\nimpliqués dans ces activités depuis l’âge de 7 ans où ils commencent à s’occuper des petits\r\nruminants (caprins et ovins), notamment dans tout ce qui concerne l’attachement des ani-\r\nmaux, la recherche d’eau et alimentation ainsi que la traite du bétail. Cette implication ne\r\nvient pas juste en aide aux parents mais constitue une première introduction et formation de\r\nl’enfant au pastoralisme. Les responsabilités des enfants changent au fur et à mesure avec\r\nl’âge de l’enfant. À partir de 13 et 14 ans, les garçons commencent à accompagner le bétail\r\n(principalement des petits ruminants) durant la journée pour aller chercher des pâturages et\r\nreviennent le soir au village, où ils s’occupent également de leur entretien. Les adolescents\r\npartent en transhumance afin d’accompagner leurs pères et parents. La transhumance im-\r\nplique des voyages souvent très longs27 et qui durent 3 ou 4 mois. Ce parcours est considéré\r\npar tous comme une phase importante du développement et de l’acquisition de savoir-faire\r\nen techniques pastorales par les enfants.\r\n\r\nLes enfants vivant dans des communautés pastorales ne se limitent pas à travailler en aide ou\r\nsoutien à leur propre famille mais peuvent également travailler pour des proches ou d’autres\r\nmembres de leur communauté. Ce travail est strictement en lien avec une idée de solidarité\r\ncommunautaire très forte parmi ces communautés pastorales en Mauritanie ainsi qu’autour\r\nde la notion que « ton enfant est l’enfant de tout le village28 ». Les enfants ne sont généralement pas\r\nrémunérés pour leur travail, sauf sous forme de ‘motivation’, où les parents promettent et\r\ndonnent (ensuite) aux enfants des têtes de bétail29 pour les récompenser. Cette pratique est\r\napplicable dans le cas de travail des enfants pour d’autres membres de la communauté.\r\n\r\nEnfin, les enfants peuvent parfois être mobilisés pour travailler pour des personnes en de-\r\nhors de leur communauté ou famille élargie, et notamment pour partir en transhumance.\r\nDans ce cas de figure, la négociation pour ce travail ainsi que pour la rémunération des en-\r\nfants est toujours faite par le biais d’un adulte. De façon générale, la négociation est réalisée\r\nau travers des parents et la personne contractante est une personne connue par la famille ou\r\nrecommandée par quelqu’un de confiance. Comme pour la négociation, le paiement du ‘sa-\r\nlaire’ est aussi accordé en passant par les parents ou un proche de l’enfant. L’enfant n’est à\r\naucun moment impliqué dans le choix concernant sa volonté de participer à une activité de\r\n\r\n\r\n26 Les filles habitant dans des communautés pastorales sont pour la plupart impliquées dans les travaux\r\n domestiques mais peuvent aussi accomplir des activités liées au pastoralisme. Selon les groupes sociaux,\r\n elles accomplissent notamment des activités en lien avec les soins, la traite et l’entretien des animaux. De\r\n plus, elles sont également formées pour pouvoir gérer les activités en absence des hommes et des gar-\r\n çons.\r\n27 Les acteurs interviewés ont parlé de la transhumance vers des pays voisins comme le Mali et la Guinée.\r\n28 Cette notion est aussi valable concernant les questions d’éducation de l’enfant. L’enfant qui obtient des\r\n bonnes notes et des bons résultats à l’école devient une raison de fierté pour sa famille et les membres\r\n de sa communauté. Cela est vrai au point que d’autres membres de la communauté peuvent se mobiliser\r\n financièrement pour permettre à l’enfant de poursuivre ses études secondaires dans les villes maurita-\r\n niennes (dans le cas où son unité familiale ne peut pas y arriver toute seule).\r\n29 Ovins et caprins.\r\n\r\n 32\r\n\ftravail ou vis-à-vis de son ‘salaire’. Comme pour le travail au sein de la famille et d e la com-\r\nmunauté, il y a une totale acceptation de la part des enfants du choix de sa famille 30. Les mé-\r\nnages choisissent qui parmi les enfants va travailler en lien avec le pastoralisme et qui, d’autre\r\npart, va aller à l’école. Ce choix se fait de façon quasi naturelle selon les familles qui ont été\r\ninterrogées dans le cadre de cette étude. Depuis le bas âge les parents savent si leurs enfants\r\nvont travailler : « les petits [enfants] commencent à s’occuper des petits ruminants, tu les observes, s’ils font\r\nbien tu commences à leur expliquer tout et leur transmettre les connaissances, puis à 16 ans, tu commences à\r\nleur faire confiance ». Les femmes disent connaître le caractère de leurs enfants depuis leur nais-\r\nsance et elles regardent aussi leur niveau d’éducation et de politesse31. Les femmes et les\r\nhommes prennent la décision concernant le travail de leurs enfants ensemble, sans aucun\r\nconflit. L’enfant qui ira à l’école est aussi choisi par ses parents, qui regardent l’envie\r\nd’apprendre de l’enfant ainsi que ses résultats scolaires32. Au-delà de cela, le choix portant à la\r\nscolarisation de l’enfant est conditionné par d’autres facteurs, qui seront adressés dans la se c-\r\ntion suivante.\r\n\r\nLa transmission des connaissances et savoir-faire vient principalement de la part des pères et\r\ndes hommes de la communauté de l’enfant. Comme déjà vu, l’enfant commence à accomplir\r\ndes petites tâches à partir de l’âge de 7 ans. Les pères montrent aux enfants comment traire\r\nles animaux, les séparer, les attacher et comment s’occuper de leur entretien. Il y a ensuite\r\nune phase importante d’observation et accompagnement de l’enfant dans ses activités qui, si\r\nréussie, est suivie par une attribution de plus grandes responsabilités à l’enfant 33. Le test ou\r\npreuve vérifiant la ‘capacité’ de l’enfant est l’attention spontanée qu’il démontre – naturelle-\r\nment – envers les animaux34 ainsi que pour l’apprentissage du métier35. Par ailleurs, le choix\r\ndes enfants qui vont prendre un rôle encore plus ‘important’, et notamment en lien avec la\r\ntranshumance, se fait sur la base de facteurs comme la capacité de l’enfant de gérer le bétail,\r\nle surveiller et de ne pas perdre des animaux. Les enfants restant au village sont souvent des-\r\ntinés à d’autres tâches afin de pouvoir appuyer la famille en fonction des besoin s où ils peu-\r\nvent également partir en ville pour chercher d’autres activités génératrice de revenu.\r\n\r\n3.5.2.2. Les facteurs conditionnant le travail des enfants\r\n« Historiquement, le travail des enfants a toujours existé dans la société mauritanienne qui le considère comme\r\nmoyen d’éducation, d’apprentissage et de préparation à la vie et de formation sur les valeurs et normes sociales\r\net morales. Dans la société traditionnelle, le travail des enfants rentre dans le cadre des processus de socialisa-\r\ntion et de reproduction du système d’organisation sociale. […] Ils assimilaient ainsi entre autres, non seule-\r\nment la technologie mais aussi les systèmes et les valeurs qui régissaient leur société. […] Dans ce sens, le\r\njeune garçon doit par ce biais acquérir endurance physique et émotionnelle, tandis que la jeune fille se prépare\r\nau futur rôle d’épouse et de mère36 ». La culture, en tant que culture du pastoralisme, constitue à cet\r\n\r\n\r\n30 Un enfant rencontré lors de la phase terrain de l’étude dit qu’il aurait préféré aller à l’école mais que « si\r\n tu es fait pour ça, tu vas faire ça » (en se référant au travail en tant que berger).\r\n31 Référence à l’éducation et à la politesse comme formes de responsabilité et de confiance que l’on peut\r\n faire aux enfants qui vont travailler en tant que bergers et pasteurs.\r\n32 « Est-ce qu’il aime étudier ? A-t-il des bonnes notes ? L’enseignant est-il content de lui ? [Si oui] il va à l’école, ici ça\r\n marche comme ça ».\r\n33 En lien avec le changement d’âge de l’enfant.\r\n34 Le côté bien portant et la bonne santé des animaux est un signal en ce sens : les parents observent l’état\r\n des animaux et comment l’enfant s’en occupe.\r\n35 « L’enfant pose-t-il des questions ? Est-il intéressé ? A-t-il l’air content quand on lui explique les choses ? ».\r\n36 Étude sur les Pires Formes de Travail des Enfants en Mauritanie, 2011, Ministère des Affaires Sociales, de l’Enfance\r\n et de la Famille (MASEF) et Office National des Statistiques (ONS).\r\n\r\n 33\r\n\fégard l’un des principaux facteurs d’implication des enfants dans le travail au sein des co m-\r\nmunautés pastorales. Le pastoralisme n’est pas qu’une activité génératrice de revenus mais\r\nune culture qui se transmet de génération en génération. La transmission des connaissances à\r\nl’enfant au travers de son travail est donc une façon pour s’assurer de la surviv ance de cette\r\nculture37. L’enfant devient donc responsable de cela mais aussi du développement des tec h-\r\nniques d’élevage selon les nouvelles nécessités. Comme vu précédemment, le choix des p a-\r\nrents de former un enfant au pastoralisme ou d’envoyer l’enfant à l’école n’est pas laissé au\r\nhasard, ce choix est très important pour les parents. Si l’école représente une sorte de ‘d é-\r\nvouement’ pour les familles vis-à-vis de leur background et héritage culturel. Le fait de « garder\r\nle bétail à l’interne de la famille » est également une composante qui rentre en jeu en contribuant\r\nà la fois au volet culturel et économique de l’implication des enfants dans ce type de travail.\r\n\r\nLes moyens d’existence des familles sont un facteur important à prendre en considération\r\nquand on s’intéresse au travail des enfants dans le pastoralisme. La nécessité des ménages\r\nd’avoir une aide de la part des enfants ne doit pas être négligée pour bien comprendre le\r\nphénomène. C’est aussi un élément à prendre en compte pour aider les acteurs étatiq ues, et\r\nautres, à définir leurs interventions de sécurité alimentaire. Au cours des dernières années\r\nnotamment38, le pastoralisme n’a pas toujours constitué une forme suffisante de revenus pour\r\nsubvenir à tous les besoins des familles et des communautés. Nous faisons donc face au-\r\njourd’hui à une situation où les parents sont de plus en plus impliqués dans des activités g é-\r\nnératrices de revenu autre que le pastoralisme. La mobilité des parents vers les villes du pays\r\npour chercher des opportunités de travail et l’engagement important des parents dans\r\nd’autres activités parfois loin du domicile font que les responsabilités des enfants\r\ns’accroissent et peuvent être ainsi amenés à s’occuper plus du bétail. Les situations de crise,\r\nen général, exacerbent les problématiques de protection de l’enfant déjà existantes et cela est\r\négalement applicable dans le cas de la sécheresse en Mauritanie. Dans la wilaya du Guidimak-\r\nha, la pauvreté conditionne particulièrement le travail des enfants. À cet égard, au sein de\r\ncertaines communautés, les ménages qui font travailler leurs enfants en dehors de leurs fa-\r\nmilles et communautés en tant que salariés font principalement partie de deux catégories\r\nsocio-économique, Hoffrou Mbalérou (très pauvres) et Samba Nigelle (pauvres).\r\n\r\nPar ailleurs, les enfants forment une force de travail valide et à bas coût pour les ménages,\r\ncorrespondant à autant de ‘bras forts’. Les adolescents39 ont « l’énergie nécessaire pour faire tout ce\r\nque les autres [les personnes plus âgées] ne peuvent pas faire ». Les adolescents accomplissent\r\nsouvent des tâches considérées comme lourdes et fatigantes et demandant ainsi de la force\r\nphysique.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n37 Culture principalement orale.\r\n38 À la suite de la crise alimentaire et la sécheresse qui ont frappé la Mauritanie et le Sahel en 2012, la rési-\r\n lience des communautés pastorales a été compromise. Toutes les communautés visitées ont en effet dé-\r\n noncé cette situation particulièrement compliquée pour leurs activités.\r\n39 Pour plus d’information sur l’adolescence, les risques auxquels les adolescents sont exposés et le respect\r\n de leurs droits - voir l’Observation Générale N°20 du Comité ONU des Droits de l’Enfant sur la mise\r\n en œuvre des droits de l’enfant pendant l’adolescence :\r\nhttp://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=6QkG1d%2fPPRiCAqhKb7yhsqIkirKQZLK2\r\n M58RF%2f5F0vH%2bg0BeHNYSXl2ulaeIW9Y1VpLxMUN7I08w%2bf%2byFshKsuF8BdZsAvqJwW\r\n wt2zdmKUR6%2fjWpaSdTTgJgwjhc9lyG\r\n\r\n 34\r\n\fLes différents obstacles liés au fonctionnement du système éducatif en milieu rural 40 consti-\r\ntuent encore un élément impactant sur le travail des enfants dans les communautés pasto-\r\nrales. Les difficultés en termes d’accès aux services d’éducation sont identifiables à plusieurs\r\nniveaux. En premier lieu, il existe un problème géographique d’accès à l’école 41. En effet,\r\ndans les communautés pastorales (résidentes) les écoles sont souvent éloignées et les enfants\r\ndoivent marcher de longues distances pour les atteindre. Pour les communautés pastorales ce\r\nproblème est encore plus fort dû à leur mobilité continue. Durant les mois les plus chauds un\r\ngrand nombre d’enfants reste à la maison pour ne pas avoir à marcher avec la chaleur, et su r-\r\ntout les plus petits. Une fois à l’école, d’autres obstacles font en sorte que l’éducation ne re-\r\nprésente pas une alternative valide au travail des enfants. En effet, les personnes rencontrées\r\ndans le cadre de cette étude ont parlé de problèmes liés à l’absence des enseignants ainsi que\r\ndes questions de discrimination42 et violence43 à l’école. Malgré que le système d’éducation\r\nnational et le Programme National de Développement du Secteur Educatif 2011-202044 pré-\r\nvoit une augmentation des ressources destinées à l’éducation en milieu rural, la problém a-\r\ntique du nombre et de la formation des enseignants demeure le principal défi en termes de\r\nqualité de l’offre éducative fournie. De plus, l’école en tant que telle ne semble pas s’adapter à\r\nla vie des communautés, des horaires d’école non-alignés avec le rythme de vie et travail des\r\ncommunautés pastorales ainsi qu’un curriculum scolaire standardisé45 ne facilitent pas le\r\nchoix des parents à s’orienter vers l’école. Lorsque les nécessités demeurent élevées en termes\r\nde travail et que les parents se retrouvent déjà face à un choix concernant le parcours de leurs\r\nenfants, les échecs du système éducatif en milieu rural ne permettent pas un changement\r\ndans les pratiques familiales vis-à-vis du travail des enfants. L’absence d’une offre d’éducation\r\nsecondaire en milieu rural est particulièrement pertinente à considérer en lien avec une ma-\r\njeure implication des adolescents dans des activités pastorales.\r\nL’école secondaire n’est pas présente au niveau des communautés rurales et les enfants vo u-\r\nlant poursuivre leurs études doivent se diriger vers les villes. Les enfants qui vont continuer\r\nleurs études vers le niveau secondaire sont normalement confiés46 à des proches de la famille\r\nhabitant en ville, les autres – choisis pour leurs capacités de travail – abandonnent définiti-\r\nvement l’école pour continuer à se former et travailler en tant que bergers et éleveurs. La\r\ntranshumance, par ailleurs, arrête définitivement le parcours scolaire de l’enfant.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n40 Ici il est intéressant de voir que les organisations de la société civile mauritanienne travaillant dans le\r\n domaine de la protection de l’enfant ont affirmé que « l’enseignement primaire hors des villes, on peut très bien\r\n dire que ça n’existe pas ».\r\n41 Noter que l’on parle d’éducation primaire.\r\n42 Les enfants fréquentant les écoles des communautés voisines ne reç oivent pas d’eau qui est destinée aux\r\n enfants de la communauté où se trouve l’école.\r\n43 Notamment le châtiment corporel fait par les enseignants.\r\n44\r\n\r\n http://www.unesco.org/education/edurights/media/docs/8f4c95850184d9c2eb04241b448293ccf6d7d\r\n af5.pdf\r\n45 Ne répondant pas aux besoins spécifiques (de formation) de ces communautés.\r\n46 Le confiage des enfants était défini « comme une pratique qui correspondait à l’origine à un mécanisme de socialisa-\r\n tion de l’enfant par le travail/l’éducation et à une forme d’entraide entre segments sociaux ou familiaux. Les parents co n-\r\n fiaient l’enfant à un foyer d’accueil en raison des opportunités qu’il pouvait lui o ffrir. Nous pouvons noter ces dernières an-\r\n nées une forme de perversion de cette pratique qui place certains enfants dans une situation de production de biens et de ser-\r\n vices au profit du tuteur » - Quelle protection pour les enfants concernés par la mobilité en Afrique de\r\n l’Ouest, https://www.tdh.ch/sites/default/files/quelle-protection-pour-les-enfants-concernes-par-la-\r\n mobilite-en-afrique-de-l-ouest_fr.pdf) Ces pratiques exposent les enfants à plusieurs risques de protec-\r\n tion en termes d’exploitation, violence et traite.\r\n\r\n 35\r\n\f3.5.2.3. Les facteurs de risque pour les enfants travailleurs.\r\n\r\n« Les familles pensent protéger les enfants car [en les faisant travailler] ils les forment47 ». La protection\r\ndes enfants travaillant dans le pastoralisme est un sujet délicat à aborder en tenant compte\r\ndes dimensions culturelles et économiques. En effet, le fait de faire travailler son enfant, de le\r\nformer et de lui offrir un avenir dans ce sens représente une forme de protection importante\r\npour les familles. À ce propos, le fait de garder l’enfant au sein de sa propre communauté\r\njoue aussi un rôle important dans la décision de faire travailler l’enfant dans le domaine pa s-\r\ntoral. La mobilité des enfants vers la ville – pour les études ou pour la recherche\r\nd’opportunités de travail – constitue un élément de danger selon les familles, qui perçoivent\r\nla ‘ville’ comme un lieu où l’enfant va perdre ses valeurs et tenir des comportements non -\r\nappropriés48.\r\n\r\nComme il a été vu, le travail des enfants dans les activités de pastoralisme est une forme im-\r\nportante d’apprentissage pour les enfants (et notamment face à une défaillance du système\r\néducatif national en milieu rural) mais l’implication des enfants dans certaines activités (p é-\r\nnibles et fatigantes) de travail liées au pastoralisme représente un risque pour leur santé et\r\nleur développement49, ainsi que pour leur protection.\r\nLes risques50 liés aux activités accomplies par les enfants existent toujours mais augmentent\r\nau fur et à mesure que l’enfant acquiert des nouvelles responsabilités. Dans l’évolution des\r\ntâches, les adolescents commencent à accompagner le bétail, puis à accomplir des tâches plus\r\nlourdes et fatigantes51. En ce sens, l’accompagnement du bétail durant la journée expose les\r\nenfants à différents risques. L’exposition durant toute la journée au soleil et à la chaleur porte\r\nsouvent les enfants à avoir des problèmes liés à la fatigue, aux coups de chaleur, à la faim et à\r\nla soif. De plus, le contact prolongé avec le bétail expose les enfants à plusieurs pathologies\r\nanimales52 ainsi qu’à des blessures suite aux actes violents des animaux53. Les morsures des\r\nserpents sont aussi une cause liée au travail récurant pour les enfants lors de leurs journées en\r\nbrousse. Durant l’accompagnement du bétail les enfants sont également en charge de couper\r\nle bois et utilisent donc des outils dangereux comme des machettes. En général, selon tous\r\nles acteurs rencontrés, les enfants rentrent souvent au village avec des lésions, blessures, des\r\nfractures ou d’autres problèmes suite à des accidents subis durant leur travail. La plupart des\r\nenfants ayant ce type d’accidents n’a généralement pas d’accès aux services basiques de santé.\r\nPremièrement, les familles tendent à recourir aux médecins traditionnels pour soigner les\r\nproblèmes de santé de ces enfants et non pas aller aux postes de santé ou à l’hôpital 54. Cette\r\noption constitue en effet le dernier recours pour les familles et est considérée juste en cas\r\n\r\n\r\n47 Chef de Projet, World Vision International, Consortium RimRap dans la wilaya de l’Assaba.\r\n48 Délinquance, usage des drogues, etc. De plus, en ville les enfants pourraient être influencés pour conti-\r\n nuer leur mobilité et partir en Europe – ce qui, pour les familles, représente un risque très élevé.\r\n49 Développement physique, mental, moral et social de l’enfant.\r\n50 Risque en tant que facteur de vulnérabilité multiplié par le facteur d’exposition au risque.\r\n51 Par exemple : couper les bois, creuser et puiser l’eau.\r\n52 La Direction Régionale de l’Action Sanitaire (DRAS) de la wilaya de Assaba confirme que les cas pris en\r\n charge par les postes de santé des enfants venant des communautés pastorales sont souvent en lien avec\r\n des pathologies animales et que les familles ne sont pas vraiment sensibilisées par rapport à ce type de\r\n risque.\r\n53 Surtout autour des points d’eau. Les enfants peuvent aussi recevoir des coups de sabot de la part des\r\n vaches et se blesser en séparant les animaux.\r\n54 Ce problème a été identifié par la DRAS, ainsi que par les organisations de la société civile rencontrées\r\n qui ont parlé d’une question de faible conscientisation des parents face aux risques liés à ce type de trai-\r\n tement pour la santé et le développement de l’enfant.\r\n\r\n 36\r\n\fd’urgence. Plusieurs facteurs rentrent en cause par ailleurs en termes d’accès aux services de\r\nsanté pour ces enfants et leurs communautés. Les difficultés liées au transport et aux coûts de\r\ntransport pour atteindre ces services, et le prix des traitements et des médicaments empê-\r\nchent les enfants – et notamment ceux issus des ménages les plus pauvres – de bénéficier\r\nd’une prise en charge médicale de leur cas. Pour faire face à cette situation, les familles et les\r\ncommunautés ont mis en place des systèmes de solidarité et de protection pour les enfants\r\nnécessitant des soins. Lorsque la médecine traditionnelle ne peut pas fournir une solution aux\r\nproblèmes de santé des enfants, pour les familles les plus pauvres, la communauté se mobi-\r\nlise pour trouver un moyen de transport ou de payer ce transport.\r\nLes rencontres avec les enfants travaillant en tant que bergers ont confirmé que les risques ne\r\nse limitent pas seulement aux blessures ou aux maladies suite aux accidents de travail, mais\r\naussi à l’isolement social de l’enfant55 et le poids de ces activités sur son bien-être moral. Tous\r\nles enfants ont partagé la très forte sensation de peur et de responsabilité ressentie vis-à-vis\r\nde leur travail. « Tu as peur tout le temps [de perdre le bétail ou de te le faire voler] et tu ne peux\r\npas te reposer », les enfants sont effectivement bien conscients de ce que ce travail représente\r\nainsi que de la valeur et de l’importance que le bétail détient pour le bien de leurs familles. Le\r\ncôté valorisant de ce travail est important pour l’éducation de l’enfant, mais la peur de perdre\r\ndes têtes de bétail et de causer un dégât économique à leur famille peut être pour l’enfant une\r\nlourde responsabilité.\r\nEnsuite, les adolescents partant en transhumance pour des longues périodes sont encore plus\r\nexposés aux risques évoqués ci-dessus et ont un accès encore plus limité aux services de base\r\nde santé au cas d’accident ou d’une maladie nécessitant une prise en charge médicale56. Dans\r\nce cas aussi, des mécanismes de protection mis en place par les communautés transhumantes\r\nexistent et leur potentiel devrait être exploité et appuyé par les interventions dont ces com-\r\nmunautés bénéficient. De plus, dans les zones frontalières avec le Mali (Kara Koro), un\r\nnombre important d’adolescents se retrouvent en contact avec la Justice, suite aux conflits\r\nliés au pastoralisme57.\r\n\r\nLes enfants travaillant en tant que bergers, ou partant en transhumance, partagent les mêmes\r\nrisques de protection. Leurs vulnérabilités peuvent varier selon leur âge mais l’exposition aux\r\nrisques reste forte et, d’autre part, les mesures de prévention des risques ne sont pas suffi-\r\nsamment encouragées. La définition d’interventions voulant aborder les problématiques de\r\nprotection de ces enfants devraient donc passer par une meilleure compréhension des méca-\r\nnismes de protection déjà existants au sein des communautés pastorales, ainsi que par le ren-\r\nforcement de facteurs externes tels que l’accès aux services d’éducation et de santé. Le travail\r\ndes enfants, au-delà de ces implications culturelles, est un facteur de soutien important pour\r\nles ménages et leur résilience est, en quelque sorte, toujours conditionnée par cet appui. Les\r\ninterventions de protection nécessitent donc une approche holistique qui tienne en considé-\r\nration tous les éléments observés en précédence et qui cherche à trouver un équilibre entre\r\nles besoins de familles, la difficulté de familles d’envoyer leurs enfants à l’école et les risques\r\nque le travail dans le pastoralisme peut comporter pour les enfants.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n55 « Tu es tout seul toute la journée, qu’avec des animaux ! ».\r\n56 Les enfants et leurs familles partant au Mali pour la transhumance ont également souligné la difficulté\r\n d’accéder aux services à cause de la différence en termes de monnaie.\r\n57 Les conflits liés au pastoralisme sont en général dans le bassin du Kara Koro, et notamment entre les\r\n éleveurs et les agriculteurs ou encore les riverains (problèmes d’eau, divagation des champs), ou égal e-\r\n ment avec les gardes forestiers qui portent aux arrestations et aux accidents.\r\n\r\n 37\r\n\f.\r\n\r\n\r\n3.6. Catégorisation des ménages\r\n3.6.1. Principaux critères de différentiation des ménages\r\n\r\nCatégoriser les ménages est un exercice difficile, et qui s’appuie parfois sur des représent a-\r\ntions arbitraires. Par ailleurs, il est utile de clarifier l’objectif du travail de catégorisation pour\r\nen définir les principes. Nous proposons une démarche de catégorisation qui s’appuie sur 4\r\ngrands types de critères : le type d’animaux et la taille du troupeau, la mobilité des animaux et\r\ndes membres du ménage, les activités extra-pastorales, et l’habitat et l’équipement domes-\r\ntiques (les premiers critères caractérisent le capital économique des ménages, tandis que le\r\ndernier illustre le niveau d’investissement dans le confort matériel, indicatif du niveau de vie).\r\nNous nous sommes également efforcés de bien identifier les ménages et individus fortement\r\nimpliqués dans des activités de gardiennage des animaux pour autrui.\r\n\r\n3.6.1.1. Distinction par le type et la taille du troupeau\r\n\r\nDistinction par le qualificatif du troupeau en langues usuelles\r\n\r\nTraditionnellement dans les langues respectives utilisées par les groupes d’éleveurs, des noms\r\nprécis et distinctifs qualifient le troupeau dont les animaux sont possédés individuellement (selon les\r\ngroupes) mais dont la conduite est gérée localement (Bonte, 1992 : 150)58 pour les maures. Selon les\r\ngroupes sociaux, une distinction se superpose constituée par l’espèce animale dominante\r\nqu’illustre le troupeau.\r\n\r\nTableau 4 : Distinction des ménages par la taille des troupeaux en langues usuelles\r\n\r\n Appellation Maure Appellation Peuhl\r\n\r\nPetit troupeau Le démarrage d’un troupeau de petit\r\n ruminants est eguizi pour les ovins-\r\n caprins (30 à 50 têtes) et toumza pour les Les propriétaires de petits (moins de 10\r\n caprins (10 à 20). bovins) troupeaux sont qualifiés de\r\n Sambanagel.\r\n Un troupeau correspondant à 5 à 10\r\n camelins ou 10 à 30 bovins est qualifié\r\n de gtaï’a\r\n\r\nMoyen trou- Le premier seuil d’un troupeau est at-\r\n teint lorsque qu’il faut un berger traduit\r\npeau\r\n en langue maure par debos (véritablement Chez les peuhls, les propriétaires de 30\r\n un bâton). Il symbolise la charge d’une à 50 bovins sont qualifiés de Diargua.\r\n responsabilité dans le gardiennage avec\r\n ses conséquences pour la bonne tenue\r\n du troupeau, l’évitement des blessures\r\n ou infections, ainsi que le vol ou\r\n\r\n\r\n58 La propriété du bétail était individuelle mais la gestion des troupeaux s’effectu ait dans un cadre domes-\r\n tique et impliquait une division du travail selon le sexe et l’âge. P. Bonte, 2009. Appartenances tribales et en-\r\n jeux fonciers pastoraux en Mauritanie, le projet « Elevage II », In Etudes rurales 2009/2 (n° 184), p. 149-168.\r\n\r\n 38\r\n\f l’égarement d’animaux (ce qui implique\r\n la recherche de l’animal).\r\n\r\nGrands trou- L’éleveur reconnu socialement est quali-\r\n fié de serk pour plus de 100 bovins,\r\npeaux\r\n azelaï pour plus de 100 camelins mâles et\r\n bahrachou pour un troupeau de 250 petits\r\n ruminants. Gallo\r\n\r\nRiches Ele-\r\n Ghani\r\nveurs\r\n\r\nDistinction par le type de bétail\r\n\r\nPlusieurs espèces sont fréquemment représentées dans les troupeaux. On retrouve notam-\r\nment des caprins associés à des troupeaux camelins ou bovins, l’avantage des caprins étant\r\nleur rusticité (possibilité de les conduire avec des camelins), tout en garantissant une certaine\r\nsouplesse dans la gestion des ventes d’animaux. Ainsi, trois grandes catégories de troupeaux\r\nse distinguent : (1) les troupeaux à dominante camelin, (2) les troupeaux à dominante bovin\r\net (3) les troupeaux principalement ovins. Les troupeaux camelins et ovins sont principale-\r\nment exploités en systèmes transhumants, tandis que les troupeaux à dominante bovin peu-\r\nvent être exploités soit en systèmes grand transhumant, soit en système agro-pastoraux ou\r\nagro-élevage. Les troupeaux de très petite taille ou de petite taille sont essentiellement des\r\ntroupeaux caprins, parfois associés à quelques bovins.\r\n\r\n3.6.1.2. Distinction par la mobilité du bétail et des membres du ménage\r\nLa distinction des ménages par la mobilité du bétail est importante, car celle est un élément\r\ndéterminant de la résilience des élevages pratiqués par les différentes catégories de ménages.\r\nEn effet, la mobilité des troupeaux permet (dans une large mesure) de se passer de complé-\r\nments fourragers en période de soudure pastorale, insuffisamment disponibles pour entrete-\r\nnir des grands troupeaux et trop chers pour être accessible par les ménages les plus vulné-\r\nrables mais aussi pour permettre l’entretien de troupeaux de grande taille. La distinction des\r\nménages par la mobilité de ses membres est aussi importante : en effet, la mobilité d’une\r\ngrande partie des membres du ménage conditionne la transmission d’un savoir-faire indis-\r\npensable à la reproduction des systèmes d’élevage. La fixation des femmes et des jeunes en-\r\nfants, compte tenu du fonctionnement du système éducatif et sanitaire, semble conditionner\r\nleur accès (très imparfait) aux services éducatifs et sanitaire.\r\n\r\nDans le cas des systèmes grands-transhumants, le bétail est presque systématiquement\r\nmobile. Les parcours de transhumance sont variables, et sont adaptés à l’espèce dominante\r\ndans les troupeaux, l’état des parcours (fonction de la pluviométrie), et des accords de réc i-\r\nprocité entre pasteurs et populations fixées dans les espaces de pâturage. Néanmoins, certains\r\nanimaux peuvent être gardés aux niveaux de points d’attache : les vaches et chamelles en\r\nlactation, et tout (pour les petits troupeaux détenus par les ménages vulnérables sédentarisés)\r\nou partie (pour les plus grands propriétaires) du troupeau de petits ruminants.\r\n\r\nLa mobilité des membres du ménage est très variable. Il est de moins en moins fréquent que\r\nl’ensemble des membres accompagnent les troupeaux transhumants dans tous leurs mouve-\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 39\r\n\fments (RBM, 2018). Ce cas est principalement réservé aux familles de bergers, responsables\r\nde la conduite de troupeaux dont ils ne sont pas propriétaires59. Dans ce cas - notamment en\r\nmilieu maure – le propriétaire se doit de fournir des vivres pour l’ensemble des membres de\r\nla famille en complément du salaire. L’usufruit de certains produits de l’élevage (nota mment\r\nle lait) revient aux bergers et à leur famille. Mais les bergers ne transhument pas systémati-\r\nquement avec l’ensemble de leur famille. En effet, la possibilité de bénéficier des produits de\r\nl’élevage est réservée aux bergers expérimentés en charge de la conduite des troupeaux. Mais\r\naussi, certaines familles de bergers, lorsqu’elles en ont la possibilité, préfèrent éviter que\r\nl’ensemble des membres du ménage ne suivent les troupeaux.\r\n\r\nLe plus souvent, les femmes et les jeunes enfants de propriétaires de troupeaux suffisamment\r\nimportants pour transhumer de façon autonome ne participent pas systématiquement aux\r\nmouvements associés à la transhumance du bétail. Dans ce cas, seuls les hommes, souvent\r\nassociés à des jeunes garçons, accompagnent les animaux. Les propriétaires de troupeaux de\r\ngrande taille ont tendance à confier la responsabilité de la conduite des animaux à des ber-\r\ngers, notamment en milieu maure. Dans ce cas, le propriétaire du troupeau participe seul au\r\ntravail de supervision des bergers. Dans le cas de très grands troupeaux (à propriétaire géné-\r\nralement urbain), la supervision du travail des bergers est confiée à un gérant, ce qui réduit les\r\nmouvements des propriétaires. Les travaux de RBM (2018) suggèrent que les cas de familles\r\nentières qui accompagnent les troupeaux pour la transhumance sont désormais très rares, et\r\nque les stratégies de confiage à des bergers et les stratégies d’accompagnement des troupeaux\r\npar le chef de ménage ou un autre membre du ménage sont à peu près aussi fréquentes.\r\n\r\nPour ce qui concerne les systèmes agro-pastoraux, la mobilité du bétail n’est pas systéma-\r\ntique et les transhumances sont généralement de plus faible amplitude. En effet, les trou-\r\npeaux agro-pastoraux de petite à moyenne taille ne transhument pas véritablement sans ges-\r\ntion collective des troupeaux. Les troupeaux peuvent être mobiles autour du point de fixa-\r\ntion, mais les déplacements se font soit à la journée, soit sur quelques jours. Pour les trou-\r\npeaux de plus grande taille ou gérés collectivement, les mobilités en système agropastoral\r\npeuvent être plus importantes (jusqu’à plusieurs centaines de km). Dans le cas des systèmes\r\nagro-pastoraux, cas où les femmes et les jeunes enfants sont impliqués dans les transhu-\r\nmances, ils sont devenus rares. Les bêtes en lactation sont généralement gardées au village ou\r\nau campement. Pour ce qui concerne la mobilité des troupeaux et des ménages, on peut éga-\r\nlement distinguer le cas des agro-éleveurs, c’est-à-dire des populations historiquement peu\r\nimpliquées dans l’élevage et qui ont récemment investies dans ce domaine. Ces populations\r\nsont fixées. Lorsque leurs animaux sont mobiles, c’est que des bergers agro-pasteurs en ont la\r\ngarde. En milieu agro-pastoral, le recours à des bergers salariés pour accompagner les ani-\r\nmaux transhumants est un peu moins fréquent (RBM 2018). De même qu’en milieu pastoral,\r\nles transhumances impliquant l’ensemble des membres des ménages, sont très rares.\r\n\r\nOn note également que les moyens de transports sont fonction de la mobilité et de la taille\r\ndu troupeau (charrette à ânes pour 30/40 bovins, véhicule Mercédès d’occasion pour au\r\nmoins un troupeau de 100 bovins et un véhicule 4*4 pour au moins 200 dromadaires). Le\r\nmoyen de transport motorisé complète l’usage des dromadaires de bât durant les différents\r\ndéplacements. Il représente le lien avec les centres d’affaires que sont les marchés où les pa s-\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n59 Leurs propres animaux de bât, et leur embryon de troupeau, sont mélangés aux animaux dont ils assu-\r\n rent la garde.\r\n\r\n 40\r\n\fteurs échangent (produits animaux) et se procurent les biens (céréales, produits domestiques,\r\nintrants, etc.) et les services (informations, actes administratifs) indispensables à la vie pasto-\r\nrale.\r\n\r\n3.6.1.3. Distinction par la main d’œuvre, et les activités et sources de revenus extra-\r\npastorales\r\nUn des facteurs important de différenciation entre les ménages est la possibilité de recours à\r\nla main d’œuvre pour l’élevage et le gardiennage des animaux. Pour les très grands éleveurs,\r\nle recours à la main d’œuvre est systématique, et il est fréquent chez les grands éleveurs. Les\r\néleveurs de petits troupeaux dépendent essentiellement du recours à la main d’œuvre fami-\r\nliale.\r\n\r\nLes pasteurs transhumants se déplacent sur des espaces pastoraux plus ou moins éloignés de\r\nleur centre d’activité. Il peut être intéressant de cerner les éleveurs par le champ des diverses\r\nactivités pratiquées. L’agriculture pluviale et le maraîchage constituent deux activités com-\r\nplémentaires à l’élevage, façonnant les groupes agro-éleveurs et agro-pasteurs selon\r\nl’antériorité de l’activité (agriculteurs se lançant dans l’élevage pour la terminologie agro éle-\r\nveurs et vice versa). Il faut souligner toutefois que certaines catégories sociales n’adoptent pas\r\nl’agriculture au nom du code social en vigueur, ou tout du moins dans les représentations\r\nsymboliques.\r\n\r\nLa cueillette de la gomme reste également présente et constitue une diversification classique60,\r\nmême si la production nationale est en chute durant les deux décennies de ce siècle.\r\n\r\nMais les plus importantes activités complémentaires se situent dans les villages, les villes in-\r\ntermédiaires et la capitale. Il s’agit d’activités commerciales plus ou moins liées à l’élevage\r\n(convoyeurs, bergers, transformateurs de viande et de lait/dérivés) et au commerce de pro-\r\nduits domestiques ou leur transformation (couscous), la location de main d’œuvre dans la\r\nconstruction ou dans les métiers artisanaux, ou encore la collecte de bois de chauffe. Les\r\ndernières activités nécessitent la résidence loin du troupeau ce qui implique la réorganisation\r\nde sa conduite soit en milieu péri-urbain, soit par fractionnement des tâches dans le ménage\r\net la famille élargie (confiage intra-famillial). On note également que la pratique de pluri acti-\r\nvités implique des pluri résidences. Dans le cas des ménages les plus aisés, le lieu de rési-\r\ndence où résident les enfants se trouve au niveau où à proximité des centres urbains, décision\r\nrésultante d’une volonté d’accès aux services éducatifs et sanitaires. Pour les ménages les plus\r\nvulnérables, seuls les actifs rejoignent la ville.\r\n\r\n3.6.1.4. Distinction par l’habitat d’autres indicateurs d’ordre domestique\r\n\r\nIl y a lieu de constater que pour les transhumants la modernité a impliqué la très forte dimi-\r\nnution de l’usage de la tente traditionnelle familiale (khayma) dans les campements (fergan) au\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n60 Les wilayas Sud, Sud-Est et Centre du pays notamment le Trarza, le Brakhna, le Gorgol, le Guidimakha,\r\n l’Assaba et les Hodhs, constituent les principales zones de prédilection des peuplements d’ Acacia senegal\r\n (gommier). La densité moyenne à l’hectare des peuplements dans les différentes régions, régénération\r\n non comprise, est de 42 arbres/ ha dont 29 gommiers (étude juillet 2012, GAGE/GIZ). La production\r\n nationale en gomme arabique est de l’ordre de 600 tonnes par an. Avant les années 2.000 avec une pro-\r\n duction de 6.000 tonnes, la Mauritanie se situait au premier plan après le Tchad et le Soudan.\r\n\r\n 41\r\n\fprofit d’hangars fixes (socle bétonné avec couverture en bâche, en paille ou en tôles). Le ni-\r\nveau de confort (tapis, type de matelas, batterie avec panneaux solaires, niveaux d’ustensile de\r\ncuisine, etc.) indique le degré d’émancipation et/ou de vulnérabilité, par exemple.\r\n\r\n3.6.2. Synthèse : Typologie des ménages selon les 3 grandes catégories de système\r\n d’élevage\r\n\r\nIl convient de souligner les difficultés méthodologiques à la formulation d’une typologie des\r\nménages pastoraux s’appuyant sur ces différents critères de catégorisation. Idé alement, il\r\nserait utile de pouvoir confronter des approches systémiques détaillées (identification de tous\r\nles systèmes d’élevage pratiqués dans chaque région) avec des approches statistiques (en-\r\nquêtes auprès des ménages pratiquant les différents systèmes pour permettre une catégorisa-\r\ntion des ménages au sein des systèmes). Le groupement d’ONG responsable de la mise en\r\nœuvre du programme RIMRAP de l’Assaba a préparé une analyse des systèmes agro-\r\npastoraux. Le groupement d’ONG qui opère dans le Guidimaka, qui dispose également d’une\r\nbonne connaissance des systèmes agro-pastoraux de la région, a conduit une enquête auprès\r\nd’un large échantillon de ménages de la région. L’analyse que cette étude, portant sur les 4\r\nrégions couvertes par le RIMRAP, est plus globale. Il s’agit, pour les 3 grands type de sy s-\r\ntèmes répertoriés (systèmes pastoraux grand transhumants, systèmes agro-pastoraux / agro-\r\nélevage, et système péri-urbains), d’identifier les principales catégories de ménages représen-\r\ntés. Pour faciliter la correspondance avec les méthodes de catégorisation les plus couram-\r\nment utilisées (et notamment l’approche HEA), il est proposé une catégorisation en 4\r\ngroupes de ménages au sein des systèmes grands transhumants et systèmes agro-pastoraux /\r\nagro-élevage ; pour les ménages impliqués dans les systèmes péri-urbains – moins diversifiés\r\n– sont regroupés en 3 catégories.\r\n\r\nLes ménages « pauvres », sont pour les trois systèmes, caractérisés par : (1) une faible pos-\r\nsession de bétail ; (2) la sédentarité du cheptel familial et de la majorité des membres du mé-\r\nnages (en dehors des hommes employés comme bergers) ; (3) une forte proportion des reve-\r\nnus tirés de la vente de main d’œuvre ; (4) la reproduction de situations de dépendance éco-\r\nnomique et sociale vis-à-vis d’autres ménages ; et (5) une exclusion de l’accès aux services\r\ndisponibles du fait de barrières financières et sociales.\r\n\r\nLes ménages « en transition » sont caractérisés par : (1) la possession d’un cheptel de petite\r\ntaille orienté vers l’épargne et générateur de revenus occasionnels, mais sensible aux aléas ; (2)\r\nune mobilité réduite du troupeau, le plus souvent associée à une absence de mobilité d’une\r\nmajorité des membres du ménages (en dehors des bergers) ; (3) des investissements dans la\r\nqualité de l’habitat (notamment pour les éleveurs maures) ; (4) des investissements vers des\r\nactivités commerciales et vers des équipements de transport de type charrette.\r\n\r\nLes ménages « riches » sont caractérisés par : (1) la possession d’un cheptel important, sou-\r\nvent constitué de plusieurs espèces. (2) une mobilité du troupeau, avec des parcours de\r\ntranshumance d’amplitude variée selon les zones agro-écologiques, les logiques commerciales\r\net les années. (3) la mobilité des membres du ménages est le plus souvent partielle, et le tra-\r\nvail de berger est assumé soit par les membres de la famille, soit par de la main d’œuvre, en\r\nfonction du niveau de diversification des activités du ménage, la connaissance du travail de\r\nberger par les membres du ménage, l’âge et le genre du chef de ménage. (4) une diversific a-\r\ntion des sources de revenus, notamment vers des activités commerciales. (5) le développe-\r\nment de stratégies de contournement de la faiblesse des services de base en milieu rural\r\n\r\n 42\r\n\f(double résidence, « confiage » des enfants en ville pour faciliter la scolarisation, utilisation\r\ndes services de santé urbains... Les ménages péri-urbains « riches » bénéficient d’un accès aux\r\nservices de base plus satisfaisant.\r\n\r\nLes ménages « très riches » sont caractérisés par : (1) la possession de très grands troupeaux,\r\ngénéralement divisés pour en faciliter la gestion ; (2) une mobilité systématique du cheptel,\r\nseules les femelles allaitantes sont parfois gardés à proximité de l’un des lieux d’attache du\r\nménage. (3) le recours à de la main d’œuvre pour le gardiennage des animaux. (4) la multi -\r\nrésidence, y compris urbaine. (5) des systèmes d’activités diversifiés et notamment orientés\r\nvers le commerce et les activités politiques. (6) le recours au secteur privé pour l’accès à ce r-\r\ntains services de base.\r\nLes tableaux 4 à 5 ci-dessous présentent les grandes lignes de cette typologie pour chacun des\r\ntrois grands systèmes. Une présentation plus détaillée de ces trois typologies est disponible en\r\nannexe 9. L’annexe 10 présente une tentative de correspondance avec une analyse plus détai l-\r\nlée des systèmes d’élevage répertoriés par l’étude Initiative Elevage Pauvreté et Croissance,\r\n(2002).\r\n\r\nLe critère de possession du bétail est plus facilement mesurable que les autres et, de\r\nfait, est utilisé de façon prioritaire lors de processus de ciblage. Ainsi, l’évaluation des\r\nseuils pour critère de différentiation des ménages relatif à la possession de bétail (Unité de\r\nBétail Tropical61 par Equivalent Adulte62) revêt une importance particulière. Les seuils pré-\r\nsentés dans les tableaux 4 à 7 ci-dessous s’appuient à la fois sur les distinctions par les qualifi-\r\ncatifs des troupeaux en langues usuelles présentés ci-dessus, par les estimations de taille des\r\nménages en équivalent adultes issues de l’analyse des données du registre social (taille du mé-\r\nnage moyenne en EA = 4,1), sur les données rendues compte par la cartographie HEA des\r\nzones de moyens d’existence publiée en 2015, mais aussi sur les analyses portant sur\r\nl’évaluation du « seuil de viabilité pastorale ». Un rapport du NGC de 2017 portant sur les\r\n« résiliences pastorales et agropastorales au Sahel » présente les éléments suivants :\r\n\r\n « Pour l’évaluation de la viabilité des troupeaux par rapport à la famille, on a retenu un seuil de 3,5 UBT\r\npar EA lorsque l’économie familiale dépend essentiellement de l’élevage, 3 UBT pour les familles disposant\r\nd’une base agricole réduite et 1,7 UBT pour celles ayant une base agricole solide. Issus de longues recherches\r\nau Sahel depuis les années 1980, ces seuils sont également alignés sur ceux préconisés par la Banque Mon-\r\ndiale63. »\r\n\r\nCompte tenu des données présentées par les analyse HEA en Mauritanie, mais aussi dans\r\nl’ensemble de la région (Roger Blein, communication personnelle sur analyse en cours des\r\ndonnées HEA à travers la sous-région avec Save the Children), il semble justifié de « réduire »\r\nles seuils de différentiation des ménages vulnérables à ceux des ménages détenteurs de petits\r\ntroupeau à 2 UBT/EA en zone pastorale et 1 UBT/EA en zone agropastorale. Les enjeux\r\n\r\n\r\n61 Les équivalences en Unité de bétail tropical ont été estimées en considérant qu’un bovin d’Afrique équ i-\r\n vaut à 0,8 UBT, un ovin équivaut à 0,12 UBT et un caprin 0,10 UBT (Rivière, 1977, cité dans NCG 2017).\r\n62 L’échelle d’Oxford, la plus couramment utilisée est la suivante : EA = 1 + (Nombre de personnes > 15\r\n ans -1)×0,7 + 0,5 × Nombre d’enfants < 15 ans. Les données du registre ne donnent pas le nombre de\r\n personnes de moins de 15 ans mais le nombre de personnes de moins de 18 ans et de moins de 10 ans.\r\n Aussi, pour nos calculs (voir Annexe 12) nous avons estimé l’EA par la formule : 1 + (Nombre de per-\r\n sonnes > 18 ans -1)×0,7 + 0,5 × Nombre d’enfants < 18 ans.\r\n63 World Bank, 2017, Enhancing Resilience in African Drylands\r\n\r\n 43\r\n\fsur l’évaluation précise de ces seuils en milieu péri-urbain sont moins importants, car la\r\ngrande majorité des ménages urbains et péri-urbains enregistrés dans le registre social possè-\r\ndent très peu de bétail (moins de 1 UBT/EA).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 44\r\n\f Tableau 5 : Catégorisation des éleveurs grands transhumants\r\n\r\nReprésentation GT1. Ménage vulnérable GT2. Petit troupeau GT3. Moyen troupeau GT4. Grand troupeau\r\nschématique\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Exploita- Autres\r\n tion fami- sources de\r\n liale revenus\r\n\r\n Agriculture\r\n\r\n Elevage\r\n\r\n Commerce et autres\r\n\r\n\r\nUBT/EA <2 2<…<5 5 < …<25 ≥ 25\r\nSources de revenus  Agriculture possible  Vente de main d’œuvre essentielle-  Implication dans des activités com-  Implication dans des activités com-\r\n ment impliquée dans des activités merciales liées ou non aux filières de merciales liées ou non à l’élevage.\r\n  Vente de main d’œuvre essen- sylvo-pastorales (parfois qualifiée), l’élevage. Emplois de services. Emplois de services, et activités poli-\r\n tiellement impliquée dans des de main d’œuvre et de petit com- tiques.\r\n activités sylvo-pastorales et de merce.\r\n main d’œuvre.\r\n\r\nMobilité des ani-  Non  Transhumance d’amplitude souvent  Transhumance d’amplitude variée,  Transhumance d’amplitude variée,\r\n réduite, en association avec des ani- sauf pour certaines femelles laitières sauf pour certaines femelles laitières\r\nmaux maux confiés. et leur suite. et leur suite.\r\n\r\nHabitat  Hangar en bois ou case, peu  Hangar en béton, maison en banco,  Hangar en béton, maison en banco,  Hangar en béton, maison en banco,\r\n équipé case, équipement marque de pro- case, équipement (batteries, gaz…), case, équipement (batteries, gaz…),\r\n gression socio-économique résidences multiples possibles résidences multiples\r\n\r\nMobilité des  Ménages sédentaires, seuls les  Ménages sédentaires, seuls les  Ménages sédentaires, seuls les  Ménages sédentaires, seuls les\r\n hommes et les jeunes garçons hommes et les jeunes garçons impli- hommes et les jeunes garçons impli- hommes sont impliqués dans la con-\r\nmembres du ménage impliqués dans des activités de qués dans des activités de ber- qués dans des activités de ber- duite des troupeaux transhumants ou\r\n berger/gardiennage sont mo- ger/gardiennage sont mobiles. Ou, ger/gardiennage sont mobiles. Ou, la supervision.\r\n biles.\r\n  Ménages transhumants.  Ménages transhumants.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 45\r\n\f Tableau 6 : Catégorisation des agro-pasteurs et agro-Eleveurs\r\n\r\nReprésentation AP1. Ménage vulnérable AP2. Petit troupeau AP3. Moyen troupeau AP4. Grand troupeau\r\nschématique\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Exploita- Autres\r\n tion fami- sources de\r\n liale revenus\r\n\r\n Agriculture\r\n\r\n Elevage\r\n\r\n Commerce et autres\r\n\r\n\r\nUBT/ EA <1 1<…<3 3 < …<15 > 15\r\nSources de revenus  Agriculture > Elevage  Elevage > Agriculture  Elevage >> Agriculture  Elevage >> Agriculture\r\n\r\n  Vente de main d’œuvre essentielle-  Main d’œuvre essentiellement impliquée  Implication dans des activités commer-  Implication dans des activités commer-\r\n ment impliquée dans des activités dans des activités sylvo-pastorales (avec ciales liées ou non aux filières de ciales liées ou non à l’élevage. Emplois\r\n sylvo-pastorales et de main d’œuvre. parfois qualifiée), de main d’ouvre et de l’élevage. Emplois de services et revenus de services, revenus issus de la migration\r\n petit commerce. issus de la migration. et activités politiques.\r\n\r\nMobilité des ani-  Non  Non pour les agro-éleveurs, de faible  Faible amplitude, conduite des troupeaux  Faible amplitude, conduite des troupeaux\r\n amplitude pour les agro-pasteurs. transhumants confiée à de la main transhumants confiée à de la main\r\nmaux d’ouvre extérieure au ménage pour les d’ouvre extérieure au ménage\r\n agro-éleveurs. pour les agro-pasteurs.\r\n\r\nHabitat  Hangar en bois ou case, peu équipé  Hangar en béton, maison en banco, case,  Hangar en béton, maison en banco, case,  Hangar en béton, maison en banco, case,\r\n équipement marque de progression so- équipement (batteries, gaz…) équipement (batteries, gaz…), et rési-\r\n cio-économique dence urbaine.\r\n\r\nMobilité des mé-  Agro-éleveurs : Ménages sédentaires.  Agro-éleveurs : Ménages sédentaires.  Agro-éleveurs : Ménages sédentaires.  Agro-éleveurs : Ménages sédentaires.\r\nnages  Agro-pasteurs : Ménages sédentaires,  Agro-pasteurs : Ménages sédentaires,  Agro-pasteurs : Ménages sédentaires,  Agro-pasteurs : Ménages sédentaires,\r\n seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons seuls les hommes impliqués dans des ac-\r\n impliqués dans des activités de ber- impliqués dans des activités de ber- impliqués dans des activités de ber- tivités de berger/gardiennage sont mo-\r\n ger/gardiennage sont mobiles. ger/gardiennage sont mobiles. ger/gardiennage sont mobiles. biles.\r\n\r\n Tableau 7: Catégorisation des éleveurs péri-urbains\r\n\r\nReprésentation schéma- PU1. Ménage vulnérable PU2. Petit troupeau à vocation PU3. Système laitier péri-urbain\r\ntique commerciale\r\n\r\n\r\n 46\r\n\f Exploita- Autres\r\n tion fami- sources\r\n liale de reve-\r\n nus\r\n\r\n Agriculture\r\n\r\n Elevage\r\n\r\n Commerce et autres\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nUBT/ EA <1 1<…<3 5< …<20\r\nSources de revenus  Vente de main d’œuvre essentielle-  Vente de bétail  Vente de lait et de bétail\r\n ment impliquée dans des activités\r\n peu qualifiées, et peu orientées vers  Main d’œuvre impliquée dans des acti-  Implication dans des activités commerciales liées ou non aux\r\n l’élevage. vités pastorales (parfois qualifiée), de filières de l’élevage. Emplois de services.\r\n main d’œuvre et de petit commerce.\r\n\r\nMobilité des animaux  Non  Non  Troupeau laitier gardé à proximité du lieu de commercialisa-\r\n tion, en partie nourri avec de l’aliment bétail et/ou de la\r\n paille ou des résidus de culture, le reste du troupeau est\r\n transhumant d’amplitude variée selon les systèmes associés et\r\n les espèces.\r\n\r\nHabitat  Hangar en bois ou case, peu équipé  Hangar en béton, maison en banco,  Hangar en béton et/ou maison en ciment, équipement (bat-\r\n case, équipement marque de progres- teries, tv, gaz…)\r\n sion socio-économique\r\n\r\nMobilité des ménages  Ménages sédentaires.  Ménages sédentaires.  Famille partiellement transhumante: En hivernage une\r\n partie de la famille se déplace vers le point d’attache rural,\r\n seuls les hommes se déplacent en saison chaude, soit de fa-\r\n çon temporaire pour aller rendre visite aux troupeaux gardés\r\n par des bergers, ou plus rarement pour accompagner le trou-\r\n peau.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 47\r\n\f3.7. Expositions aux risques\r\n3.7.1. Risques sur les systèmes d’élevage\r\n\r\n3.7.1.1. Risques covariants, touchant plus ou moins les systèmes d’élevage\r\n\r\nPour les éleveurs, les risques majeurs sont ceux qui remettent en cause leurs activités d’une m a-\r\nnière grave. Le capital humain (santé, main d’œuvre et savoir-faire et savoir-être) et animal\r\n(cheptel) sont les piliers de chaque système.\r\n\r\nLa sècheresse, ou plutôt la succession d’années déficitaires, constitue une grave épreuve mar-\r\nquant le calendrier d’une vie d’un pasteur (dans le langage usuel, par exemple, on fait référence\r\naux années en fonction des grands événements). La sècheresse implique la rareté (ou l’absence\r\ndu pâturage herbacé mais également une moindre production de feuilles, et surtout de graines\r\npour les pâturages aériens (Acacia, Balanites, etc.). De plus, la contrainte de l’eau reste centrale\r\npour tous les élevages, même si elle impacte beaucoup plus les grands transhumants et les trou-\r\npeaux de gros effectifs dans leurs tactiques de déplacement. Les parades aux sècheresses sont\r\ndoubles : soit un départ en transhumance prématuré vers les zones plus favorables est appliqué\r\navec quelques semaines ou mois d’avance (cas actuel), soit une co mplémentation journalière est\r\nenvisagée en aliment du bétail. L’abreuvement reste toujours une contrainte pour les points\r\nd’eau de profondeur (puits et forages), impliquant des transports d’eau et de longues heures\r\nd’attente et de travail d’exhaure pénible et tendu (tour d’eau, heures d’attente avec les animaux\r\nassoiffés, etc.).\r\n\r\nLes épizooties constituent de graves atteintes pénalisant pour tous les éleveurs, même si la\r\npromiscuité animale augmente incontestablement le risque de contagion. Les parcours sahariens\r\nconstituent des espaces réputés pour leur faible pression parasitaire et pour le bénéfice des\r\ncures salées. À l’opposé, la fréquentation des marchés à bétail augmente les risques sanitaires\r\npar simple promiscuité. Par ailleurs, la très faible couverture sanitaire des quatre wilayas en vété-\r\nrinaires privés et en personnel d’inspection rendent différées, et finalement peu efficaces, les\r\ninterventions en cas d’épizooties. Enfin, la question de la qualité des produits vétérinaires so u-\r\nlève, à la fois, des postures de prudence et de réserve chez les éleveurs quant aux campagnes de\r\nvaccinations mais également des opérations d’automédication pas toujours judicieuses.\r\n\r\nOn note que les sècheresses impliquant un départ en transhumance imposent aux ménages des\r\nmoyens spécifiques impératifs. Les ménages ne possédant pas de main d’œuvre suffisante et de\r\nmatériel de transport (charrettes et animaux de traction ou véhicules) ne peuvent pas envisager\r\nde départ pour leurs propres animaux seuls. Par contre, le berger seul, ou bien la famille sans\r\ncheptel, peut envisager de se louer pour partir en transhumance avec des animaux confiés (un\r\nou plusieurs propriétaires).\r\n\r\nL’accès aux aliments de bétail, autre alternative au déficit fourrager lié aux sècheresses, reste\r\nconditionné à sa proximité, à son prix et aux liquidités disponibles de la famille. La saison ac-\r\ntuelle témoigne, pour une majorité d’éleveurs non transhumants, d’un recours précoce aux ali-\r\nments de bétail (plusieurs centaines de tonnes par semaine sur Ayoûn64). Les commerçants se\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n64 Source : commerçants interrogés sur le marché.\r\n\r\n 48\r\n\fsubstituent aux institutions financières et pratiquent des prêts à des taux souvent usuraires ce\r\nqui, en l’état, constitue un risque de spirale de l’endettement de l’éleveur de la classe médiane.\r\n\r\n3.7.1.2. Risques spécifiques inhérents à la grande mobilité\r\n\r\nLa mobilité implique le séjour dans des espaces pastoraux situés loin des structures de l’État. Il\r\ns’ensuit des prises de risques pour les personnes et pour les animaux. Les différentes formes\r\nd’accidents (blessures, complications de santé) et de violences (vols d’animaux, rackets, tracas-\r\nseries de diverses natures sans possibilité de recours du fait de l’isolement) sont rencontrées par\r\nles éleveurs mobiles. Par ailleurs, la faible présence de l’État et des contrôles correspondants\r\nimplique sur certains parcours l’influence d’individus peu scrupuleux qui rançonnent les pa s-\r\nteurs en déplacement. Diverses tracasseries sont subies par les éleveurs de moyenne stature\r\nainsi que par des commerçants et leurs convoyeurs qui se déplacent sur les trajets transfronta-\r\nliers. Ces difficultés vont à l’encontre du pastoralisme et de l’intérêt éc onomique qu’il procure\r\ndans les quatre wilayas frontalières.\r\n\r\nIl s’agit également de l’incomplète présence de la téléphonie mobile (zones d’ombre hert-\r\nziennes). En effet, l’exercice du pastoralisme nécessite d’être au cœur de l’information pl urielle\r\n(animaux égarés, rupture d’un forage, point d’épizootie, lieux de danger pour les personnes et\r\nles animaux). Le point d’eau focalise les réseaux d’informations de toute nature, toutefois la\r\ncirculation de long de chapelets de mares diffuse les contacts nécessaires à l’information. Enfin,\r\nl’isolement du mode de vie nomade n’est certainement pas favorable à l’engagement des jeunes\r\ndans la fonction de berger, puis de chef de troupeaux ce qui, à terme, remet en cause la repro-\r\nduction même du pastoralisme.\r\n\r\n3.7.2. Risques sanitaires et sociaux portant sur les ménages\r\n\r\nCompte tenu des mauvaises conditions d’accès à l’eau potable et aux services de santé qui pré-\r\nvalent dans les zones rurales des wilayas du sud-est mauritanien (voir section 3.5.1) les risques\r\nsanitaires sont fréquents et leurs impacts sont élevés pour l’ensemble des populations rurales,\r\nquel que soit leur mode de vie. Néanmoins, la mobilité implique des contraintes spécifiques qui\r\nrenforcent la vulnérabilité des ménages transhumants vis-à-vis des risques sanitaires et sociaux.\r\n\r\nConcernant la santé humaine, l’accès aux vaccinations de base (rougeole, tétanos, lèpre, etc.) est\r\nplus délicat du fait de la faible couverture du service en milieu pastoral, d’autant plus qu’il faut\r\nrespecter les rappels à des dates précises (efficacité vaccinale), difficilement compatibles avec le\r\ndéplacement du troupeau.\r\n\r\nLa prise en charge des accidents en transhumance (grossesse et contrôle pré natal, santé de la\r\nreproduction, maladies et blessures diverses) peut être handicapante car la conduite du troupeau\r\nimpose une logique propre, pas forcément compatible avec des haltes imposées par des événe-\r\nments sanitaires. Par exemple, les femmes de pasteurs en situation d’allaitement ne reçoivent\r\npas toujours d’attention et les rations alimentaires correspondantes prévues par les programmes\r\nCSA-PAM. Par ailleurs, l’accès problématique aux boutiques Emel offrant des prix subvention-\r\nnés, situées généralement dans les chefs-lieux de communes sont difficilement accessibles aux\r\nménages transhumants. Globalement, les enfants de pasteurs ne sont que faiblement inclus\r\ndans le dispositif préventif et curatif de santé humaine.\r\n\r\n3.7.3. Mécanismes de gestion des risques et de solidarité\r\n\r\n 49\r\n\fMécanismes de prévention des risques\r\n\r\nSolidarités : Le paiement de la zakhat est inscrit dans les lois du pays. La zakhat porte notamment\r\nsur la possession de bétail. Au-dessus d’un certain cheptel, les propriétaires doivent donner\r\nl’équivalent de 2,5% de leurs têtes de bétail aux populations démunies ou aux percepteurs de la\r\nzakhat qui se chargent de la redistribuer. En milieu pastoral, la première option est souvent re-\r\ntenue, et constitue ainsi un mécanisme de redistribution du cheptel. La possibilité pour les mé-\r\nnages vulnérables de bénéficier directement de la zakhat transmise par des ménages aisés est\r\ngénéralement liée à des liens tribaux ou sociaux, et s’accompagnent de contreparties et de dé-\r\npendances.\r\n\r\nAlliances : La facilitation de l’accès à l’eau et au pâturage en situation de transhumance repose\r\nsur des alliances entre familles et tribus. Ces stratégies d’alliance qui s’expriment entre les\r\ngroupes, représentent une des conditions essentielles de la reproductibilité de modèles pasto-\r\nraux transhumants.\r\n\r\nStratégies de gestion collective des risques : Pour faire face aux risques sécuritaires (vols, banditisme),\r\nles éleveurs transhumants adoptent des stratégies de regroupement des troupeaux pour en faci-\r\nliter le gardiennage. Ces stratégies ont des inconvénients en matière d’abreuvement , plus délicat\r\npour des troupeaux de grande taille.\r\n\r\nFixation d’une partie des membres des ménages : La réduction de la mobilité de certains membres du\r\nménage (notamment les femmes, et les jeunes enfants) correspond à une tactique classique de\r\nréduction des risques sanitaires associés à la transhumance.\r\n\r\nUtilisation de véhicules pour accompagner la transhumance : Cette stratégie n’est permise que pour les\r\néleveurs de grands troupeaux. Elle permet de notamment de gérer les risques sanitaires portant\r\nsur les bergers, et facilite la supervision de plusieurs bergers et leurs troupeaux par des gérants\r\nou propriétaires.\r\n\r\nMécanismes d’atténuation\r\n\r\nModification des calendriers et itinéraires : Les itinéraires varient d’une année sur l’autre en fonction\r\nde la disponibilité locale du pâturage. Lors des années de déficit pluviométrique particulière-\r\nment aigu, des itinéraires beaucoup plus longs doivent être adoptés, ce qui requiert des modes\r\nd’organisation différents et représente des frais supplémentaires.\r\n\r\nAchat d’aliment du bétail: Alors que les aliments du bétail sont essentiellement utilisés en complé-\r\nment pour les bêtes allaitantes en année « normale », ils sont utilisés pour l’entretien d’une\r\npartie plus large du bétail en années de sècheresse, notamment par les éleveurs non transhu-\r\nmants. Pour pouvoir accéder à l’aliment de bétail, les plus grands éleveurs non transhumants\r\nont recours à des achats d’aliment de bétail à crédit. Cette pratique n’est pas accessible aux éle-\r\nveurs vulnérables.\r\n\r\nAchats groupés d’aliment du bétail : Cette stratégie, qui pourrait éventuellement permettre aux éle-\r\nveurs de réduire les prix d’achats des aliments du bétail en année de sécheresse n’est pratiquée\r\nqu’à petite échelle, avec l’aide de projets.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 50\r\n\fEmondage : En cas de manque de pâturage herbacé, les éleveurs pratiquent l’émondage pour\r\nfavoriser l’accès au pâturage aérien par les bovins. Ces pratiques illicites sont associées à des\r\nrisques d’amende par les agents des services des Eaux et forêts.\r\n\r\nSolidarité : Les ménages faisant face à des chocs les concernant plus particulièrement (accident,\r\nproblème de santé aigu, perte de bétail, forte amende, vol, pertes liées à des violences inter-\r\ncommunautaires…) sont soutenus par des mécanismes de solidarité intra-communautaires. Ces\r\nmécanismes peuvent prendre différentes formes : confiage d’animaux avec usufruit sur les pro-\r\nduits, mobilisation d’une caisse communautaire, collecte occasionnelle… Ces mécanismes sont\r\nprécisément codifiés. Ils répondent à des appellations différentes d’un groupe social à l’autre :\r\npar exemple Loha en langue maure, habanaae en langue peuhl.\r\n\r\n3.8. Synthèse générale par système\r\nCette synthèse générale reprend les différents systèmes d’élevage et les catégories des ménages\r\nqu’ils les illustrent de manière à indiquer les risques soulevés, la résilience rencontrée et les\r\nperspectives institutionnelles (dialogue de la plateforme) et opérationnelles (inscription dans les\r\nprojets actuels (PRAPS, PRODEFI, autres) et les interventions futures (RIMDIR, RIMFIL).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 51\r\n\f Tableau 8: Synthèse des risques, résiliences et perspectives de dialogue politique en vue de l’aménagement du territoire par grand système\r\n\r\n Type de Risques et/ou défis Gravité des effets négatifs Formes de résilience Perspectives institution- Perspectives opérationnelles\r\n système nelles (Plateforme)\r\n  Conflits d’accès à l’eau  Transhumances erratiques et  Développement de  Réflexion sur une  Points d’eau (PRAPS-\r\n sédentarisation urbaine points d’eau privée, nou- stratégie d’hydraulique RIMDIR)\r\n  Exclusion de parcours\r\n velles alliances (nationale et régions)\r\n  Exclusion  Etude nationale de\r\n  Accès à l’aliment bétail\r\nSystèmes  Rôle des organisations  Programme Education l’aliment bétail avec\r\n  Armes, drogues, terreurs\r\n  Insécurité dans en milieu pastoral l’implication des organi-\r\n grands  Pertes de savoir être et sa- l’approvisionnement et (classes multigrades, sations professionnelles\r\ntranshu-  Santé animale-humaine\r\n voir faire l’accès à l’aliment bétail cantines, écoles no-\r\n  Préparer la mise en\r\n mants  Reproduction du capital humain et mades)\r\n  Déception de la jeunesse et  Développement de l’auto œuvre du RIMFIL, con-\r\n culturel\r\n recrutement potentiel par médication avec risques  Promotions de filières certation avec PRODE-\r\n  Stratégie individualiste terroristes FI\r\n  Inadéquation entre besoins familiaux  Manque de dynamisme  Filets sociaux (BM)\r\n et productivité de l’élevage\r\n  Assistanat\r\n\r\nSystèmes  Disponibilité d’aliment bétail  Baisse des productions et  Diversification des reve-  Concertation inter\r\n des productivités nus et des activités projet sur l’espace rural\r\nagro éle-  Tensions sur l’accès aux ressources\r\nveurs et   Non règlement des conflits  Nouvelles alliances,\r\n Multiplication des mises en défens\r\n avec exacerbations et com- concertations,\r\nagro pas- obstruant les axes de transhumance\r\n plexification (dépenses)\r\nteurs\r\nSystèmes  Coût des aliments bétail  Perte de capital culturel  Diversification des reve-  Meilleure connaissance  Revalorisation du métier\r\n (savoirs de la mobilité) nus et des activités de la filière aliment du de berger et de la\r\npéri ur-  Coût de l’eau\r\n bétail (lien avec le re- transhumance\r\nbains  Pertes de repères du mode  Salariat ponctuel ou\r\n  Baisse des productions périphériques cherche action et la\r\n de vie pastoral de la jeunesse permanent de bergers et\r\n pâturables formation)\r\n courtiers\r\n  Pertes de la productivité de\r\n  Conséquences négatives de  Mesures\r\n ce type d’élevage\r\n l’assainissement sur les animaux (plas- d’assainissement\r\n tiques)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 52\r\n\f3.9. Adéquation du registre social avec la situation socio-\r\néconomique des ménages pastoraux et agro-pastoraux\r\n3.9.1. Adéquation des méthodes de ciblage géographique\r\n\r\nCaractéristiques de la démarche de ciblage géographique adoptée par le Registre Social :\r\n Le Registre Social adopte le principe de continuité géographique : à terme, toutes les\r\n communes et les localités du pays seront couvertes.\r\n Le Registre Social prévoit de couvrir, 150 000 ménages pauvres pour le pays, cible calcu-\r\n lée sur la base de l’EPCV 2014 qui estime le taux de pauvreté et d’extrême pauvreté. Les\r\n nombres de ménages à identifier par commune (quotas) ont été calculé selon une mé-\r\n thode d’estimation de la pauvreté à petite échelle qui croise les données de l’EPCV 2014\r\n et du RGPH 2013 et permet d’estimer des taux de pauvreté par commune.\r\n Le nombre de ménage à identifier par localité65 (désagrégation du quota) a été estimé en\r\n multipliant le taux de pauvreté de la commune par la population vivant dans la localité se-\r\n lon le RGPH 2013.\r\n Si l’équipe de conduite du ciblage communautaire (cf. 3.9.2 pour plus de détail) constate\r\n la disparition, le regroupement, ou l’apparition de localités depuis le RGPH 2013, le\r\n nombre de ménages à cibler est ré-estimé66 en appliquant le taux de pauvreté communal.\r\n\r\nCes caractéristiques principales de l’approche de ciblage géographique par le registre condui-\r\nsent à formuler plusieurs observations, dont certaines sont spécifiques à la question des mé-\r\nnages pastoraux, et d’autres plus générales.\r\n\r\nPoints d’attention particuliers pour le ciblage des ménages pastoraux\r\n\r\n1. Les points d’attache se sont généralisés, et le nomadisme est résiduel. Bien que le mode\r\n d’élevage transhumant domine, la grande majorité des ménages disposent de lieux de r é-\r\n sidence fixes où ils vivent tout ou partie de l’année. Les risques d’exclusion liés à\r\n l’absence de point de fixation des populations pastorales semblent donc réduits.\r\n\r\n2. Les processus de fixation géographique par les ménages pastoraux sont dispersés, et con-\r\n duisent à une multiplication des localités de petite taille (voir tableau 9). Si l’évolution du\r\n nombre de localité apparait étonnamment rapide et cache peut être des problèmes de\r\n qualité des données, le phénomène de d’apparition et de disparition de localités qui fait\r\n porter un risque sur la qualité du registre est clairement mis en évidence par ces données.\r\n Bien que le manuel mis à jour (2017) du registre ait prévu une procédure pour tenir\r\n compte de ces difficultés, le recul sur sa mise en œuvre est réduit. La multiplication de l o-\r\n calités de petite taille et la distinction entre l’apparition de nouvelles localités et\r\n l’éclatement de localités antérieures représentent de réelles difficultés opérationnelles\r\n pour le registre social.\r\n\r\n\r\n65 Jusqu’en novembre 2017, ces quotas étaient définis au niveau « d’aires de ciblage », regroupant plusieurs\r\n localités.\r\n66 En cas de fusion de localités le quota communal n’est pas modifié. En cas disparition de localités, il est\r\n réduit ; en cas d’apparition, il est augmenté.\r\n\r\n 53\r\n\f3. Les résidences multiples, notamment pour les ménages pastoraux, sont fréquentes. La\r\n multiplicité des résidences peut à la fois influer sur le ciblage géographique (variations\r\n saisonnières du nombre d’habitant par localité susceptibles d’introduire des biais sur les\r\n quotas par localité) et sur le ciblage individuel (absence de ménages à certaines périodes\r\n de l’année). Les impacts de cette problématique des résidences multiples sur la précision\r\n des estimations de nombre d’habitants par localité relèvent de la responsabilité de l’ONS\r\n et des travaux de recensement. Pour le registre social, il semble important d’éviter de\r\n mener les travaux pendant les périodes d’hivernage durant lesquelles le nombre\r\n de ménages urbains qui utilisent leur résidence rurale est le plus élevé. Ce type de\r\n pratique est d’ores et déjà adopté par le registre social. Par ailleurs, la problématique des\r\n résidences multiples concerne moins les ménages les plus vulnérables que les ménages les\r\n plus aisés. L’impact sur le ciblage individuel serait à étudier de manière plus approfondie\r\n mais ne semble pas représenter un risque important.\r\n\r\nPoints d’attention plus généraux pour le ciblage géographique\r\n\r\n4. Sans remettre en cause le principe de continuité géographique adopté par le registre so-\r\n cial, il semble assez clair que les conditions de vies des ménages varient entre les localités\r\n d’une même commune. L’ONS a travaillé sur des estimations des taux de pauvreté au ni-\r\n veau des localités en appuyant sur les RGPH 2013 et sur l’EPCV 2014. Néanmoins, les\r\n estimations ainsi élaborées ne sont pas représentatives à ce niveau de désagrégation géo-\r\n graphique Ainsi, dans le cadre d’un éventuel renforcement des procédures de mise à\r\n jour du registre social, il pourrait être intéressant d’étudier la faisabilité d’estimation\r\n de quotas par localité, en s’appuyant non seulement sur les données de l’EPCV et\r\n du RGPH, mais aussi sur les données d’enquêtes de vérification du registre so-\r\n cial, qui concernent un échantillon biaisé vers les populations pauvres, mais de taille bien\r\n plus importante que l’échantillon enquêté pour l’EPCV de 2014 (9700 ménages à l’échelle\r\n de l’ensemble du pays, contre les 150000 ménages visés par le registre social).\r\nTableau 9: Evolution du nombre de localités habitées de 2000 à 2013\r\n Nobre de localités avec plus de Localités de moins de 50 Croissance du\r\n Nombre total de localités Croissance du nombre de\r\n 50 habitants habitants\r\n nombre de localités de\r\n Région 2000 2013 2 000 2013 2 000 2013 localités moins de 50\r\n habitants\r\nHod el Charbi 1115 2057 847 1334 152 723 84% 376%\r\nHod el Gharbi 826 1318 674 927 170 391 60% 130%\r\nAssaba 909 1164 739 922 141 242 28% 72%\r\nGorgol 661 722 520 626 49 96 9% 96%\r\nBrakna 415 646 366 555 72 91 56% 26%\r\nTrarza 597 872 525 625 148 247 46% 67%\r\nAdrar 306 331 158 141 17 190 8% 1018%\r\nNouhadibou 38 96 21 27 32 69 153% 116%\r\nTagant 250 344 218 257 73 87 38% 19%\r\nGuidimaka 407 500 334 457 6 43 23% 617%\r\nTirz Zemour 14 20 8 10 8 10 43% 25%\r\nInchiri 22 67 14 22 0 45 205% N/A\r\nNouakchott 1 1 1 1 0 0 0% N/A\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3.9.2. Adéquation des méthodes de ciblage des ménages ou « individuel »\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 54\r\n\fPrésentation 4 étapes principales67 de la démarche de ciblage des ménages au sein des locali-\r\ntés adoptée par le registre social :\r\n Le ciblage communautaire : l’identification des ménages à enregistrer dans la version\r\n initiale du registre repose sur une méthode de ciblage communautaire. Au niveau de\r\n chaque localité, « un comité des sages » est formé et se voit confier la responsabilité de\r\n déterminer les critères selon lesquels les ménages les plus pauvres seront identifiés au sein\r\n de la localité68, puis de faciliter le processus d’identification des ménages correspondant\r\n au mieux à ces critères, dans la limite du quota fixé pour la localité.\r\n Encourager et gérer les réclamations : Le registre social poursuit le développement\r\n d’une procédure permettant aux ménages qui estiment correspondre aux critères\r\n d’enregistrement dans le registre adopté au niveau de la localité, mais n’ayant pas été in s-\r\n crits dans la première liste établie, de le signaler afin de demander leur éventuelle intégra-\r\n tion dans une liste définitive. La conception et l’opérationnalisation de cette procédure\r\n de gestion des réclamations sont en cours de stabilisation.\r\n Collecte des données, et apurement du registre social : Chaque ménage enregistré\r\n aux étapes précédentes fait l’objet d’une enquête visant à collecter un certain nombre\r\n d’informations socio-économiques au sujet des ménages enregistrés dans le registre so-\r\n cial. Si un ménage enregistré aux étapes précédentes n’est pas présent lors de la période\r\n de passage de l’équipe de collecte d’information dans la moughaata concernée, il est sup-\r\n primé du registre social.\r\n Tri des ménages enregistrés dans le registre social : Cette démarche, bien\r\n qu’administrée par l’équipe du registre social, correspond davantage à une étape\r\n d’utilisation que de construction du registre. À la demande des programmes utilisateurs,\r\n le registre social est en mesure de fournir des listes de ménages correspondant aux cri-\r\n tères de ciblage de tel ou tel programme, pourvu que ces critères correspondent à une\r\n combinaison des variables collectées lors de l’enquête auprès des ménages enregistrés\r\n dans le registre social. Par exemple, pour ce qui concerne le ciblage du programme Te-\r\n kavoul, le registre social fournit un listes ordonnée selon un score PMT69, et ayant subi un\r\n filtre excluant les ménages possédant plus de 7 « équivalent têtes de bétail » (selon la for-\r\n mule nombre de tête de bovins ou camelins + 0,25 × nombre de têtes de caprins ou d’ovins ), et un\r\n filtre excluant les ménages en possession d’un véhicule70.\r\n\r\nDe même que pour le ciblage géographique, certains points d’attention spécifiques au ciblage\r\nindividuel des ménages pastoraux sont formulés à l’issue de notre analyse, ainsi que quelques\r\npoints d’attention plus généraux.\r\n\r\nPoints d’attention particuliers pour le ciblage des ménages pastoraux\r\n\r\n\r\n67 Chacune de ces étapes est en fait subdivisées en plusieurs sous-étapes dans le manuel du registre.\r\n68 Les localités de moins de 50 habitants sont regroupées.\r\n PMT : Proxy Mean Test – Score correspondant à une combinaison de certaines variables renseignées par l’enquête\r\n réalisée auprès des ménages enregistrés dans le registre social. La sélection de ces variables, et les pondérations al-\r\n louées à chacune d’entre elles ont été définies en s’appuyant sur l’EPCV 2014, de sorte à ce que, sur l’échantillon de\r\n ménages enquêtés pour l’EPCV, le score de PMT soir fortement corrélé au niveau de pauvreté représenté par le n i-\r\n veau de consommation des ménages. Ainsi le score PMT représente une combinaison des variables disponibles pour\r\n les ménages enregistrés, dont l’hypothèse est qu’elle est fortement corrélée avec le niveau de pauvreté monétaire de\r\n ces ménages.\r\n70 À noter que ce filtre est légèrement redondant avec le score PMT, qui considère cette variable, mais en\r\n lui attribuant un poids relatif.\r\n\r\n 55\r\n\f1. Certains ménages pauvres (notamment les ménages de bergers), bien qu’ayant des points\r\n d’attache, sont mobiles. Ainsi, la réalisation du ciblage communautaire et/ou de l’enquête\r\n de vérification lors des principales périodes de déplacement est un facteur d’exclusion\r\n potentiel. Il donc est important de prévoir la réalisation des principales étapes de ci-\r\n blage en dehors des principales périodes d’éloignement des points de fixation. La\r\n période la plus favorable se situe entre Octobre et Février. Les années de sècheresse\r\n (comme c’est le cas lors de la saison 2017/2018), des déplacements importants peuvent\r\n avoir lieux dès janvier.\r\n\r\n2. La possession de bétail est un des critères clés de catégorisation essentiel pour les popula-\r\n tions.71 Ainsi, dans la plupart des cas, et en particulier en zones pastorales, le processus\r\n ciblage communautaire tient compte des critères associés à la pratique de\r\n l’élevage et favorise l’inscription des éleveurs décapitalisés sur le registre social.\r\n\r\n3. La pratique du confiage d’animaux est très fréquente et suit des règles variées (durée du\r\n confiage, accords vis-à-vis de l’usufruit sur la suite des animaux…). Si les animaux sont\r\n un élément de résilience pour les ménages auxquels ils sont confiés, ils ne représentent\r\n pas le même capital que des animaux en propriété. Le questionnaire d’enquête de vé-\r\n rification ne prend pas bien en compte des pratiques de confiage. Deux confusions\r\n sont possibles : (1) l’absence de comptabilisation des animaux confiés, ce qui aurait\r\n comme conséquence de surévaluer la pauvreté (ou la vulnérabilité) des ménages auxquels\r\n des animaux sont confiés, et (2) la confusion entre animaux confiés avec des animaux en\r\n propriété, ce qui au contraire aurait tendance à sous-évaluer la pauvreté (ou la vulnérabili-\r\n té) des ménages auxquels des animaux sont confiés. Ces possibles confusions pourraient\r\n avoir des répercussions importantes sur les appréciations fournies par les enquêtes de vé-\r\n rification. En effet, les ménages auxquels sont confiés des animaux sont le plus souvent\r\n des ménages pauvres, et sont donc directement concernés par ces enquêtes.\r\n\r\n4. La propriété du bétail au sein des ménages et des familles et la gestion du troupeau ré-\r\n pondent à des règles variées. En effet, dans la tradition maure, la propriété et la gestion\r\n (en dehors des pratiques de confiage évoquées ci-dessus) du bétail revient au ménage.\r\n Dans la communauté peuhl, la propriété est plutôt individuelle (les hommes et les\r\n femmes au sein d’un ménages possèdent leurs propres animaux), tandis que la gestion du\r\n troupeau est généralement collectivisée entre ménages d’une même famille (en particulier,\r\n les animaux de plusieurs frères et de leurs épouses sont conduits ensemble). Ainsi, de\r\n même que pour les pratiques de confiage, le questionnaire d’enquête de vérification\r\n ne prend pas bien en compte les différents niveaux possibles de propriété du bé-\r\n tail, ce qui peut conduire à des réponses imprécises. Par ailleurs, la gestion collective des\r\n troupeaux chez les peuhls représente un facteur de résilience de leurs systèmes d’élevage\r\n qui n’est pas bien appréhendé par les enquêtes et ainsi, les démarches de ciblage des\r\n éventuels programmes utilisateurs s’appuyant sur le registre social.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n71 Source : Document du RS renseignant les critères mis en avant lors des étapes de ciblage communau-\r\n taire, et entretiens auprès de responsables communautaires.\r\n\r\n 56\r\n\f5. Compte tenu de l’importance accordée par les communautés à la possession de bétail (ou\r\n plutôt à son absence) comme indicateur de la pauvreté des ménages, l’introduction de\r\n filtres sur la possession du bétail apparait comme pertinente. Néanmoins, plusieurs ob-\r\n servations sont formulées sur le « filtre bétail » adopté par le registre social72 :\r\n  L’utilisation d’un filtre uniforme pour l’ensemble du registre, indépendant des\r\n zones géographiques et des modes de vies majoritaires dans chaque zone, est\r\n discutable. En effet, il est clair qu’à taille de troupeau égale, un ménage qui dé-\r\n pend essentiellement de l’élevage sera plus vulnérable qu’un ménage dont le sys-\r\n tème d’activités est diversifié par des activités agricoles, de services, ou commer-\r\n ciales.\r\n  L’unité habituellement utilisée pour agréger différentes catégories de bétail est\r\n l’Unité de Bétail Tropical. Or, la formule utilisée pour la conception du filtre est\r\n assez différente des normes en vigueur (les équivalences en Unité de Bétail Tro-\r\n pical73 ont été estimées en considérant qu’un bovin d’Afrique équivaut à 0,8 UBT,\r\n un ovin équivaut à 0,12 UBT et un caprin 0,10 UBT (Rivière, 1977, cité dans\r\n NCG 2017)).\r\n  Dans un objectif de catégorisation des ménages, il apparaît important de pondé-\r\n rer le cheptel par la taille des ménages ou encore le nombre de membres du mé-\r\n nage. En effet, le capital représenté par ce cheptel est d’autant moins significatif\r\n qu’il soutient un grand nombre de personnes. Par ailleurs, le ratio bétail sur\r\n membres du ménage défini d’avantage le mode de conduite possible que le\r\n nombre de tête de bétail en tant que tel74.\r\n\r\n Une analyse comparative de l’utilisation du filtre actuel et d’un filtre qui serait basée sur\r\n une catégorisation des ménages telle qu’avancée en section 3.6.2 est présentée en Annexe\r\n 11. Les conclusions issues de cette analyse sont les suivantes : (1) Ce type de filtre se-\r\n rait plus pertinent et efficace associé à un travail catégorisation des communes se-\r\n lon les systèmes d’activité dominants, effectué de façon indépendante, et s’appuyant\r\n sur des critères objectifs et bien documentés. (2) Il est préférable de définir ces seuils\r\n sur la base de critères objectifs et bien documentés, sous la responsabilité des pro-\r\n grammes utilisateurs (et non celle du registre social). (3) Pour une conception et une\r\n application plus fine d’un filtre « bétail » il serait utile de distinguer plus finement\r\n les différentes catégories de bétail (à minima distinguer camelins et bovins, et idéale-\r\n ment ovins et caprins), et de distinguer bétail en propriété et confié.\r\n\r\nPoints d’attention plus généraux pour le ciblage des ménages\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n72 Le filtre adopté conduit à l’exclusion les ménages possédant plus de 7 « équivalent têtes de bétail » (se-\r\n lon la formule nombre de tête de bovins ou camelins + 0,25 × nombre de têtes de caprins ou d’ovins ) par le pro-\r\n gramme Tekavoul.\r\n73 Cette formule n’est pas systématiquement utilisée et retrouve une certaine variation autour de l’util isation des normes\r\n proposées par Rivière en 1977.\r\n74 A troupeau équivalent, le mode de conduite possible est fonction de la main d’ouvre disponible pour\r\n prendre soin des animaux.\r\n\r\n 57\r\n\f6. Certains groupes sociaux ont une influence politique réduite et sont susceptibles de souf-\r\n frir de phénomènes d’exclusion sociale lors de l’étape de ciblage communautaire. Ce\r\n point a été largement souligné comme un risque important par de nombreux interlocu-\r\n teurs lors des visites dans les communes ciblées par le registre social. Il convient de rap-\r\n peler que ce type de risque concerne toutes les méthodes de ciblage et pas seulement\r\n celles adoptées par le registre social. Il concerne les populations pastorales de façon plus\r\n spécifique, car leur mobilité représente un facteur de risque d’exclusion des cercles de\r\n gouvernance locaux et communaux supplémentaire. Mais globalement, la prise en\r\n compte de ce risque dans la conception des procédures de mise en place du registre social\r\n est forte et s’est progressivement renforcée. En 2017, le passage de « comités des\r\n sages » organisés au niveau des « unités de ciblage » regroupant plusieurs locali-\r\n tés, à des comités formés au niveau de chaque localité, est une mesure\r\n d’atténuation supplémentaire des risques d’exclusion de certains groupes so-\r\n ciaux. Le suivi de l’efficacité de cette disposition représente un enjeu important\r\n pour le registre social dans les années à venir.\r\n\r\n\r\n4. Conclusions et recommandations\r\nL’objectif poursuivi par cette étude était de mettre en exergue les caractéristiques sociales et\r\néconomiques des ménages dont le pastoralisme constitue le principal moyen d’existence et de\r\ncomprendre les contraintes d’accès de ces ménages aux services de bases, dont le système de\r\nprotection sociale.\r\n\r\nTrois grands systèmes d’élevages ont été mis en exergue : (1) Les systèmes transhumants\r\npastoraux, post nomades : dominante camelin, dominante bovins ou petits ruminants selon\r\nles zones, cas particuliers des systèmes commerciaux, et ceux de « prestige-luxe » (2) Les sys-\r\ntèmes agro pastoraux ou agro éleveurs de plus ou moins grande amplitude, (3) Les systèmes\r\npéri urbains ou en proximité des routes (plus ou moins en lien avec les autres systèmes). Une\r\ndiversité de sous-systèmes existe apportant des nuances en termes d’effectifs d’espèces (do-\r\nminante cameline ou de ruminants : petits et grands) et de types de tactiques d’élevage (desti-\r\nnée à la vente, etc.). Les 4 groupes des conclusions et recommandations suivantes concer-\r\nnent les 3 grands types de systèmes mais s’y appliquent de façon différentiée.\r\n\r\nConclusion 1 :\r\nUn constat majeur porte sur la faible disponibilité des services de base, couplé, no-\r\ntamment pour les ménages pauvres, à de nombreuses barrières d’accès aux services dispo-\r\nnibles. Cette problématique n’est pas seulement un des déterminants importants de la vulné-\r\nrabilité des ménages pastoraux, c’est aussi un des facteurs clés des choix et priorités accordés\r\npar les ménages vis-à-vis de leurs lieux de résidence, de leurs déplacements, qui a des inci-\r\ndences fortes sur l’évolution des systèmes pastoraux et agro-pastoraux.\r\nL’éducation en milieu pastoral n’est pas aisée (éloignement, décalage des périodes sociales\r\navec les transhumances, sécurisation des filles au collège, disponibilité des outils pédago-\r\ngiques). [R1.1] Des réflexions nationales doivent être approfondies pour prendre en\r\ncompte ces spécificités liées à la disponibilité et l’accès aux services éducatifs en\r\nmilieu pastoral, afin d’éviter une marginalisation extrême d’une couche de la popula-\r\ntion (jeunes, femmes) avec les risques sociaux que cela représente.\r\n\r\n 58\r\n\fL’accès aux centres de santé reste conditionné à la proximité, à la qualité du service mais ég a-\r\nlement aux coûts. Les grandes mutations des systèmes d’élevage côtoyant davantage les villes\r\nvont dans le sens d’une meilleure intégration d’une partie des éleveurs. [R1.2] Les zones\r\npastorales d’excellence doivent être couvertes par des moyens innovants (points mo-\r\nbiles de santé mixte humaine et animale, campagnes communes de vaccination entre\r\nservices de la Santé et ceux de l’Elevage, informations de préventions vers les pas-\r\nteurs via la téléphonie, etc.).\r\nConclusion 2 :\r\nMalgré une importance croissante de l’élevage dans l’économie rurale du sud-est\r\nmauritanien, répondant à des marchés nationaux et régionaux dynamiques, et con-\r\ntrastant avec un net recul de l’agriculture75, certains facteurs de l’environnement de\r\nproduction des éleveurs limitent la productivité et renforcent la vulnérabilité de leurs\r\nsystèmes aux aléas climatiques, de marché, et sécuritaires. Certains de ces facteurs con-\r\ncernent les 3 grands types de systèmes, quand d’autres sont plus marqués pour certains\r\nd’entre eux.\r\nFacteurs communs aux trois systèmes:\r\n  Les soins vétérinaires sont largement insatisfaits sur l’ensemble du territoire, y com-\r\n pris à proximité des villes.\r\n  Malgré des marchés dynamiques, la compétitivité des produits de l’élevage maurita-\r\n nien pâtit du manque d’infrastructures de vente mais aussi de manque de promotion\r\n et de label des produits animaux qui en sont issus.\r\n  La faible valorisation des produits généralisée est à relier à une organisation peu per-\r\n formante des transformations de produits et d’un environnement peu favorable (ban-\r\n carisation faible, animation limitée, information inefficace).\r\nPour les grands transhumants, une contrainte de plus en plus forte pèse sur l’accessibilité\r\ndes parcours (conflits, problème d’accès à l’eau). Cette réalité se couple avec une perte de\r\nsavoirs (capacité à transhumer) et ainsi que d’une baisse de valorisation des espaces-\r\nressources, notamment liée à la faible disponibilité en points d’eau.\r\n\r\nLes zones agro-pastorales voient se multiplier les barrières à la mobilité. La diffusion de lois\r\net décrets, d’accords et conventions locales et transfrontalières est insuffisante ou inexi stante\r\nselon les cas.\r\n\r\nPour les systèmes périurbains, il est mis en évidence une faible productivité : baisse des res-\r\nsources, déséquilibre alimentaire, désorganisation de la filière aliment bétail. Cette dernière\r\ncontrainte concerne également un grand nombre de ménages en système agro-pastoral, dont\r\nla taille des troupeaux ne justifie pas le recours à la mobilité du bétail, y compris en année de\r\nsécheresse.\r\n\r\nBeaucoup d’acquis et de perspectives en matière d’appui à la productivité de l’élevage existent\r\ndans les programmes actuels (RIMRAP, PRAPS, PRODEFI, etc.) et futurs (RIMDIR, RIM-\r\nFIL) et peuvent apporter des solutions dans les quatre wilayas. [R 2.2] Il y a lieu\r\nd’harmoniser davantage les interventions autour des directions régionales de\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n75 lui-même lié à une combinaison de facteurs écologiques, économiques et à ces choix de politique alimentaire\r\n\r\n 59\r\n\fl’Elevage et de leurs inspections, notamment dans les zones frontalières (fluidité des\r\nmobilités, baisse de conflits locaux, amélioration de la productivité des élevages).\r\nConclusion 3\r\n\r\nL’approche adoptée pour la construction du registre social, compte tenu de la faible pratique\r\ndu nomadisme total et de la généralisation des points de fixation, ne risque pas de conduire à\r\nune forte exclusion des populations pastorales sur la base de leur mode de vie et de leur mo-\r\nbilité. Néanmoins, certaines adaptations pourraient garantir une meilleure prise en compte\r\ndes spécificités des populations pastorales, réduisant d’autant plus les risques d’exclusion, et\r\nlimitant les impacts non désirés potentiels sur les stratégies adoptées par les ménages pasto-\r\nraux.\r\n\r\n[R3.1] Une attention est accordée à la saisonnalité des mouvements de population\r\nliés aux activités pastorales par le processus de construction du registre social, mais\r\ncelle-ci pourrait être renforcée en réduisant la période de collecte de l’information à la\r\nsaison froide, notamment en année de sécheresse. En effet, la conduite d’activité\r\nd’enregistrement en zone pastorale en période d’hivernage augmente les risques d’inclusion\r\nde populations essentiellement urbaines, alors que les risques d’exclusion de populations\r\ntranshumantes sont augmentés en saison chaude, notamment en mauvaises années lorsque\r\nles mouvements de familles entières sont plus fréquents et plus précoces.\r\n\r\nAlors que les choix des critères de ciblage communautaire tiennent compte des principaux\r\nfacteurs de vulnérabilité pastorale, les outils développés dans le cadre de la construction du\r\nregistre social ne tiennent pas compte des pratiques de confiage des animaux de la diversité\r\nde leurs modes de gestion. [R3.2] Ainsi, le questionnaire de l’enquête de vérification\r\ndemande à être précisé pour mieux tenir compte de ces pratiques et permettre un\r\nciblage des programmes sociaux utilisateurs du registre sur des bases plus précises.\r\n\r\n[R 3.3] Enfin, une analyse comparée du « filtre bétail » aujourd’hui utilisé par le pro-\r\ngramme Tekavoul et d’un prototype de filtre alternatif basé sur l’analyse des systèmes\r\net des catégories de ménages détaillée dans ce rapport souligne l’utilité d’une con-\r\nception de filtres spécifiques à chaque zone de moyen d’existence dominant.\r\n\r\nConclusion 4\r\nL’implication d’enfants dans les soins apportés aux animaux, y compris lors des transhu-\r\nmances, est très fréquente. Cette implication est une condition nécessaire à la transmission\r\nintergénérationnelle des savoirs sur laquelle repose en grande partie la reproduction des sys-\r\ntèmes d’élevage pastoraux et agro-pastoraux. Mais elle conduit ces enfants à être exposés à de\r\nnombreux risques, notamment sanitaires, et, sans être l’unique barrière d’accès, est difficile-\r\nment compatible avec l’accès à l’éducation formelle primaire et secondaire. Alors que ces\r\nchoix s’opèrent dans un contexte contraint et caractérisé par une offre de services de base\r\nfaible et inadaptée aux contraintes de la mobilité, ce sont souvent les choix et besoins des\r\nfamilles qui guident les motivations d’implication des enfants dans les travaux associés à\r\nl’élevage.\r\n[R 4.1] Alors que cette problématique est à la croisée d’enjeux économiques et de\r\ntransmission des savoir-faire sur lesquels reposent la reproduction des systèmes pas-\r\ntoraux et des emplois associés, mais aussi d’autres enjeux, non moins impor tants,\r\nassociés aux droits des enfants, il est recommandé de favoriser la mise en débat de\r\n\r\n 60\r\n\fces questions au sein de la future plateforme pastorale multi-acteurs, et d’appuyer les\r\nconcertations à venir par la poursuite d’études complémentaires sur la perception des\r\nenfants d’éleveurs, de leurs parents, de la façon dont ces choix ou cette absence de\r\nchoix se présente à eux.\r\n\r\n\r\n -----\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 61\r\n\f 5. Annexes\r\n\r\nAnnexe 1 : Termes de référence de la mission\r\nAnnexe 2 : Bibliographie consultée\r\nAnnexe 3 : Calendrier de la mission et institutions rencontrées\r\nAnnexe 4 : Liste des personnes rencontrées\r\nAnnexe 5 : Carte des moyens d’existence (SIM : 2013)\r\nAnnexe 6 : Liste des projets et programmes dans les 4 régions\r\nAnnexe 7 : Quelques faits historiques marquants les 4 régions\r\nAnnexe 8 : Esquisse de la liste des tribus et des alliances\r\nAnnexe 9 : Catégorisation détaillée des ménages selon les 3 grands types\r\nde systèmes\r\nAnnexe 10 : Correspondance des typologies des systèmes et des ménages\r\nproposées avec une catégorisation détaillée des systèmes d’élevage\r\n(IEPC, 2002)\r\nAnnexe 11: Type de système dominant dans les communes couvertes par\r\nle Registre Social\r\nAnnexe 12 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux services de\r\nsanté dans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP.\r\nAnnexe 13 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux services\r\nd’éducation formelle dans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP\r\nAnnexe 14 : Listes de sigles et des abréviations\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 62\r\n\fAnnexe 1 : Termes de référence de la mission\r\n Analyse des déterminants de la vulnérabilité des systèmes pastoraux et leur implica-\r\n tion sur les ménages pastoraux et le travail des enfants\r\n\r\nContexte\r\nMalgré la bonne performance économique de ces dernières années, la Mauritanie est confrontée à une série de\r\ndéfis, tels que l’augmentation des prix des denrées et les chocs climatiques répétés. En réponse à ce contexte de\r\nvulnérabilité, la Mauritanie a développé et validé sa Stratégie nationale de protection sociale (SNPS), destinée à\r\nsoutenir les ménages les plus pauvres et à promouvoir la résilience dans le pays. La SNPS appelle à une plus\r\ngrande coordination entre les programmes existants et à la création de nouveaux programmes visant la réduc-\r\ntion de la pauvreté et/ou le renforcement des moyens d’existence des populations les plus vulnérables aux\r\nrisques sociaux, économiques et sanitaires.\r\n\r\n\r\nL’Union européenne a entamé le 11e FED en Mauritanie à travers un secteur de concentration important –\r\nSécurité Alimentaire & Nutritionnelle et Agriculture Durable, SANAD – dont le premier volet consiste en un\r\nprogramme novateur de structuration du monde rural avec une porte d’entrée institutionnelle. Depuis 2016, le\r\nRIMRAP – Renforcement Institutionnel en Mauritanie vers la Résilience Agricole et Pastorale – a pour ambi-\r\ntion de fédérer l’ensemble des acteurs du secteur tout en renforçant les structures de l’Etat, tant au niveau ce n-\r\ntral que régional. Ceci dans un objectif global d’amélioration de la résilience des populations les plus vuln é-\r\nrables. Le RIMRAP possède une forme originale puisqu’il regroupe autour d’une Assista nce Technique, 18\r\nONG (dont Save the Children) réparties dans 4 Wilaya et 2 Etats Membres (Espagne & Allemagne). Les deux\r\nautres volets de la SANAD, destinés à renforcer les infrastructures rurales et les filières agricoles & pastorales,\r\nentreront en action en 2018. L’ensemble de ce premier secteur représente 80 M€ d’investissement pour l’UE et\r\nmérite donc une attention particulière.\r\n\r\n\r\nDans le cadre de l’exécution de la SNPS, la République Islamique de Mauritanie met en place, avec l’aide de la\r\nBanque Mondiale, un programme de filets sociaux en direction des ménages les plus pauvres du pays. Ce Pro-\r\ngramme, se fonde sur (i) La création d’un Registre social de la pa uvreté et (ii) Des transferts sociaux réguliers et\r\nprévisibles aux ménages ayant été identifiés comme les plus pauvres. Par ailleurs, la Banque mondiale appui\r\négalement le gouvernement mauritanien dans la mise en place de mécanismes de réponse aux chocs.\r\n\r\n\r\nL’Union Européenne, Save the Children et la Banque Mondiale, de par leur mandat et le développement des pro-\r\ngrammes précités portent un intérêt convergent aux systèmes et aux ménages pastoraux. Aussi, dans l’optique\r\nde mieux comprendre les systèmes pastoraux – finalement assez mal connus et peu documentés – ces 3 acteurs\r\ndésire entreprendre une étude d’envergure dans les 4 wilayas pour en connaître leurs caractéristiques et diversité.\r\n\r\n\r\nJustification de l’étude\r\nPour le RIMRAP, cette étude doit permettre de mieux adapter les stratégies d’appui, à la fois institutionnelles\r\net centrales avec le Ministère de l’Elevage et les Etats membres, qu’opérationnelle et locales avec les ONG et les\r\nservices déconcentrés. Ceci permettra, dans un premier temps, d’affiner l’approche en direction des ménages les\r\nplus vulnérables de ces systèmes à travers les fonds d’inve stissement prioritaires du RIMRAP et, dans un se-\r\ncond temps avec les RIMDIR et RIMFIL, d’adapter au mieux les infrastructures à installer et les filières de\r\nproductions à soutenir pour développer une résilience réelle des populations concernées.\r\n\r\n\r\nDans le cadre du RIMRAP, Save the Children a mené une étude dans le Hodh El Gharbi, et a commencé, à tra-\r\nvers des techniques de participation directe des enfants, à explorer le lien existant entre le travail des enfants\r\ndans le milieu agro-pastoral, la sécurité alimentaire et les mécanismes de résilience des ménages pastoraux. Avec\r\ncette étude, Save the Children souhaite mieux comprendre la situation des enfants au sein des communautés pas-\r\ntorales et leur rôle dans l’économie des ménages ainsi que sensibiliser sur le t ravail des enfants dans le secteur\r\npastoral et les implications sur le bien-être des enfants.\r\n\r\n\r\n 63\r\n\fEnfin, la Banque mondiale s’interroge sur l’inclusion des ménages pastoraux au système de protection s ociale en\r\ncours de développement par le gouvernement. Le socle du système se base sur le Registre social et le Pro-\r\ngramme de transferts monétaires (Tekavoul) conçus davantage pour une population sédentaire qu’une popul a-\r\ntion mobile. Les ménages dont les moyens d’existence reposent essentiellement sur les sy stèmes pastoraux\r\npourraient constituer un groupe de population négligé ou non pris en compte dans les mécaniques développés.\r\n\r\n\r\nAu final, les systèmes pastoraux que le RIMRAP voudrait mieux comprendre pour agir efficacement sur leur\r\nrésilience, s’appuient de manière assez spécifique sur le travail des enfants dont Save the Children voudrait appré-\r\nhender les implications sur leur bien-être. Une partie de ces ménages étant particulièrement vulnérable, mais\r\npossédant un mode de vie partiellement itinérant, constituent d es bénéficiaires potentiels d’une protection s o-\r\nciale appuyée par la Banque Mondiale sous réserve de pouvoir les comptabiliser dans le Registre social. A terme,\r\ncet appui « social » pourrait se prolonger par des actions collectives ou individuelles de « protection sociale\r\nadaptative » - qui possèdent une dimension économique et productive – aboutissant à la résilience recherchée\r\npar la SANAD et, globalement, l’ensemble des acteurs.\r\n\r\n\r\nObjectif de l’étude\r\nL’objectif de cette étude est de mettre en lumière les caractéristiques sociales et économiques des ménages dont\r\nle pastoralisme constitue le principal moyen d’existence et de comprendre les contraintes d’accès de ces m é-\r\nnages aux services de bases dont le système de protection sociale. Cette analyse s’appuie ra sur les différents\r\ntravaux réalisés en Mauritanie en lien avec la vulnérabilité et la résilience des élevages pastoraux ; diagnostic\r\nrécents réalisés dans le cadre du RIMRAP (ONG) et du PRAPS (diagnostics pastoraux par UEP) notamment,\r\nétude Initiative élevage pauvreté et croissance (FAO 2002), systèmes d’élevage dans le Hodh el Gharbi (VSF\r\n2000), pastoralisme et sécurité alimentaire (RESAL UE, 1998)…\r\nCette analyse vise à alimenter les échanges et le dialogue sectoriel entre acteurs de la plateforme de dialogue\r\nsectoriel. Elle permettra d’alimenter les réflexions prospectives sur les priorités de renforcement de la résilience\r\ndes systèmes pastoraux particulièrement vulnérables.\r\n\r\n\r\nPérimètre de l’étude et questions à traiter par les consultants\r\n - Identification des principaux acteurs du pastoralisme. Il s’agit d’identifier les grands acteurs des\r\n activités pastorales : institutions, associations et ménages dont les moyens d’existence se b asent sur le\r\n pastoralisme.\r\n\r\n - Catégorisation des systèmes pastoraux : Quels sont les différents systèmes pastoraux existants et\r\n quels sont leurs modes de fonctionnement ? Il conviendra d’identifier parmi chaque système identifié,\r\n les contraintes et les dynamiques actuels (Amplitude des déplacements, itinéraires, accès à l’eau, ac cès\r\n au pâturage, accès aux marchés, compétition et/ ou complémentarités avec d‘autres activés) ainsi que\r\n les grandes évolutions historiques.\r\n\r\n\r\n - Catégorisation des ménages pastoraux : Quelles sont les grandes caractéristiques des ménages pas-\r\n toraux ; Il conviendra d’établir une grille d’analyse selon plusieurs critères : Le statut (propriétaire él e-\r\n veur, propriétaire ayant recours au salariat ou au « confiage », berger ; Le cheptel (type et quantité\r\n moyenne) ; Le degré de spécialisation (agro-pasteur, pasteur) ; La mobilité (amplitude des déplace-\r\n ments, itinéraires, points d’attaches).\r\n\r\n\r\n - Exposition aux risques : Quels sont les risques qui pèsent sur les moyens d’existence des ménages\r\n pastoraux ? Il conviendra de faire la distinction entre les risques covariants (é pizootie, sécheresse…)\r\n qui à priori touchent les moyens d’existence des ménages pastoraux et les risques idiosyncratiques sp é-\r\n cifiques aux ménages pastoraux (maladies, décès, divorces…). Les risques identifiés doivent être anal y-\r\n sés au regard des catégorisations des systèmes et des ménages pastoraux préalablement effectuées.\r\n\r\n\r\n 64\r\n\f - Recommandations : Le consultant s’attachera à présenter des pistes de solution pour faciliter\r\n l’intégration des ménages pastoraux dans les programmes / projets développés par les com manditaires\r\n de l’étude. Plus spécifiquement il est attendu des recommandations portant sur les aspects suivants :\r\n (i) La définition d’actions structurantes et résilientes à l’échelle depuis les ménages\r\n jusqu’aux zones d’évolution de ces ménages ;\r\n (ii) La définition de modalités d’interventions permettant de réduire la pénibilité et\r\n l’intensité du travail des enfants ;\r\n (iii) La définition d’actions ou de processus ad hoc aux méthodes existantes pour ident i-\r\n fier les ménages pauvres et leur apporter un appui de base.\r\n\r\n\r\nQuestions spécifiques devant être traitées par l’étude\r\n - Quels besoins sont exprimés par ces ménages pastoraux, dans tous les domaines (sociaux, pro-\r\n ductifs…) ? Ceci permettra au RIMRAP d’orienter les actions à entreprendre à travers les agents de\r\n l’Etat, les structures de développement et les élus.\r\n\r\n - Quels est l’accès aux services de base (éducation, santé, Etat civil…) et aux programmes sociaux\r\n pour les ménages pastoraux ? Il conviendra de clarifier les facteurs des difficultés d’accès aux services\r\n de base (contraintes liées à la mobilité, à la culture…).\r\n\r\n - La mesure de la pauvreté selon le Registre Social (registre social) est-elle en adéquation avec\r\n la situation sociale et économique des ménages pastoraux (Pour chaque catégorie de mé-\r\n nages identifiés) ? Si oui, comment faciliter leur enregistrement dans le registre social ? Comment fa-\r\n ciliter l’accès aux services de base (éducation, santé, Etat civil, marché) pour chaque catégorie de m é-\r\n nages pastoraux ?\r\n\r\n - Quels sont les rapports avec les autres acteurs du secteur rural (autres groupes socio-\r\n économiques, structures de développement & associatives, services déconcentrés de l’Etat tant tec h-\r\n nique qu’administratifs, Elus) ? L’idée étant d’optimiser – si besoin – la synergie entre ces différents\r\n groupes en vue d’une paix sociale et d’une meilleure résilience de ces groupes et de la zone.\r\n\r\n - Situation des enfants dans le milieu pastoral : analyse de la situation des enfants au sein des com-\r\n munautés pastorales (nutrition, santé éducation, etc.), notamment le recours au travail des enfants par\r\n les ménages pastoraux. Analyser les causes et conséquences du travail des enfants dans le milieu agro-\r\n pastoral en Mauritanie et son lien avec la sécurité alimentaire et résilience des ménages.\r\n\r\n\r\n - Quelles contributions au système productif local ? L’objectif est d’étudier toutes les productions\r\n réalisées par ces groupes, de manière autonome (lait, viande etc…) mais également en complément\r\n avec les autres systèmes de production. L’idée étant de rechercher d’une meilleure synergie socio -\r\n économique locale et, de nouveau, une amélioration de la résilience des ménages.\r\n\r\n\r\nProduits attendus\r\nLes produits attendus au fil et au terme de l’étude sont :\r\n\r\n\r\n 1) En amont de la mission : Une proposition méthodologique et d’organisation du travail et une liste d es\r\n structures et personnes clés à rencontrer avec les questionnaires ou guides d’entretien corre spondant ;\r\n 2) Une première restitution « à chaud » auprès des commanditaires et des parties prenantes directement\r\n concernées par l’étude ;\r\n 3) Une présentation publique plus générale des résultats auprès d’un public plus large incluant les décideurs\r\n principaux du pays mais aussi les acteurs majeurs et notamment les acteurs de la plateforme de dialogue\r\n\r\n 65\r\n\f sectoriel appuyée par le RIMRAP et le PRAPS. Un power point de présentation par les consultants et un\r\n compte rendu exhaustifs des débats (par le secrétariat assuré au titre de la plateforme de dialogue) ;\r\n 4) Un rapport d’étude comprenant un rappel de la méthodologie de l’étude, une présentation des résultats des\r\n travaux réalisés dans les 4 wilayas, une analyse approfondie des questions structurantes et des recommanda-\r\n tions opérationnelles utiles aux interventions;\r\n\r\nProcessus méthodologique\r\nPréparation\r\n - Prise de connaissance des documents et de la littérature disponibles pour permettre une bonne com-\r\n préhension du contexte, de la problématique pastorale en Mauritanie et du travail des enfants dans ce\r\n milieu, et des projets des commanditaires de l’étude ;\r\n - Circonscription du champ de l’étude, approbation du plan de travail de l’étude avec l’équipe de pilo-\r\n tage de l’étude ;\r\n - Entretiens préalables avec les commanditaires de l’étude pour prendre des informations sur le déro u-\r\n lement de l’étude, la gestion du contrat, l’organisation du départ sur le terrain.\r\n\r\n\r\nEntretiens approfondis & visites de terrain\r\n - Entretiens avec les parties prenantes (Ministère de l’élevage, ministère de l´action sociale, associations\r\n d’éleveurs, agences de Nations Unies : FAO, UNICEF, BIT, OP élevage, PRAPS etc.) ;\r\n - Conduites d’entretiens individuels approfondis auprès des acteurs de l’élevage (services de l’élevage,\r\n associations, ménages pastoraux y compris avec les enfants etc.). Visites de terrain dans les 4 Wilaya du\r\n RIMRAP (zone agro-pastorale)\r\n\r\n\r\nRestitution\r\n\r\n - Avant de remettre le rapport initial, le Consultant organisera une réunion de restitution avec les parties\r\n prenantes pour discuter des premières observations / analyses.\r\n - Une présentation publique plus générale des résultats auprès d’un public plus large incluant les déc i-\r\n deurs principaux du pays mais aussi les acteurs majeurs et notamment les acteurs de la plateforme de\r\n dialogue sectoriel appuyée par le RIMRAP et le PRAPS.\r\n - En guise de note de fin de mission, les experts produiront un power point de présentation par les\r\n consultants et un compte rendu exhaustifs des débats (par le secrétariat assuré au titre de la plateforme\r\n de dialogue).\r\n\r\n\r\nAnalyse et rédaction du rapport\r\n - Un rapport initial sera soumis par le Consultant, 15 jours après la fin de sa mission terrain. Les com-\r\n manditaires de l’étude procéderont à une première appréciation de la qualité du rapport initial, sa con-\r\n formité aux critères énoncés dans les termes de références et le contrat conclu avec le consultant. Des\r\n commentaires seront éventuellement émis et le Consultant aura alors 15 jours pour modifier son rap-\r\n port en tenant compte des commentaires.\r\n - Le but du rapport est de présenter les analyses et les conclusions de l’étude reprenant les grands él é-\r\n ments d’analyse figurant dans les termes de références et fournir des recommandations ;\r\n - Le Consultant doit développer ses conclusions en expliquant dans quelle mesure elles reposent sur les\r\n avis, des analyses ou des éléments objectifs et vérifiables. Lorsque les avis recueillis lors des entretiens\r\n et des séances de travail en commun constituent l a principale source d’information, le Consultant pr é-\r\n cisera le degré de consensus observé et les procédures appliquées pour vérifier ces avis.\r\n - Le rapport comprendra : Une synthèse de l’étude (2 pages maximum) ; La finalité, l’objet et les modali-\r\n tés de conception et de conduite de l’étude ; Les informations et les analyses répondant aux questions\r\n soulevées dans les termes de références ; Les conclusions ; Les recommandations ; Les annexes dont\r\n les noms et les contacts des principales personnes rencontrées.\r\n\r\n\r\nProfil des Consultants\r\n 66\r\n\fUne équipe de quatre consultants sera mobilisée pour mener à bien cette étude qui bénéficie d’un\r\ncofinancement RIMRAP-UE, Banque Mondiale, Save the children.\r\n\r\nChef de mission (financement RIMRAP-UE):\r\n\r\n Socio-pasto-anthropologue de niveau 3ème cycle, avec une connaissance avérée des systèmes de pro-\r\n duction agricoles tropicaux et en particulier sahéliens. L’expert doit disposer d’une bonne connai s-\r\n sance des contextes pastoraux et de plus de 10 ans de pratique dans des appuis au développement rural\r\n en Afrique subsaharienne. Une connaissance de la Mauritanie est un atout. Excellentes capacités de\r\n rédaction et de synthèse requises.\r\n\r\nExpert protection sociale et filet sociaux (financement Banque Mondiale):\r\n\r\n Socio-économiste (bac +5), spécialiste des politiques de la protection sociale et des mécanismes de fi-\r\n lets sociaux en milieu sahélien. Bonne connaissance requise des aspects socio-économiques du con-\r\n texte rural sahélien.\r\n Au moins 10 ans d’expérience dans des projets d’appui au développement rural en Mauritanie.\r\n Bonne capacité de rédaction en français.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nConsultant socio-pastoraliste national (RIMRAP-UE):\r\n\r\n Expert national ou accompagnement dans les wilayas par les délégations régionales de l’élevage? Profil\r\n à ajouter type expert national socio-pastoraliste connaissant les 4 wilayas, les problématiques pasto-\r\n rales, les projets de développement pastoral, les démarches de concertation pour la gestion des espaces\r\n pastoraux et le cadre juridique. Bonne capacité de rédaction en français et maitrise de la langue has-\r\n sanya et/ou de la langue poular.\r\n\r\n\r\nSpécialiste travail des enfants « Save the children » :\r\n\r\n Spécialiste du travail des enfants fourni par « Save de children »\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganisation du travail, durée de l’étude et calendrier\r\nLe contrat sera pour une durée de trente jours travaillés par expert répartis de la manière suivante.\r\n\r\n\r\nPhases Chef de mission Experte filet Spécialiste travail Expert national socio\r\n pastoraliste sociaux des enfants pastoraliste\r\nAnalyse documentaire 5 5 5 5\r\net préparation desk\r\nEntretiens de cadrage 3 3 3 3\r\nNouakchot\r\nEntretiens dans les 4 12 12 12 12\r\nwillaya RIMRAP\r\nAnalyses et restitution 4 4 4 4\r\naux acteurs du dia-\r\nlogue sectoriel\r\nNouakchott\r\nRédaction rapport 6 6 6 6\r\nprovisoire et final\r\ndesk\r\nTotal jours experts 30 30 30 30\r\n\r\n 67\r\n\fCe planning sera ajusté en fonction du calendrier final.\r\nPour rappel sur la prise en charge financière des experts par l’UE, en fonction du calendrier, du fait de la densité\r\nde la mission les samedis pourront être travaillés. Les dimanches à la capitale ne sont pas considérés comme\r\njours travaillés.\r\nLe démarrage de la mission est souhaité dans la période de fin février et début mars.\r\n -------\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 68\r\n\f Annexe 2 : Bibliographie consultée\r\nAnalyse des filières agricoles : coton, riz, mangue, pomme de terre, échalote, 37 pages.\r\n\r\nBonte P., 2009. Appartenances tribales et enjeux fonciers pastoraux en Mauritanie, le projet « Elevage II », In Etudes\r\nrurales 2009/2 (n° 184), p. 149-168.\r\n\r\nBouy M., Ould SAaleh T.M., 2002. Typologie des systèmes dElevage du Hod el Gharbi. GIRNEM, CA-\r\nMEL.\r\n\r\nCadre d’analyse de la gouvernance foncière, 2013, Contribution à l’amélioration de la politique foncière à travers\r\nl’usage du cadre d’analyse de la gouvernance Foncière, Banque Mondiale, 101 p.\r\n\r\nCILSS-BAD, 2014, Programme de renforcement à la résilience alimentaire et nutritionnelle récurrente au Sahel (P2registre\r\nsocial), Etude ESS.\r\n\r\nCILSS-CSEAO, Profil sécurité alimentaire- Mauritanie, rapport final, 2008.\r\n\r\nCMAP, 2005, Analyse du potentiel de croissance du secteur rural en Mauritanie, Ministère des Affaires écono-\r\nmiques et du Développement.\r\n\r\nCollectif, 2017, L’Afrique du Sahel et du Sahara à la Méditerranée, Édition Armand Colin, Paris, 287 p.\r\n\r\nCoopération italienne au Maroc et en Mauritanie 2015.\r\n\r\nFAO, 2014, Stratégie et Plan d’Action de mise en œuvre de l’Initiative de la Grande Muraille Verte en Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nFAO-CR, 2014, Étude sur le financement de l’agriculture et du monde rural, Rapport complémentaire\r\n\r\nFewsNet, FAO, ACF, 2015. Mauritanie: Profil des moyens d’existence. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nFIDA/ ProLPRAF, 2008, Filière aviculture, 20 p.\r\n\r\nFMI, 2011, Cadre stratégique de lutte contre la pauvreté, Volume 1.\r\n\r\nGouvernement, 2006, Appui à la Mise en œuvre du NEPAD-PDDAA, Vol 5, Appui aux filières agricoles\r\nporteuses, NEPAD-FAO, 16 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nGouvernement, 2010, Les opportunités d’investissement en Mauritanie, Journée Secteur Privé, Bruxelles, UE-\r\nPNUD-FAO, 22 juin 2010.\r\n\r\nGRDR, Atlas du Sud-Est mauritanien, Dynamiques rurales.\r\n\r\nHEA, 2009, Profil de moyens d’existence des agriculteurs de la zone agricole pluviale Moughataa de Selibabi, Guidimaka.\r\n\r\nHEA, 2009, Profil de moyens d’existence des pastoraux de la zone sud-est Moughataa d’Aioun el Atrouss, wilaya de\r\nHoldh el Gharbi.\r\n\r\nInitiative Elevage Pauvreté et Croissance, 2002, Proposition pour un document national.\r\n\r\nIRAM-ECO, 2002, Gestion des ressources naturelles du Guidimaka, PDR, 52 p.\r\n\r\nLe Couster V., 2011, Conception et mise en œuvre d’Activités Génératrices de Revenus (AGR) sur le programme Revenus\r\nVerts pour la nourriture. Rapport de fin de mission.\r\n\r\n\r\n 69\r\n\fLe Couster V., 2011, Guide de référence pour la gestion du Fonds de Roulement.\r\n\r\nMDR, 2012, Appui à l’élaboration de la Stratégie de Développement du Secteur Rural, Rapport final.\r\n\r\nMDR, 2013, Stratégie de développement du secteur rural à l’horizon 2025 (SDSR), Rapport définitif, février 2013.\r\n\r\nMDR/Direction de l’Élevage, 2006, Élevage en Mauritanie, Etat des lieux et perspectives du sous-secteur, Con-\r\ntraintes, Atouts et Stratégies, 6 pages.\r\n\r\nMDR-DUE, 2014, Revue institutionnelle du secteur agricole et pastoral – RISAP, Etat des lieux et principaux chan-\r\ntiers de réformes institutionnelles, MDR-DUE/HTSPE, 85 p.\r\n\r\nMEDD, 2014, Stratégie nationale de conservation des zones humides en Mauritanie, MEDD-UICN.\r\n\r\nMinistère de L’Environnement et du Développement Durable, Projet de stratégie et de plan d’action sur la diver-\r\nsité biologique, 1999, 57 p.\r\n\r\nMinistère de la Santé. 2014. Carte sanitaire nationale de la Mauritanie. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nMinistère de la Santé. 2017. Plan national de développement sanitaire 2017-2020. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nMinistère de lEconomie et des Finances - Office National de la Statistique. 2013. Recensement Général\r\nde la Population et de l’Habitat. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n(RGPH 2013)\r\n\r\nMinistère de lEconomie et des Finances - Registre Social - RIM, 2017. Manuel opérationnel du Registre\r\nSocial. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nMinistère de lEconomie et des Finances, 2017. Questionnaire ménage de l’enquête de vérification.\r\n\r\nMinistère de lEducation, 2016. Annuaire des Statistiques Scolaires 2016-2017. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nMinistère des Affaires Économiques et du Développement, 2012, Stratégie Nationale de Sécurité Alimentaire\r\npour la Mauritanie aux horizons 2015 et vision 2030.\r\n\r\nMinistère des Affaires économiques et du Développement, 2015, Rapport d’évaluation globale 2001-2015 du\r\nCSLP, 221 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nMinistère du Commerce, Industrie et du Tourisme, 2015, Actualisation de l’Etude diagnostic pour l’intégration du\r\ncommerce, De rentes à court terme vers une croissance macroéconomique et un développement durable fondé sur l’exportation,\r\n177 p.\r\n\r\nNCG, 2017. Résiliences pastorales et agropastorales au Sahel : Portraits de la transhumance 2014-2015 et 2015-2016\r\n(Sénégal, Mauritanie, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger), 46 p.\r\n\r\nOffice National de la Statistique (ONS). 2014. Profil de la pauvreté en Mauritanie. Rapport final. Nouak-\r\nchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nOffice National de la Statistique (ONS). 2016. Enquête par grappes à indicateurs multiples, 2015, Rapport\r\nfinal. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nOXFAM-INTERMON, 2001, Etude sur la capitalisation d’expériences de commercialisation groupée dans le Pro-\r\ngramme de Moyens d’Existence Durable en Mauritanie, 13 pages.\r\n\r\nPANA, 2004, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\n 70\r\n\fPNASA-FAO, Mécanismes de prévention et de gestion des urgences alimentaires en Mauritanie, 2011.\r\n\r\nPNUD-FAO, 2000, Rapport sur la consultation sur le thème de l’Agriculture et de la lutte contre la pauvreté.\r\n\r\nPNUD-PNUE, Évaluation environnementale stratégique (EES) du secteur du développement rural, 71 pages + an-\r\nnexes.\r\n\r\nPRAPS, 2015, Présentation du Projet régional d’appui au pastoralisme au Sahel, Banque mondiale, 24 p.\r\n\r\nPRAPS, 2018. Plan de contingence actualisé aux crises pastorales en Mauritanie. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nPRAPS, Diagnostic de démarrage, Banque mondiale, 2016.\r\n\r\nPRODEFI, 2016, Rapport de conception, FIDA, 30 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nProGRN, 2011, Evaluation des effets des activités pare-feux et CES sur les revenus et la sécurité alimentaire des ménages\r\nEnquête au Guidimakha et au Hodh el Gharbi, 62 p.\r\n\r\nProGRN, 2011, Gestion décentralisée des ressources naturelles en Mauritanie, Expérience et enseignements 2001-2011,\r\n37 p.\r\n\r\nProjet d’appui au Développement de Brakna, 2006, Rapport d’activités du Projet Brakna-Sud, 14 p.\r\n\r\nProLPRAF, 2015, Etude de la filière cuirs et peaux, 40 p.\r\n\r\nProLPRAF, 2016, Etude de la filière lait, 110 p.\r\n\r\nProLPRAF, 2016, Rapport d’achèvement du projet, 31 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nProLPRAF, Document de conception du projet, FIDA, 24 p.\r\n\r\nRBM, 2018. Une démarche innovante de l’adaptation classique de l’analyse de l’économie des ménages\r\n(IHEA) aux réalités pastorales du sahel.\r\n\r\nRIM, 2002, Initiative élevage pauvreté et croissance (IEPC), Proposition pour un document national, FAO, 71 p.\r\n\r\nRIMRAP, 2016, Etude d’identification des filières porteuses en termes économiques et en matière de ren-\r\nforcement de la résilience agricole et pastorale, DUE/IRAM-UCAD Conseils, 64 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nRIMRAP, 2016, Rapport final de la mission de formulation du Programme « Renforcement des Investissements en Mauri-\r\ntanie pour le Développement des Infrastructures et services Ruraux (RIMDIR) » 6 à 20 Février 2017, DUE/IRAM-\r\nUCAD Conseils, 22 p. + annexes.\r\n\r\nUCAD - PRAPS. 2017. Etude des revenus des ménages des pasteurs et agropasteurs en Mauritanie. Rap-\r\nport final. Nouakchott, Mauritanie.\r\n\r\nUE, 2014, État des lieux et principaux chantiers de réformes institutionnelles et organisationnelles, RISAP, 109 p. +\r\nannexes.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 71\r\n\f Annexe 3 : Calendrier de la mission et institutions rencontrées\r\nDate Activité Lieu nuitée\r\n Voyage Domicile – Paris – Nouakchott\r\n25/03 Accueil par Dr Abder Benderdouche, chef de projet RIMRAP et Bernard Bonnet en mission Nouakchott\r\n pour le RIMRAP (mission formation et recherche action AFC-GIZ)\r\n Entretien avec Abder Benderdouche, Hamzate Kane (SE/RIMRAP) et Zahra Abdallahi Assis-\r\n tante de programme\r\n Entretien de début de mission avec la DUE\r\n26/03 Entretien avec le Président du GNAP et son adjoint\r\n Nouakchott\r\n\r\n Travail de préparation méthodologique et établissement du calendrier de terrain\r\n Bilan, recherche et exploitation documentaire\r\n Réunion à la Direction DPSEC de l’Elevage\r\n Séance de travail avec les représentants des consortia d’ONG -OI partenaires du RIMRAP\r\n Entretien avec Save the Children\r\n27/03 Entretien avec la Direction technique du PRAPS Nouakchott\r\n Réunion avec l’UNICEF\r\n Réunion avec le PAM\r\n Réunion avec le Registre social\r\n Voyage Nouakchott- Ayoûn Ayoûn\r\n28/03\r\n Exploitation bibliographique\r\n Réunion avec le consortium OXFAM-ODSZAZAM Ayoûn\r\n Visite de courtoisie au Waly, en présence de son staff\r\n Entretien à la Direction régionale de l’Agriculture\r\n29/03\r\n Entretien à la Direction régionale de l’Education\r\n Entretien à la Direction régionale de la Santé\r\n Entretien avec un promoteur de production et vente de lait de chamelle\r\n Visite du site de Ounlah Riad (zone pastorale), jour de marché, entretien avec le Maire et diffé- Ayoûn\r\n30/03 rents acteurs (APE, commerçants, intermédiaires de vente, éleveurs, familles de pasteurs)\r\n Visite du Hakem de Kobenni Ayoûn\r\n Réunion avec l’Inspecteur de l’Elevage, le représentant des Associations pastorale et d’un\r\n31/03 vétérinaire privé en retraite\r\n Entretien avec le Maire de et certains administrés\r\n Rencontre des membres de la mission de vérification du registre social à Hassi el AAhmed\r\n Rencontre avec les bouchers de Ayoûn Ayoûn\r\n01/04 Réunions sur les ménages dans les villages de\r\n Point interne à la mission (fin d’entretiens sur le Hodh El Gharbi)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 72\r\n\f Voyage Ayoûn – Ména Néma\r\n Visite de courtoisie au Waly du Hodh Ech Chargui en présence de son staff\r\n Entretien avec le Directeur Régionale de l’Elevage (PI)\r\n02/04 Entretien avec le Directeur Régionale de l’Education\r\n Entretien avec le Directeur de la Santé\r\n Entretien avec le représentant du GNAP pour la région du Hadh El Gharbi\r\n Réunion avec le Consortium Terre solidaire\r\n Réunion avec le Consortium Terre solidaire Ayoûn\r\n Visite de courtoisie au chef d’arrondissement de Ayouna At Zib\r\n03/04\r\n Entretien avec le Président de l’association pastorale El Rer à Ayouna At Zib\r\n Voyage Néma – Ayoûn\r\n Entretien avec une famille Foulbé Gieri (focus group de femmes) à Would Souya\r\n Voyage Ayoûn – Kiffa Kiffa\r\n Réunion avec le Consortium\r\n04/04\r\n Entretien avec le Directeur Régionale de l’Elevage\r\n Visite de courtoisie au Waly de l’Assaba\r\n Entretien avec un vétérinaire en retraite et formateur\r\n Travail interne à la mission Kiffa\r\n Echange téléphonique avec le Délégué Régional de L’Elevage\r\n05/04 Entretien avec le Président de la Fédération régionale des commerçants de bétail\r\n Entretien avec le Vice-président de l’association pastorale de Kiffa (membre du GNAP)\r\n Focus groupe au village de Mouchigag\r\n Visite de courtoisie au Hakem de Kankossa Kiffa\r\n Entretien avec l’adjoint au Maire de Konkossa et du comité de sélection au r egistre social\r\n06/04\r\n Entretien avec l’Inspecteur de l’Elevage de Konkossa et quelques éleveurs\r\n Réunion au village de Sani avec le maire, l’APE et quelques notables\r\n Visite de courtoisie au Hakem d’Ould Enjé Aweinat\r\n07/04 Entretien avec l’Inspecteur de l’Elevage d’Ould Enjé\r\n Réunion au village d’Aweinat avec participation de membres du comité de sélection au r egistre\r\n Réunion à un site peul d’un quartier d’Aweinat Sélibabi\r\n08/04 Voyage Ould Enjé à Sélibabi\r\n Réunion avec le Coordinateur GRDR\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 73\r\n\f Réunion avec le Consortium GRDR Sélibabi\r\n Entretien avec le Délégué Régional de l’Agriculture\r\n Entretien avec le Délégué Régional de l’Hydraulique\r\n Entretien avec le Service du Cantonnement de Sélibabi\r\n09/04 Entretien avec la Direction de l’Environnement\r\n Entretien avec la Délégation Régionale de la Santé\r\n Entretien avec la Délégation de l’Education\r\n Entretien avec le Représentant du GNAP\r\n Visite sur le site de ???\r\n Visite sur le site de ??? Kaédi\r\n10/04\r\n Voyage Sélibabi-Kaédi\r\n Voyage Kaédi-Nouakchott Nouakchott\r\n11/04\r\n Travail interne à la mission (synthèse du terrain des 4 wilayas)\r\n\r\n12/04 Préparation de la restitution Nouakchott\r\n Restitution à la Banque Mondiale aux parties prenantes Nouakchott\r\n13/04\r\n Contacts complémentaires\r\n Début de rédaction commune (répartition des tâches) Nouakchott\r\n14/04\r\n Départ de Mauritanie pour l’expert filets sociaux international\r\n Ultimes contacts et travaux avec l’équipe du RIMRAP\r\n15/04\r\n Départ de Mauritanie pour le chef de mission international\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 74\r\n\f Annexe 4 : Liste des personnes rencontrées\r\nNom Institution Fonction\r\n\r\n Nouckchott\r\n\r\nAbder Benderdouche RIMRAP Chef de mission\r\n\r\nHamzate Kane RIMRAP Suivi Evaluation\r\n\r\nZahra Abdallahi RIMRAP (UCAD) Assistante Programme\r\n\r\nPhilippe Lecler DUE Mauritanie Chargé de programme\r\n\r\nEl Hacen Ould Taleb GANAP Président\r\n\r\nMohamed Fadel Néma PRAPS-Mr Directeur technique\r\n\r\nDr Saleh DPSEC/ME Directeur\r\n\r\nDr Mamoudou Kane DPSEC/ME Directeur adjoint\r\n\r\nGéraldine Choquet GRDR Coordinatrice\r\n\r\nBâ M. Consortia Assaba Représentant\r\n\r\nFadel Bah Oxfam-Accord (Hott) Représentant\r\n\r\nJean-Noel Gentile et Damien\r\n Pam Représentant et chargé de programmes\r\nVacquier\r\nJudith Léveillée, Zihalirwa Représentante adjointe, responsable protection,\r\n Unicef\r\nNalwage, Fatma Saeid Ahmed chargée de programme protection\r\n\r\nAhmed Ould Bedde Registre social Directeur\r\n\r\nMohamedou MHaimid Agence Tadamone Coordonateur du Programme Tekavoul\r\n\r\n Willaya du Hod el Gharbi\r\n\r\nMohamed Ball Dir.. Reg. Agri. Ayoûn Dir. Reg. PI\r\n\r\nDélagué Régional Dir. Rég. Educ. Ayoûn Direct. Rég. Ayoûn\r\n\r\nAboubacrin Ould Wafi Dir. Rég. Santé Ayoûn Direct. Rég. Ayoûn\r\n\r\nBa Souleymane Oxfam Ayoûn Chef de projet\r\n\r\nThiam Abdoulaye Oxfam Ayoûn Technicien\r\n\r\nP. Amzig Ayoûn Promoteur lait\r\n\r\nElud Abdoulrhamane Ounlah Riad Maire\r\n\r\nMohamed Salim Ahmed Poste de Santé de Oulmah Riad Responsable de Poste\r\nPrésidente de lAssociation des\r\n Ouhmal Riad Présidente\r\nParents dElèves\r\n\r\nMadame Ardeja Ouhmal Riad Famille de pasteurs\r\n\r\nMohamed Ayoûn Représentant du GNAP pour la région\r\n\r\n\r\n 75\r\n\fKaber Ayoûn Membre de la Fédération des Bouchers\r\n\r\n Association Pastorale de Kobenni\r\nAhmed sidi Amed Représentant\r\n (Membre du GNAP)\r\n Inspection de lélevage de Koben-\r\nGabo Seydou Inspecteur\r\n ni\r\n\r\nM. Mohamed Ancien vétérinaire Retraité à Kobenni\r\n\r\nMaire de Hassi El Ahmed Hassi El Ahmed Maire\r\n\r\nAhmad Oul Mohamed Chef de Village Hassi El Ahmed\r\n\r\n Village de la commune de Hassi el Superviseur de léquipe denquête de vérification\r\nDada Oul Ahmed\r\n Ahmed du registre social\r\n\r\nSidat Ould Ahmed Village de Bouchiche Chef de ménage dune famille de pasteur\r\n\r\nBombai Ould Sidi Ahmed Village de Bosfaye Chef de ménage dune famille de pasteur\r\n\r\n Willaya du Hod el Chargui\r\n\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nLebatt Moubarak Chef de zone\r\n Chargui\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nYeslem Hamadi Chef de zone\r\n Chargui\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nBerti Benani Animateur\r\n Chargui\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nDille Sidi Ahmaed Animatrice\r\n Chargui\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nLyes CISP\r\n Chargui\r\n Consortium RIMRAP du Hod el\r\nSahineze Coordinatrice\r\n Chargui\r\n\r\nDidde Med Alboullah Dir. Reg Education DRE\r\n\r\nDr Mohamed Ahmed Direction Régionale de la Santé DRAS\r\n\r\nL. Moubarak GNAP Néma Président Néma\r\n\r\nAbdboulaye Mamadou Ba ACF Nema Responsable dantenne\r\n Association Pastorale Ayouna At\r\nEgal Abdidayin Président\r\n Zib\r\n Willaya de dAssaba\r\n\r\nFamille Sow Village Fulbe Gueri Mohamed Ali Femmes et jeunes hommes\r\n\r\nAbdoulaye Marmoud Association Pastorale de Kiffa Vice-président du Bureau Régional du GNAP\r\n\r\nAbdalaye Mohamed Fed des commerçants de Kiffa Président\r\n\r\nDia Abderhramane Personne-ressource Vétérinaire retraité\r\n\r\n Inspection de lElevage de Kon-\r\nHamadi Abdoul Sall Inspecteur\r\n kossa\r\n\r\nSouleymane Ould Side Commune de Kankossa Adjoint au Maire\r\n\r\n 76\r\n\fEtmane Sidi Ahmed Commune de Kankossa Secrétaire Général\r\n\r\nAbdel Malick Samba Délé. Reg Hydraulique Délégué à Selibabi\r\nMohamed oul Seidane Village de Zeida Ncheich Chef du village\r\n Village de la commuen de Kan-\r\nVillage de Saani Chef du village et ses adjoints\r\n kossa\r\n\r\nDélégué régional DR élevage de Kiffa Délégué régional\r\n\r\n Willaya du Guidimaka\r\n\r\n Inspection de lElevage dOuld\r\nOumar Diop Inspecteur\r\n Yenge\r\n\r\nKhaléhly Ould Hamouty Fadération Nationale de Eleveurs Président de section de Ould Yenge\r\n\r\nMoctar Diaguili Commune de lEweinat Maire\r\n\r\n Chef lieu de commuen de lEwei-\r\nChefs de ménages Entetien collectif\r\n nat\r\n Village Peuhl de la commuen de\r\nChef de village Chef du village\r\n lEweinat\r\n\r\nAbdou Yatabéré Consortia et GRDR Coordinateur\r\n\r\nKalilou Sy Cadre GRDR Personne-ressource\r\n\r\nDia Abdou GNAP Selibabi Personne-ressource\r\n\r\n ONG du consortium du RIRAM\r\nResponsable dAntenne Entetien collectif\r\n Guidimaka\r\n\r\nBureau de lEtat Civil Antenne régionale du Guidimaka Adjoint au reponsable du bureau\r\n\r\n Délégation Régionale du MEDD\r\nMohamed Vadel Limam Délégué Régional\r\n du Guidimaka\r\n Délégation Régionale du MEN du\r\nMr Dah Ould Didiya Délégué Régional\r\n Guidimaka\r\n Village Peulh de la commune de\r\nDjibi Bate Sow Chef du village\r\n Tachott\r\n\r\nEleveurs en transhumance Sabou, commune de Gouraye Bergers\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Personnels du projet RIMRAP\r\n Nom Institution Fonction Contact\r\nAbder Benderdouche RIMRAP (IRAM) Chef de mission a.benderdouche@iram-fr.org\r\n +222 36 96 54 66\r\nFranck Müller RIMRAP (IRAM) Expert principal franckmuller@mac.com\r\n +222 44 44 00 14\r\nHamzate Kane RIMRAP (IRAM) Expert Suivi évaluation hamzate.kane@gmail.com\r\n 27 91 86 70\r\nZahra Abdallahi RIMRAP (UCAD) Assistante de Programme abdallahizhra@gmail.com\r\n 31 59 59 59 ou 20 94 65 65\r\n\r\n 77\r\n\fAnnexe 5 : Liste des projets dans les quatre régions\r\n\r\n DATE DATE SOURCE DE ACTIONS\r\n TITRE PROJET DEBUT FIN Opérateur BUDGET FINANCEMENT ZONE INTERVENTION\r\n Restauration des sols,\r\n Moughataas de M’Bout du mobilisation et gestion des\r\n Projet de lutte contre la pauvreté dans 2014 10 505 600 eaux de surface.\r\n Gorgol, Ould Yengé du\r\n 2019 FIDA / RIM Guidimakha et Kankossa de Appui au développement\r\n lAftout Sud et le Karakoro (PASK II) USD local.\r\n l’Assaba\r\n\r\n\r\n Réhabilitation et Préservation\r\n Projet de développement des Trarza, Brakna, Gorgol, des moyens de subsistance.\r\n Guidimagha, Assaba, Tagant, Développement de la\r\n Infrastructures de base en zone rurale 2015 2019 5 738 000 USD BID Hodh Gharbi, HodhChargui, Résilience aux changements\r\n aride de Mauritanie, volet Oasis Inchiri et Dakhlet Nouadhibou climatiques et de la Sécurité\r\n Alimentaire.\r\n\r\n WAAPP : programme sous-régional de 8 130,097 FADES / Adrar, Tagant, Assaba Hodh\r\n 2018 El Gharbi et Hodh Charghi\r\n lamélioration de la productivité agricole 2013 millions dUM RIM\r\n Projet dAménagement Hydro_agricole du 21, 436 Aménagment hydro-agricole\r\n 2015 2019 BAD de Brakna\r\n Brakna Ouest (PAHABO) II milliards UM\r\n amélioration de la productivité\r\n Renforcement Institutionnel en Mauritanie UE / RIM / agricole tout en favorisant\r\n Hodh el Garbi, Hodh el lintégration régionale comme\r\n vers la Résilience Agricole et Pastorale 2016 2020 22 000 000 € AECID / Chargui, Assaba, Guidimaka instrument de promotion dune\r\n (RIMRAP) * GIZ croissance partagée et de\r\n réduction de la pauvreté\r\n Projet Régional dAppui au Pastoralisme au 60 000 000 National (wilayas\r\n 2016 2016 BM agropastorales zone appui au pastoralisme\r\n Sahel (PRAPS) USD frontières)\r\n PRREF: Projet de Renforcement de la Résilience\r\n de l’Economie Familiale (PRREF) grâce à la 60 000 000\r\n janv-15 janv-18 BM Sud et Est Mauritanien. Lutter contre la pauvreté\r\n productivité de l’élevage dans le Sud et l’Est USD des pasteurs et agro-pasteurs\r\n Mauritanien. les plus vulnérables\r\n Amelioration de lacces à la consomation\r\n 4 Wilayas du Sud et l’Est\r\n de poisson et renforcement de la securité mars-14 mars-17 1.070.000 Euros. UE Mauritanien.\r\n alimentaire\r\n\r\n Amélioration de la résilience des En plus des 4 Wilayas couvertes Lutter contre la pauvreté\r\n communautés et de leur sécurité par le PRREF: Gorgol, Brakna et des pasteurs et agro-pasteurs les\r\n janv-15 janv-18 238.000 Euros. DFID Trarza pour appuyer plus vulnérables des 4 Wilaya\r\n alimentaire face aux effets néfastes du\r\n changement climatique agropasteurs les plus vulnérables Sud et l’Est de la Mauritanie.\r\n des 7 Wilayas.\r\n Hodh el Chargui (Amourj, prévention et prise en charge de\r\n Projet de réponse intégrée à lamélioration\r\n Djiguenni, Néma) Gudimakha la malnutrition des populations\r\n de la sécurité nutritionnelle et à laccès aux 2016 2018 ACF 2 980 000 € ECHO / DFID (région)\r\n soins de santé en Mauritanie\r\n Gudimakha : municipalités de renforcement de capacité et\r\n Projet d’appui au recouvrement des Bouanze, Dafort, Bouli, Souvi, l’accès à l’eau ainsi que les\r\n besoins d’urgence et au renforcement de la Baediam et Khabou systèmes de gestion\r\n juil-05 2017 ACF USD 837 097 USAID\r\n résilience des populations vulnérables dans\r\n la région du Guidimakha (Phase II)\r\n communes de Khabou, Baédiam Groupement de Collectivités\r\n Projet Intercommunal de Gestion Intégrée et Soufi (Guidimakha) Territoriales (Khabou, Soufi,\r\n des Ressources Naturelles dans le Bassin 2015 2017 GRDR 490.500 Euros UE Baédiam) sur la gestion\r\n du Karakoro concertée des ressources du\r\n Karakoro\r\n 5 communes du bassin de Renforcer les capacités des\r\n Projet d’opérationnalisation et de\r\n annuelle Karakoro (Ould Yengé, Boully, Organisations Paysannes, de\r\n mobilisation des ressources financières au Soufi, Baédiam et Khabou) leurs membres et des élus des\r\n 2016 ment GRDR 39 000 € SCAC\r\n profit des initiatives intercommunales du Collectivités Locales\r\n étendu\r\n bassin de Karakoro\r\n Pour l’émergence d’un dialogue politique Guidimakha: communes\r\n concerté sur la sécurité alimentaire dans de Oud Yengé, Sélibaby,\r\n les territoires transfrontaliers du Mali, de la 2016 2017 GRDR 643.330.400 UM CCFD AFD Gouraye et Melgué\r\n Mauritanie, du Sénégal, du Niger et du\r\n Burkina Faso « DIAPOCO »\r\n UE SCAC Guidimaka Karakoro réflexion développement\r\n Gouvernance citoyenne des territoires 2015 2017 GRDR 2 700 000 € CFSI Rég local au Sahel\r\n Centre\r\n Assaba, Brakna, Gorgol, Adaptation au changement\r\n Projet Augmentation des Capacités pour\r\n Guidimakha, Hodh El climatique\r\n l’Adaptation au Changement Climatique en 2014 … 2018 7 800 000 USD FAB\r\n Chargui, Hodh El Gharbi,\r\n Milieu Rural\r\n Tagant, Trarza\r\n Programme de renforcement de la tout le pays\r\n résilience à linsécurité alimentaire et 2015 2019 15 000 000 USD BAD\r\n nutritionnelle récurrente au Sahel P2RS\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 78\r\n\fAnnexe 6 : Quelques faits historiques marquants\r\n  1850 : La période précoloniale, agitée et intertribale\r\n  1905 : La pacification du pays et la collaboration avec les tributs maraboutiques Zwaya et\r\n guerrières\r\n  1929 : La grande crise mondiale et la grande famine locale avec manque de textiles (re-\r\n cours aux cuirs, peaux, laines)\r\n  1940 : Politique de sédentarisation coloniale, premières cultures en aval des barrages\r\n (sorgho, niébé, maïs)\r\n  1905 : L’influence de la tribu des Ehel Sidi Mahmoud et les relations sociales locales (As-\r\n saba et Guidimaka et Gharbi, en alliance avec les aoulad M’Bareck)\r\n  1945 : Grande guerre spirituelle entre les Tenwajiw et Leghlal Mourides Cheik Hama-\r\n houlah (Hodh El Gharbi et Nioro del Sahel)\r\n  1947 : Passage de Mr Pierre Mesmer à Boughara et le barrage de Tamourt Kirain\r\n  19 ??? Exil de Cheik Hamaholah\r\n  1960 : Indépendance de la Mauritanie (28 novembre), Président Mokhtar Ould Daddah\r\n  1964 : Loi sur les associations à but non lucratif au niveau du Ministère de l’Intérieur\r\n  1969 : Les grandes sécheresses avec changements socio-économiques. Premières distri-\r\n bution de vivres gratuits, introduction du blé dans les habitudes alimentaires. Villagisa-\r\n tion et exode rural\r\n  1978 : Coup d’État militaire contre le Président Mokhtar Ould Daddah\r\n  1975-1983 : La construction de la route de l’espoir (Nouakchott-Néma et ses impacts so-\r\n cio-économiques (regroupement de campements).\r\n  Années 1995 : Début du développement du maraichage autour des points d’eau\r\n  1978 : Création de la Loi permettant la création des coopératives agricoles au niveau du\r\n Ministère du Développement rural\r\n  1986 : La création des communes et l’ère de la démocratie en 1986 suite au sommet de la\r\n Baule ; essor des coopératives, associations, GIE\r\n  1986 : Création du projet oasis\r\n  1991 : Constitution du 20 juillet et Pluralisme politique\r\n  Projet Elevage 1985-1995 : création des associations coopératives pastorales et GNAP\r\n  1991-2004 : Projet de gestion intégrée des RN dans l’Est mauritanien (GIRENM)\r\n  1992 : Premières élections présidentielles dans la 2e République\r\n  1995 : Création de la Loi modifiant certains articles de la coopération\r\n  2000 : Code pastoral\r\n  2004 : Décret d’application du Code pastoral\r\n  Année 2000 : Programme Assaba – PNUD : investissements importants dans les oasis et\r\n en infrastructures rurales.\r\n  2007 : Election présidentielle\r\n  2009 : Code forestier et son décret d’application\r\n  2017 : Evolution vers de nouvelles régions Centre (Tagant, Assaba, Guidimakha) et les\r\n deux Hodhs réunis (référendum du 05 août 2017).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 79\r\n\fAnnexe 7 : Esquisse de la liste des tribus et des alliances\r\nChorfa (descendant du Prophète) : alliance avec toutes les tribus\r\n------------------\r\nKounta\r\nLaglal\r\n--------------------\r\nMechdouf\r\nLehmenat\r\n-------------------\r\nOulad Daoud\r\nOulad Allouch\r\n-----------------\r\nJoumane\r\n---------------\r\nIdoblal\r\n---------------\r\nEhel Sidi\r\n------------------\r\nOulad M’Bareck\r\nTenwajiw\r\nOulad Bouhoumoud (24 fractions)\r\nOulad Naçr\r\n-----------------------\r\nIdawali\r\nIdow’ich\r\n---------------------\r\nEhel Taleb Mahmoud\r\nEhel Taleb Ethmane\r\nLechyakh\r\n----------------------\r\nOulad Zeid\r\nOulad Alloul\r\n--------------------\r\nOulad Biyeri\r\nOulad Billa\r\nJ’Avra\r\nLadem\r\n\r\n 80\r\n\f-----------------\r\nDeiboussat\r\nOulad Sidi\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 81\r\n\f Annexe 8 : Catégorisation détaillée des ménages selon les 3 grands types de systèmes\r\n Système Grands Capital productif et main d’œuvre Autres activités Mobilité, habitat et équipement domestique\r\n Transhumants\r\nMénages vulnérable (Ho- Activité agricole parfois pratiquée (maraichage, cultures sèches ou de\r\nfoubalero) Ovins/ Caprins : 0-20 I Bovins : 0-5 décrue au sud de la zone pastorale) mais souvent très réduite.. Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des animaux (retour au\r\n  UBT/actif < 2 village tous les soirs).\r\nNe paie pas la Zakhat mais la\r\nreçoit. Implication dans les activités suivantes (dont certaines ne sont pratiquées\r\n que par certains groupes sociaux) : Famille sédentaire.\r\n\r\n\r\n Main d’œuvre disponible parfois réduite En relation avec l’élevage : Gardiennage autour des points de fixation, Habitat : Hangar en bois ou plus rarement en béton,\r\n (veuf ou veuve, adulte malade, personnes berger saisonnier, puisage de l’eau et abreuvement des animaux, con- mais peu meublé, case, maison en banco (notamment\r\n âgées), et/ou très peu qualifiée. voyage des animaux (temporaire), boucherie (vendeur de viande), tannage, dans les petits centres urbains).\r\n ramassage et vente de bois de chauffe.\r\n\r\n Beaucoup de familles vulnérables habitent les quartiers\r\n Sans relation directe avec l’élevage : Maçonnerie (main d’œuvre), pauvres des petits centres urbains et/ou les villages satel-\r\n manutention, fabrication de briques, transformation (ex: couscous), lites de villages plus aisés ou des chefs lieu de commune.\r\n artisanat, cueillette de PFNL, micro-commerce.\r\nPropriétaire d’un petit\r\ntroupeau (Toumza, Sam- Ovins/Caprins : 20-50 Ι Bovins : 5-10 Cette catégorie de ménages pratique les mêmes activités que les ménages Mobilité : Transhumance souvent d’amplitude réduite,\r\nbanagel) I Camelins : 0 Anes : 0-2  2 < vulnérables. Néanmoins certains (notamment les hommes au sein du soit associée à la garde d’autres animaux que ceux dont le\r\n UBT/actif < 5 ménage) pratiquent ces activités avec un statut moins précaire, par ménage est propriétaire (activité de berger), soit à la\r\nNe contribue pas à la Zak- exemple : conduite d’un troupeau rassemblant le bétail de plusieurs\r\nhat. Le statut de bénéficiaire ménages (conduite collective du troupeau). Complémen-\r\nvis à vis de la Zakhat dé-  La majorité des petits troupeaux tation des laitières avec de l’aliment bétail en saison\r\npend du milieu social. sont des troupeaux de petits rumi-  Berger saisonnier  Berger responsable de la conduite d’un trou- chaude, notamment lors des années de sécheresse.\r\n nants. peau.\r\n  Lorsque les troupeaux sont mobiles,  Convoyage temporaire et courtier non capitalisé  convoyage Pour les familles de bergers (garde d’autres animaux en\r\n le propriétaire dispose souvent régulier et courtier non ou peu capitalisé plus du troupeau familial), deux options sont possibles :\r\n d’une charrette et d’un âne.\r\n  Micro-commerce  petit commerce de détail  Famille transhumante, avec point d’attache.\r\n\r\n\r\n 82\r\n\f  Le ménage peut parfois disposer  Vendeur de viande  boucher disposant d’une patente.  Famille sédentaire, seuls les hommes et les\r\n d’un très modeste capital roulant jeunes garçons étant impliqués dans la\r\n commercial. transhumance\r\n Lorsque ces activités extra-pastorales sont très chronophages, et que le\r\n manque de disponibilité de main d’œuvre familiale l’exige, les animaux de\r\n ces ménages sont confiés en gardiennage à d’autres ménages, notamment Pour les autres ménages : famille sédentaire.\r\n Main d’œuvre : Disposant d’un savoir- en période de transhumance, mais rarement à l’année.\r\n faire particulier ou d’un réseau (conduite\r\n de troupeau, courtage, convoyage, bou- Habitat : hangar en béton mais modeste, maison en\r\n cherie,…) banco, le niveau d’équipement de l’habitat est alors un\r\n signe de trajectoire de différentiation économique et\r\n sociale ; case (généralement moins équipée).\r\nMoyen troupeau (Gatai’a,\r\n Ovins/Caprins : 50 -100 Ι Bovins : 15-70  Pas d’activité agricole. Mobilité : Bétail transhumant, les laitières sont gardées\r\nDiarga) et/ou Camelins : 10-20 I Anes /chevaux: au niveau du point d’attache si l’ensemble du ménage ne\r\n 1-2  5 < UBT/actif < 25  En général, pas d’implication dans les activités de main d’œuvre le transhume pas. Complémentation des laitières avec de\r\nContribue à la Zakhat\r\n plus pénibles et dans les activités socialement déconsidérées. l’aliment bétail en saison chaude, notamment lors des\r\n années de sécheresse.\r\n  Diversification dans un commerce  Gérant de grand troupeau / troupeau collectif, responsable de la\r\n de petite taille fréquent. supervision de plusieurs bergers.\r\n  Implication possible dans des activités de commerce (courtier capi- Deux options possibles :\r\n talisé, commerce de détail dans les petits centres urbains, etc…).\r\n  Famille transhumante, avec point d’attache.\r\n  Parfois retraités de la fonction publique, ou fonctionnaire de bas\r\n grade.  Familles sédentaires, et seuls les hommes partent en\r\n transhumance avec les grands enfants et/ou des\r\n jeunes bergers pour les accompagner (retraités, mé-\r\n nages âgés, cas ou les activités extra-pastorales\r\n Lorsque ces activités extra-pastorales sont très chronophages, et que le jouent un rôle important).\r\n manque de disponibilité de main d’œuvre familiale l’exige, les animaux de\r\n ces ménages sont confiés en gardiennage à d’autres ménages, notamment\r\n en période de transhumance, mais parfois à l’année. Habitat : Hangar en béton et ou maison en banco, avec\r\n bon niveau d’équipement (batteries, salon aménagé…),\r\n case (généralement moins équipée). Résidences multiples\r\n possibles.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 83\r\n\fGrand troupeau (Serk, Ovins /Caprins : 150 – 400 I Bovins :  Pas d’activité agricole. Mobilité : Bétail transhumant, les laitières sont gardées\r\n 80-150 et + Camelins : 20 à 100 et + au niveau du point d’attache. Pour les laitières, complé-\r\nGallo)  Implication fréquente dans des activités de commerce, et/ou emploi mentation des laitières avec de l’aliment bétail en saison\r\n  25 < UBT/actif salarié régulier (fonctionnaire), responsabilités politiques locales. chaude, notamment lors des années de sécheresse.\r\n  Le travail de berger est confié aux jeunes hommes et/ou confié à de\r\n la main d’œuvre extra familiale (soit des familles entières – préfé-\r\n rence des propriétaires-, soit des bergers individuels souvent issues Famille sédentaire: seuls les hommes se déplacent, soit de\r\nContribue à la Zakhat façon temporaire pour aller rendre visite aux troupeaux\r\n  Véhicules : Parfois Mercedes ou des catégories 1 ou 2 ci-dessus).\r\n 4×4 pour les plus gros troupeaux gardés par des bergers, soit pour accompagner les trou-\r\n  Pour les troupeaux de très grande taille, un gérant assure une relation peaux pour l’ensemble de la saison.\r\n  Commerce, parfois de gros. intermédiaire entre le propriétaire et les bergers de ses différents\r\n sous-troupeaux.\r\n Habitat : Résidences multiples quasi-systématiques – en\r\n milieu rural : hangar en béton et ou maison en banco,\r\n avec bon niveau d’équipement (batteries, salon aména-\r\n gé…), case ; en milieu urbain (chef-lieu de mougahaata,\r\n ou de willaya) : maison et hangar en béton. Les ménages\r\n les plus aisées peuvent également avoir une résidence à\r\n Nouakchott.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Agro-Pasteurs et Capital productif et main d’œuvre Autres activités Mobilité, habitat et équipement domestique\r\n Agro-Eleveurs\r\nMénages vulnérable\r\n Ovins/ Caprins : 0-10 I Bovins : 0 Activité agricole pratiquée de façon systématique (maraichage, cul- Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des animaux (retour au\r\nNe paie pas la Zakhat mais la tures sèches ou de décrue au sud de la zone agro-pastorale). La contribu- village tous les soirs).\r\n  UBT/actif < 1 tion de l’activité agricole aux revenus de ces ménages et relativement plus\r\nreçoit.\r\n importante que celle de l’élevage.\r\n Famille sédentaire.\r\n Surface cultivée : 1 à 2 ha en culture\r\n pluviale et décrue (pas systématique). Implication dans les activités suivantes (dont certaines ne sont pratiquées\r\n que par certains groupes sociaux) : Habitat : Hangar en bois ou plus rarement en béton,\r\n mais peu meublé, case, maison en banco (notamment\r\n Main d’œuvre disponible parfois réduite dans les petits centres urbains).\r\n (veuf ou veuve, adulte malade, personnes En relation avec l’élevage : Gardiennage, berger saisonnier, creusement\r\n\r\n 84\r\n\f âgées), et/ou très peu qualifiée. des puisards et abreuvement des animaux, convoyage des animaux (tem-\r\n poraire), boucherie (vendeur de viande), tannage.\r\n Beaucoup de familles vulnérables habitent les quartiers\r\n pauvres des petits centres urbains et/ou les villages satel-\r\n Sans relation directe avec l’élevage : Main d’œuvre agricole, maçonne- lites de villages plus aisés ou des chefs lieu de commune.\r\n rie (main d’œuvre), manutention, fabrication de briques, transformation\r\n (ex: couscous), artisanat, cueillette de PFNL, collecte et vente de bois de\r\n chauffe, micro-commerce.\r\nPropriétaire d’un très petit\r\ntroupeau Ovins/Caprins : 15-30 Ι Bovins : 2 - Activité agricole pratiquée de façon systématique (maraichage, cultures Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des troupeaux pour les\r\nNe contribue pas à la Zak- 10 I Camelins : 0 Anes : 0-2  1 < sèches ou de décrue au sud de la zone agro-pastorale). La contribution de agro-éleveurs et transhumance d’amplitude réduite pour\r\nhat. Le statut de bénéficiaire UBT/actif < 3 l’activité agricole aux revenus de ces ménages est le plus souvent infé- les agro-pasteurs. Dans ce cas, la transhumance est asso-\r\nvis à vis de la Zakhat dé- rieure à celles des activités liées à d’élevage. ciée à la garde d’autres animaux que ceux dont le ménage\r\npend du milieu social. est propriétaire (activité de berger), soit à la conduite d’un\r\n Surface cultivée : 1 à 3 ha en culture troupeau rassemblant le bétail de plusieurs ménages\r\n pluviale et décrue (pas systématique). Implication dans les activités suivantes (dont certaines ne sont pratiquées (conduite collective du troupeau).\r\n que par certains groupes sociaux) :\r\n\r\n  La majorité des petits troupeaux Dans les deux cas, pratique de ramassage des résidus de\r\n sont des troupeaux de petits rumi-  Berger saisonnier  Berger responsable de la conduite d’un trou- culture et de paille pour contribuer à l’alimentation du\r\n nants. peau. bétail non transhumant en saison chaude. Complémenta-\r\n tion avec de l’aliment bétail en saison chaude, notamment\r\n  Le ménage peut parfois disposer  Convoyage temporaire et courtier non capitalisé  convoyage lors des années de sécheresse.\r\n d’un très modeste capital roulant régulier et courtier peu capitalisé\r\n commercial.\r\n  Micro-commerce  petit commerce de détail La très grande majorité des familles sont sédentaires :\r\n  Aire de pâturage collective de mise pour les familles de bergers – uniquement représentées\r\n en défend possible.  Vendeur de viande  boucher disposant d’une patente.\r\n chez les agro-pasteurs et non chez les agro-éleveurs -\r\n (garde d’autres animaux en plus du troupeau familial),\r\n seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons sont impliqués\r\n Lorsque ces activités extra-pastorales sont très chronophages, et que le\r\n dans la transhumance.\r\n Main d’œuvre : Disposant d’un savoir- manque de disponibilité de main d’œuvre (ou de savoir -faire chez les\r\n faire particulier (conduite de troupeau, Soninké) familiale l’exige, les animaux de ces ménages sont confiés en\r\n courtage, convoyage, boucherie,…) gardiennage à d’autres ménages, soit à l’année (Soninké), soit en période\r\n de transhumance (agro-pasteurs). Habitat : hangar en béton mais modeste, maison en\r\n banco, le niveau d’équipement de l’habitat est alors un\r\n signe de trajectoire de différentiation économique et\r\n sociale ; case (généralement moins équipée).\r\nMoyen troupeau\r\n Ovins/Caprins : 30 - 80 Ι Bovins : 10-40 Activité agricole pratiquée de façon systématique (maraichage, cultures Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des troupeaux pour les\r\n\r\n 85\r\n\f et/ou Camelins : 0-5 I Anes /chevaux: 1-2 sèches ou de décrue au sud de la zone agro-pastorale). La contribution de agro-éleveurs et transhumance d’amplitude réduite pour\r\nContribue à la Zakhat  3 < UBT/actif < 15 l’activité agricole aux revenus de ces ménages est nettement inférieure à les agro-pasteurs. Dans ce cas, la transhumance est asso-\r\n celles des activités liées à d’élevage, sauf dans des cas particuliers (ce r- ciée à la garde d’autres animaux que ceux dont le ménage\r\n taines familles d’agro-éleveurs Soninké ayant peu investi dans l’élevage). est propriétaire (activité de berger), soit à la conduite d’un\r\n Surface cultivée : 2 à 3 ha en culture L’ensemble du terroir agricole n’est pas systématiquement exploité (dé- troupeau rassemblant le bétail de plusieurs ménages\r\n pluviale et décrue (pas systématique). pend notamment de la main d’ouvre disponible et de la pluviométrie (conduite collective du troupeau).\r\n annuelle). L’emploi de main pour la réalisation des activités agricole est\r\n fréquent.\r\n Dans les deux cas, pratique de ramassage des résidus de\r\n  Diversification dans un commerce culture et de paille pour contribuer à l’alimentation du\r\n de petite taille fréquent.  En général, pas d’implication dans les activités de main d’œuvre les bétail non transhumant en saison chaude. Complémenta-\r\n plus pénibles et dans les activités socialement déconsidérées. tion avec de l’aliment bétail en saison chaude, notamment\r\n  Aire de pâturage collective de mise lors des années de sécheresse.\r\n en défend possible.  Implication possible dans des activités de commerce (courtier capi-\r\n talisé, commerce de détail dans les petits centres urbains, etc…).\r\n La très grande majorité des familles sont sédentaires :\r\n  Retraités de la fonction publique, ou fonctionnaire de bas grade,\r\n pour les familles de bergers – uniquement représentées\r\n revenus issus de la migration.\r\n chez les agro-pasteurs et non chez les agro-éleveurs -\r\n (garde d’autres animaux en plus du troupeau familial),\r\n seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons sont impliqués\r\n Lorsque ces activités extra-pastorales sont très chronophages, et que le dans la transhumance.\r\n manque de disponibilité de main d’œuvre (ou de savoir -faire chez les\r\n Soninké) familiale l’exige, les animaux de ces ménages sont confiés en\r\n gardiennage à d’autres ménages, soit à l’année (Familles Soninké), soit en Habitat : Hangar en béton et ou maison en banco, avec\r\n période de transhumance (agro-pasteurs). bon niveau d’équipement (batteries, salon aménagé…),\r\n case (généralement moins équipée). Les résidence mul-\r\n tiples sont rares.\r\nGrand troupeau\r\n Ovins /Caprins : 100 – 400 I Bovins : Activité agricole pratiquée de façon systématique chez les agro-éleveurs, Mobilité : Bétail généralement transhumant (amplitude\r\nContribue à la Zakhat 40-150 et + Camelins : 5 à 20 et + et résiduelle chez les agro-pasteurs (maraichage, cultures sèches ou de variée), les laitières sont gardées au niveau du point\r\n décrue au sud de la zone agro-pastorale). La contribution de l’activité d’attache.\r\n  15 < UBT/actif agricole aux revenus de ces ménages est systématiquement inférieure à\r\n celles des activités liées à d’élevage. L’ensemble du terroir agricole n’est\r\n pas systématiquement exploité (dépend notamment de la main d’ouvre Ramassage des résidus de culture et de paille pour contri-\r\n Surface cultivable : 2 à 5 ha en culture disponible et de la pluviométrie annuelle). L’emploi de main pour la buer à l’alimentation du bétail non transhumant en saison\r\n pluviale et décrue (pas systématique). réalisation des activités agricole est systématique. chaude. Complémentation avec de l’aliment bétail en\r\n saison chaude, notamment lors des années de sécheresse.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 86\r\n\f  Véhicules possibles mais rarement  Le travail de berger saisonnier est confié aux jeunes hommes (uni- Famille sédentaire: seuls les hommes se déplacent en\r\n utilisés pour la conduite des trou- quement chez les agro-pasteurs) et/ou confié à de la main d’œuvre saison chaude, soit de façon temporaire pour aller rendre\r\n peaux (plus fréquemment utilisées extra familiale : bergers individuels souvent issues des catégories 1 ou visite aux troupeaux gardés par des bergers, soit pour\r\n pour des activités commerciales ou 2 ci-dessus, accompagnés de jeunes garçons. accompagner les troupeaux pour l’ensemble de la saison.\r\n de transport).\r\n  Les revenus issus de la migration sont parfois importants à prépon-\r\n  Commerce, parfois de gros. dérants. Habitat : Résidences multiples fréquentes chef les agro-\r\n  Aire de pâturage familiale de mise  Implication dans des activités politiques. pasteurs (mais rares chez les agro-éleveurs) – en milieu\r\n en défend possible. rural : hangar en béton et ou maison en banco, avec bon\r\n niveau d’équipement (batteries, salon aménagé…), case ;\r\n en milieu urbain (chef-lieu de mougahaata, ou de wil-\r\n laya) : maison et hangar en béton. Les ménages les plus\r\n aisées peuvent également avoir une résidence à Nouak-\r\n chott.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Eleveurs Péri- Capital productif et main d’œuvre Autres activités Mobilité, habitat et équipement domestique\r\n Urbains\r\nMénages vulnérable\r\n Ovins/ Caprins : 0-5 I Bovins : 0 Activité agricole très réduite (et uniquement en zone agro- Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des animaux.\r\nNe paie pas la Zakhat mais la pastorale).La contribution de l’activité agricole aux revenus de\r\n  UBT/actif < 1 ces ménages est variable selon les conditions de production.\r\nreçoit.\r\n Les familles sont sédentaires : pour les familles de ber-\r\n gers, seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons sont impli-\r\n Surface cultivée : <1 ha en culture pluviale, Implication dans les activités suivantes (dont certaines ne sont qués dans la transhumance.\r\n décrue (zone agro-pastorale), mais surtout pratiquées que par certains groupes sociaux) :\r\n maraîchage.\r\n Habitat : Hangar en bois ou plus rarement en béton,\r\n  En relation avec l’élevage : Gardiennage, berger saison- mais peu meublé, case, maison en banco (notamment\r\n Main d’œuvre disponible parfois réduite (veuf ou dans les petits centres urbains).\r\n nier, creusement des puisards et abreuvement des ani-\r\n veuve, adulte malade, personnes âgées), et/ou très\r\n maux, convoyage des animaux (temporaire), boucherie\r\n peu qualifiée.\r\n (vendeur de viande), tannage.\r\n Beaucoup de familles vulnérables habitent les quartiers\r\n  Sans relation directe avec l’élevage (prépondérantes) : pauvres des petits centres urbains.\r\n Main d’œuvre agricole, maçonnerie (main d’œuvre), manu-\r\n\r\n\r\n 87\r\n\f tention, fabrication de briques, transformation (ex: cous-\r\n cous), artisanat, cueillette de PFNL, collecte et vente de\r\n bois de chauffe, micro-commerce.\r\nPropriétaire d’un petit\r\ntroupeau à vocation com- Ovins/Caprins : 15-30, Bovins : 0 - 5  1 < Activité agricole très réduite (et uniquement en zone agro- Mobilité : Absence de mobilité des animaux. Utilisation\r\nmerciale UBT/actif <3 pastorale).La contribution de l’activité agricole aux revenus de de l’aliment bétail et/ou achat de paille ou résidus de\r\n ces ménages est variable selon les conditions de production. culture (zone agro-pastorale) pour leur engraissement en\r\nNe contribue pas à la Zak- saison chaude.\r\nhat. Le statut de bénéficiaire Surface cultivée : <1 ha en culture pluviale,\r\nvis à vis de la Zakhat dé- décrue (zone agro-pastorale) ou maraîchage. Implication dans les activités suivantes (dont certaines ne sont\r\npend du milieu social. pratiquées que par certains groupes sociaux) : Les familles sont sédentaires : pour les familles de ber-\r\n gers, seuls les hommes et les jeunes garçons sont impli-\r\n  La majorité des petits troupeaux sont des qués dans la transhumance.\r\n troupeaux de petits ruminants (ca-  Berger saisonnier  Berger responsable de la conduite\r\n prins>ovins). L’élevage est essentiellement d’un troupeau.\r\n orienté vers l’embouche. Habitat : Résidence urbaine, hangar en béton mais mo-\r\n  Convoyage temporaire et courtier non capitalisé  con- deste, maison en banco, le niveau d’équipement de\r\n  Le ménage peut parfois disposer d’un très voyage régulier et courtier peu capitalisé l’habitat est alors un signe de trajectoire de différentiation\r\n modeste capital roulant commercial, investi économique et sociale ; case (généralement moins équi-\r\n dans des activités de commerce ou de cour-  Micro-commerce  petit commerce de détail pée).\r\n tage.  Vendeur de viande  boucher disposant d’une patente.\r\n\r\n\r\n Main d’œuvre : Disposant d’un savoir-faire parti-\r\n culier (conduite de troupeau, courtage, convoyage,\r\n boucherie,…)\r\nSystème laitier péri-urbain\r\n Vaches : 10-20, associées à troupeau transhu-  Activité agricole très réduite (et uniquement en zone agro- Mobilité : Troupeau laitier gardé à proximité du lieu de\r\n mant (80 et +) ou Chamelles : 5 à 10, associées pastorale). commercialisation, en partie nourri avec de l’aliment\r\n à troupeau transhumant (30 et +) bétail et/ou de la paille ou des résidus de culture, le reste\r\n  La conduite du troupeau non allaitant est confiée à des du troupeau est transhumant d’amplitude variée selon les\r\n bergers. systèmes associés et les espèces.\r\n  5 < UBT/actif <20  Implication dans des activités de commerce (courtier\r\n capitalisé, commerce de détail, etc…).\r\n Famille partiellement transhumante: En hivernage une\r\n  Investissement dans des activités de com-  Parfois retraités de la fonction publique, ou fonctionnaire partie de la famille se déplace vers le point d’attache rural,\r\n merce. de bas grade. en saison chaude, seuls les hommes se déplacent en\r\n saison chaude, soit de façon temporaire pour aller rendre\r\n  Réfrigérateur/congélateur. visite aux troupeaux gardés par des bergers, ou plus\r\n\r\n 88\r\n\f rarement pour accompagner le troupeau.\r\n\r\n\r\n Habitat : Résidence principale en milieu urbain (chef-lieu\r\n de mougahaata, ou de willaya) : maison et hangar en\r\n béton. Résidence rurale utilisée principalement lors de\r\n l’hivernage.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n89\r\n\f Annexe 9 : Correspondance des typologies des systèmes et des ménages proposées avec une catégorisa-\r\n tion détaillée des systèmes d’élevage (IEPC, 2002)\r\nSystèmes GT1. Ménage vulnérable SP1. Système Pastoral Nomade\r\nGrands\r\nTranshumants GT2. Petit Troupeau SP2. Système Pastoral à propriétaire urbain\r\n\r\n GT3. Moyen Troupeau SP3. Système pastoral à élevage bovin transhumant zébu-maure\r\n\r\n GT4. Grand Troupeau SP4. Système pastoral à élevage transhumant Ovin\r\n\r\nSystèmes AP1. Ménage vulnérable SP5. Système agro-pastoral avec élevage transhumant Zébus Peuhls\r\nAgro-\r\nPastoraux ou AP2. Petit Troupeau SP6. Système agro-pastoral à élevage caprin associé à l’agriculture pluviale, de décrue\r\nAgro-Elevage ou Oasienne\r\n\r\n AP3. Moyen Troupeau SP7. Système agro-pastoral associé à l’agriculture irriguée\r\n\r\n AP4. Grand Troupeau SP8. Système sédentaire urbain\r\n\r\nSystèmes Pé- PU1. Ménage vulnérables SP9. Système péri-urbain semi intensif camelin associé à un troupeau transhumant\r\nri-Urbains\r\n PU2. Petit troupeau à SP10. Système péri-urbain semi intensif bovin associé à un troupeau transhumant\r\n vocation commerciale\r\n\r\n PU3. Système laitier péri- SP12. Système avicole poulet de chair intensif\r\n urbain\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 90\r\n\fAnnexe 10 : Type de système dominant dans les communes\r\ncouvertes par le Registre Social\r\n Urbaine et Péri-\r\n Région / Moughaata / commune Agro-Pastorale Pastorale\r\n Urbaine\r\nAssaba\r\n Barkéol\r\n Barkéol X\r\n Bou Lahrath X\r\n Daghveg X\r\n El Ghabra X\r\n Gueller X\r\n Laweissi X\r\n Lebheir X\r\n RDheidhie X\r\n Kankoussa\r\n Blajmil X\r\n Hamed X\r\n Kankoussa X\r\n Sani X\r\n Tenaha X\r\nGuidimagha\r\n Ghabou\r\n Baydjam X\r\n Ghabou X\r\n Gouraye X\r\n Souvi X\r\n Ould Yengé\r\n Bouanz X\r\n Dafort X\r\n Leaweinat X\r\n Leboully X\r\n Lehraj X\r\n Ould Yengé X\r\n Tektake X\r\n Sélibaby\r\n Arr X\r\n Ejar X\r\n Hassi Chegar X\r\n\r\n\r\n 91\r\n\f Ould MBonny X\r\n Sélibaby X\r\n Tachout X\r\n Wompou X\r\nHodh El Gharbi\r\n Koubenni\r\n Gougui Zemmal X\r\n Hassi Ehl Ahmed Bechne X\r\n Koubenni X\r\n Leghlig X\r\n Modibougou X\r\n Timzine X\r\n Voullaniya X\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 92\r\n\fAnnexe 11 : Analyse comparative du filtre bétail actuellement\r\nutilisé par le programme Tekavoul et d’un filtre reposant sur les\r\npropositions de catégorisation des systèmes et des ménages\r\nprésentées dans ce rapport.\r\nLe tableau A présente une analyse du nombre et de la fréquence des ménages inscrits dans le\r\nregistre social et exclus du programme Tekavoul après l’application du « filtre bétail ». Cette\r\nanalyse est désagrégée par grandes zones de moyen d’existence : P (à dominante pastorale),\r\nAP (à dominante agro-pastorale), et U-PU (à dominante urbaine ou péri-urbaine). Chaque\r\ncommune jusqu’à présent couverte par le registre social dans les régions concernées par cette\r\nétude a été associée à l’une de ces trois zones. Les communes des chefs-lieux de Moughaata\r\nont été classées « communes à dominante urbaine ou péri-urbaine », tandis que la distinction\r\nentre « communes à dominante pastorale » et « communes à dominante agro-pastorales »\r\ns’est appuyée sur (1) le zonage HEA établi en 2015, (2) nos observations lors de la mission,\r\n(3) la densité de population à l’échelle de la commune d’après le RGPH 2013. La matrice de\r\ncorrespondance entre communes et zones de moyens d’existence dominants (ZMED) est\r\nfournie en annexe 10. Le nombre moyen d’équivalent têtes de bétail76 par ménage dans les com-\r\nmunes ainsi classifiées « à dominante pastorale » est plus élevé qu’il ne l’est dans les com-\r\nmunes à dominante agro-pastorales, et nettement plus élevé que dans les communes à domi-\r\nnante urbaine et péri-urbaine. La conséquence est naturellement un taux d’exclusion plus fort\r\npar le « filtre bétail » en zone pastorale qu’en zone agro pastoral ou urbaine et péri-urbaine.\r\nOr, à niveau de possession de bétail équivalent, les ménages vivant en zone pastorales sont\r\nsans doute plus pauvres et plus vulnérables que les ménages vivant an zone agro-pastorale et\r\nque les ménages urbains et péri-urbains : ils ne disposent pas ou ne disposent que de com-\r\npléments de revenu ou de consommation issus d’une activité agricole, les services de base\r\nsont de moins bonne qualité et plus éloignés du fait de la faible densité de population dans\r\nces zones, et les opportunités d’emploi en dehors du secteur de l’élevage sont réduites. A p-\r\npliquer un filtre identique quelles que soient les ZME apparait donc inéquitable au détriment\r\ndes ménages possédant un petit cheptel en zone pastorale.\r\n\r\nTableau A: Zonage des communes couvertes par le registre social et niveaux dexclu-\r\nsion par le filtre bétail\r\n Nombre de\r\n Nombre moyen Ménages exclus % de ménages\r\n Nombre de ménages enregis-\r\n « d’équivalent tête de par le « filtre exclus par le filtre\r\n communes trés dans le\r\n bétail » par ménage bétail » bétail\r\n registre social\r\n ZMED à dominante\r\n 10 7856 4,0 1088 14%\r\n pastorale\r\nZMED à dominante agro-\r\n 22 16990 3,5 2000 12%\r\n pastorale\r\nZME à dominante urbaine\r\n 6 5087 1,4 230 5%\r\n et péri-urbaine\r\n\r\nLe tableau B rend compte du nombre et de la proposition de ménages inscrits dans le registre\r\nsocial correspondant aux différentes catégories de ménages décrites en section 3.6.2, lorsque\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n76 nombre de tête de bovins ou camelins + 0,25 × nombre de têtes de caprins ou d’ovins\r\n\r\n 93\r\n\fle seul critère de « possession77 » de bétail (exprimé en UBT par Equivalent Adulte –\r\nUBT/EA) est mobilisé pour classer les ménages selon les différentes catégories. Alors que la\r\nrecommandation serait de ne cibler que les ménages ainsi classifiés « vulnérables » avec le\r\nprogramme Tekavoul, cela reviendrait à exclure 10% des ménages inscrits dans le registre so-\r\ncial en zone pastorale, 15% en zone agro-pastorale, et 6% en zone urbaine et péri-urbaine.\r\nEn zone pastorale, ce filtre basé sur des catégories de ménages différentiées selon les ZMED\r\nserait donc un peu plus doux (moins excluant) que le filtre actuellement utilisé. Il serait à\r\nl’inverse un peu plus excluant en zone agro-pastorale.\r\n\r\nTableau B: Nombre de ménages par catégories évaluées selon la possession de bétail\r\npar équivalent adultes, et différenties selon les ZME\r\n ZME à dominante pastorale78\r\n GT4 GT3 GT2 GT1\r\n Catégories de ménages (et critères) Total\r\n (UBT/EA>25) (25>UBT/EA>5) (3>UBT/EA>2) (UBT/EA<2)\r\n Nb ménages inscrits dans le registre\r\n 17 251 506 7082 7856\r\n social\r\n Proportion au sein de la ZMED 0% 3% 6% 90% 100%\r\n ZME à dominante agro-pastorale79\r\n AP4 AP3 AP2 AP1\r\n Catégories de ménages (et critères) Total\r\n (UBT/EA>15) (15>UBT/EA>3) (3>UBT/EA>1) (UBT/EA<1\r\n Nb ménages inscrits dans le registre\r\n 82 654 1840 14414 16990\r\n social\r\n Proportion au sein de la ZMED 0% 4% 11% 85% 100%\r\n ZME à dominante urbaine et péri-urbaine80\r\n PU2 PU1\r\n Catégories de ménages (et critères) PU3 (UBT/EA>3) Total\r\n (3>UBT/EA>1) (UBT/EA<1)\r\n Nb ménages inscrits dans le registre social 63 262 4762 5087\r\n Proportion au sein de la ZMED 1% 5% 94% 100%\r\n\r\nLe tableau C indique que les scores PMT moyens des ménages inclus par le filtre sur la pos-\r\nsession de bétail actuellement utilisé par le registre sont similaires ou légèrement inférieurs\r\naux scores moyens des ménages exclus par ce filtre. A l’inverse, ce tableau souligne que les\r\nscores PMT des ménages catégorisés « non vulnérables » sont en moyenne plus élevés pour\r\nles ménages alors classifiés « vulnérables » selon la typologie proposée pour chaque ZME, ce\r\nqui souligne la cohérence de cette typologie avec l’approche de classification de la pauvreté\r\ndes ménages basées sur le PMT (notamment liée à la prise en compte de la taille des ménages\r\npar les deux approches).\r\n\r\nTableau C: PMT moyen selon les catégories de ménages\r\n P AP PU\r\n Ménages exclus par le filtre bétail 1201,5 1195,7 1197,7\r\n Ménages inclus par le filtre bétail 1202,1 1198,4 1209,2\r\n Différence moyenne de PMT entre ménages exclus et inclus -0,6 -2,7 -11,5\r\n Ménages catégorisés non vulnérables (NV : TG+G+P) 1211,4 1204,3 1211,3\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n77 Partant de l’hypothèse, questionnée ci-dessous que les réponses au questionnaire de vérification rendent\r\n bien compte de la possession de bétail.\r\n78 GT1. Ménage vulnérable ; GT2. Petit troupeau ; GT3. Moyen troupeau ; GT4. Grand troupeau\r\n79 AP1. Ménage vulnérable ; AP2. Petit troupeau ; AP3. Moyen troupeau ; AP4. Grand troupeau\r\n80 PU1. Ménage vulnérable ;PU2. Petit troupeau à vocation commerciale ;PU3. Système laitier péri-urbain\r\n\r\n 94\r\n\f Ménages Catégorisés vulnérables (V) 1201,0 1197,0 1208,5\r\n Différence moyenne de PMT entre ménages NV et V 10,4 7,3 2,8\r\n\r\nLe tableau D présente une analyse de recouvrement entre (A) le filtre bétail aujourd’hui util i-\r\nsé par le registre social (excluant les ménages déclarant posséder plus de 7 équivalent tête de\r\nbétail) pour le ciblage du programme Tekavoul, et (B) une catégorisation des ménages selon\r\nles typologies présentées en section 3.6.2 s’appuyant exclusivement sur le critère de posse s-\r\nsion du bétail (UBT par équivalent adulte). Les différences entre les deux filtres sont indi-\r\nquées par les cases orangées (ménages exclus par le filtre bétail actuel, alors qu’ils seraient\r\ninclus par un filtre reposant sur la catégorisation des ménages proposée), et en vert (ménages\r\nexclus par le filtre bétail actuel, alors qu’ils seraient inclus par un filtre reposant sur la catég o-\r\nrisation des ménages proposée). Sans porter de jugement sur la pertinence relative des deux\r\nfiltres, cette analyse indique une forte sensibilité du ciblage définit par le choix de ces filtres, y\r\ncompris pour la ZMED agro-pastorale ou les deux filtres conduisent approximativement au\r\nmême niveau d’exclusion.\r\n\r\nTableau D: Correspondance entre les deux types de filtres\r\n GT4 GT3 GT2\r\n GT1 (UBT/EA<2)\r\n (UBT/EA>25) (25>UBT/EA>5) (3>UBT/EA>2) Total\r\n ZMED Pastorale 17 251 506 7082 7856\r\n Exclus par le filtre bétail 17 251 447 373 1088\r\n Inclus par le filtre bétail 59 6709 6768\r\n AP4 AP3 AP2\r\n AP1 (UBT/EA<1\r\n (UBT/EA>15) (15>UBT/EA>3) (3>UBT/EA>1) Total\r\n ZMED Agro-pastorale 82 654 1840 14414 16990\r\n Exclus par le filtre bétail 82 639 1033 246 2000\r\n Inclus par le filtre bétail 15 807 14168 14990\r\n PU2\r\n PU3 (UBT/EA>3) PU1 (UBT/EA<1)\r\n (3>UBT/EA>1) Total\r\n ZMED urb et péri-urb 63 262 4762 5087\r\n Exclus par le filtre bétail 58 140 32 230\r\n Inclus par le filtre bétail 5 122 4730 4857\r\n\r\nLe choix de filtres homogènes quel que soit les ZME semble tout de même problématique,\r\ncompte tenu de l’importance différentiée de la possession de cheptel selon les moyens\r\nd’existence dominants dans chaque les zone. L’approche proposée semble plus pertinente\r\nque l’approche adoptée par le filtre bétail de ce point de vue. Néanmoins, ces approches di f-\r\nférentiées par ZMED sont nécessairement sensibles au choix de catégorisation des com-\r\nmunes selon les ZMED dominantes. Notre classification résulte de choix raisonnés (voir\r\npara au-dessus du tableau 1), néanmoins, la conception de ce type de filtre demande à ce\r\nque ce travail de catégorisation des communes selon les ZMED soit effectué de fa-\r\nçon indépendante, et s’appuyant sur des critères objectifs et bien documentés.\r\n\r\nPour contourner cette difficulté, la seule option envisageable semble être d’adopter des filtres\r\nuniformes sur l’ensemble du territoire. Dans ce cas, il convient de bien analyser les enjeux en\r\nmatière d’exclusion et d’inclusion. Le filtre bétail actuel est à peu près aussi sélectif (11,1 %\r\ndes ménages inscrit dans le registre social exclus) qu’un filtre qui exclurait les ménages « pos-\r\nsédant » plus de 1,35 UBT/EA quelle que soit les ZMED. En zone pastorale, le niveau seuil\r\nde possession de bétail impliqué par un tel filtre serait donc plus de deux fois moins élevé\r\nque le seuil de viabilité pastoral estimé à 2 UBT/EA. Un tel filtre semblerait donc trop ex-\r\n\r\n 95\r\n\fcluant compte tenu de la nature et des objectifs du programme Tekavoul. Une alternative se-\r\nrait d’adopter un filtre homogène quelles que soit les ZMED, mais dont le seuil se rappro-\r\ncherait d’avantage du seuil de viabilité pastorale en zone pastorale, ce qui limiterait les erreurs\r\nd’exclusion dans les communes pastorales. Bien entendu, ce choix de filtre moins excluant et\r\nuniforme entre ZMED, conduirait à cibler des ménages jugés moins vulnérables en zone\r\nurbaine et péri-urbain et en zone agro-pastorale (voir tableau E).\r\n\r\nTableau E: Correspondance entre le filtre bétail actuel et un filtre basé sur les seuils\r\nde vulnérabilité en zone pastorale\r\n Inclusion et exclusion\r\n NV (UBT/EA >2) V (UBT/EA < 2) par le filtre bétail actuel\r\nA dominante pastorale 774 7082 100%\r\n Exclus par filtre Registre 715 373 14%\r\n Inclus par filtre Registre 59 6709 86%\r\nInclusion et exclusion par un filtre au seuil de 3 UBT/EA 10% 90%\r\nA dominante agro-pastorale 1190 15800 100%\r\n Exclus par filtre Registre 1095 905 12%\r\n Inclus par filtre Registre 95 14895 88%\r\nInclusion et exclusion par un filtre au seuil de 3 UBT/EA 7% 93%\r\nA dominante urbaine et péri-urbaine 118 4969 100%\r\n Exclus par filtre Registre 105 125 5%\r\n Inclus par filtre Registre 13 4844 95%\r\nInclusion et exclusion par un filtre au seuil de 3 UBT/EA 2% 98%\r\n\r\nLe seuillage des filtres utilisés est particulièrement important. Il semble essentiel d’établir\r\nces seuils sur la base de critères objectifs (ici le seuil de viabilité pastorale), et de\r\nmettre ces choix en relation avec les objectifs des programmes utilisateurs de ces filtres. Par\r\nailleurs, compte tenu (1) du fait que les programmes utilisateurs du registre social peuvent\r\ns’adresser à différents groupes cibles mais aussi (2) de l’importance variable de certains actifs\r\nselon les ZME, il semble préférable que ces filtres soient définis et calibrés sous la\r\nresponsabilité des programmes utilisateurs et non sous celle du registre social\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 96\r\n\f Annexe 12 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux ser-\r\n vices de santé dans les régions couvertes par le RIMRAP.\r\n Sources : MICS 2016, Carte Sanitaire National de la Mauritanie 2014.\r\n\r\n Figure 4: Mortalité infantile\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Poids-pour âge Taille pour age Poids-pour-taille\r\n\r\n Insuffisance Pondérale Retard de croissance Nombre Emaciation Obésité\r\n Pourcentage en-dessous de Moyenne Nombre Pourcentage en-dessous de Moyenne denfants de Pourcentage en-dessous de Moyenne\r\n Sco re-Z denfants de Sco re-Z - mo ins de Sco re-Z\r\n - 2 SD Figure\r\n [1]\r\n 5: Couverture\r\n - 3 SD\r\n [2]\r\n (SD)\r\n Sanitaire\r\n moins de 5 ans\r\n dans\r\n - 2 SD un rayon[3]\r\n - 3 SD de 5 km\r\n (SD)\r\n [4]\r\n 5 ans\r\n - 2 SD\r\n [5]\r\n - 3 SD\r\n [6]\r\n + 2 SD\r\n [7]\r\n (SD)\r\nTotal 24,9 7,7 -1,2 9926 27,9 11,4 -1,1 9787 14,8 3,5 1,3 -0,8\r\nSexe\r\nMasculin 27 8,4 -1,3 4954 29,7 11,7 -1,2 4881 16,4 3,9 1,2 -0,9\r\nFéminin 22,7 7 -1,2 4972 26,2 11,2 -1,1 4906 13,3 3,1 1,4 -0,8\r\nWilaya\r\nHodh Echargui 35,5 11,5 -1,6 1295 42,8 20,1 -1,6 1287 13,6 2,8 0,5 -0,9\r\nHodh El Garbi 25,6 7,5 -1,3 1073 30,7 12,7 -1,3 1057 11,7 2,6 1,2 -0,8\r\nAssaba 26,7 9 -1,4 1091 28,9 11,7 -1,2 1085 17,7 3,9 0,5 -1\r\nGorgol 28 8,1 -1,3 1228 23,2 8,7 -0,9 1220 20,4 4,5 0,7 -1,2\r\nBrakna 28,8 9,2 -1,4 877 25,7 10,5 -1,1 845 21,3 5 1 -1,1\r\nTrarza 23,6 7,4 -1,2 695 27,1 10,9 -1,1 671 15,4 3,6 1,9 -0,8\r\nAdrar 24,9 5,7 -1,3 38 26,2 9,9 -1,2 38 14,4 3,5 1,3 -0,9\r\nNouadhibou 8,6 1,5 -0,5 293 14,5 5,2 -0,6 289 9,4 1,6 4,6 -0,3\r\nTagant 33,2 12 -1,5 48 37,7 16,5 -1,4 47 18,9 5,1 1,7 -0,9\r\nGuidimagha 30,7 11 -1,5 855 29,5 12,9 -1,2 851 17,9 3,6 0,6 -1,1\r\nTiris Zemour 16,1 4,1 -1 41 21,3 7,8 -0,9 41 10,1 3,3 2,5 -0,7\r\nInchiri 20,2 6,3 -1 11 16,5 2,8 -0,7 11 18,2 4,9 2,2 -0,8\r\nNouakchott 15,1 4 -0,9 2383 22,5 8,1 -1 2347 9,4 3,1 2,2 -0,5\r\nMilieu de\r\nrésidence\r\nUrbain 19 5,1 -1 4330 23,2 8,6 -1 4271 12,3 3,1 1,8 -0,7\r\nRural 29,4 9,7 -1,4 5596 31,6 13,6 -1,3 5516 16,8 3,8 0,9 -1\r\nIndice de bien-\r\nêtre\r\nLe plus pauvre 32,8 10,8 -1,5 2264 36,4 15,9 97 -1,4 2244 17,3 3,5 0,7 -1\r\nDeuxième 30,4 11 -1,4 2136 30,8 13,8 -1,3 2103 16,9 4,2 0,9 -1\r\nMoyen 25,9 7,3 -1,3 1938 26,9 10,4 -1,1 1906 17,3 4,4 0,9 -0,9\r\nQuatrième 19,5 5,6 -1 1901 23,6 8,6 -1 1869 12 3 2 -0,7\r\nLe plus riche 12 2,2 -0,8 1688 18,8 6,7 -0,8 1665 9 2,1 2,4 -0,4\r\n\fFigure 6: Santé materno-infantile: consultations prénatales\r\n Pa s de vi s i te Qua tre vi s i ets ou\r\n Une à troi s vi s i tes Ma nqua nt/NSP Total\r\n préna tal e pl us\r\nTotal 12,8 20,4 63 3,9 100\r\n\r\n\r\nWilaya\r\nHodh Echa rgui 20,2 19,7 53 7,2 100\r\n\r\nHodh El Ga rbi 26,8 19,8 49,8 3,5 100\r\n\r\nAs s a ba 17,1 16,2 57,1 9,6 100\r\nGorgol 5,7 35,2 58,3 1 100\r\nBra kna 8,2 22,5 68,6 0,7 100\r\nTra rza 6,3 19,6 72,4 1,8 100\r\nAdra r 28,7 20 48,3 2,9 100\r\nNoua dhi bou 2,5 22,7 73,6 1,2 100\r\nTa ga nt 26,6 18,9 49,3 5,3 100\r\nGui di ma gha 32,2 27,6 38,7 1,5 100\r\nTi ri s Zemour 4,2 30,3 58,1 7,4 100\r\nInchi ri 5,9 22 70,5 1,6 100\r\nNoua kchott 3,5 12,1 80,3 4 100\r\n\r\nMilieu de résidence 0\r\nUrba i n 6,3 16,8 73,4 3,4 100\r\nRura l 18,1 23,2 54,4 4,3 100\r\nAge de la mère à la naissance 0\r\nMoi ns de 20 a ns 14,5 26,7 56 2,8 100\r\n\r\n20-34 11,6 19 65,4 4 100\r\n35-49 15,4 21,5 59 4 100\r\n\r\nMa nqua nt/NSP (*) (*) (*) (*)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 98\r\n\fFigure 7: Pourcentage denfants âgés 12-23 mois actuellement vaccinés contre les\r\nmaladies infantiles évitables par la vaccination\r\n\r\n Pourcenta ge\r\n\r\n a vec ca rte de\r\n\r\n [a] va cci na ti ons\r\n Toutes\r\n Aucune vue\r\nTotal 48,7 9,5 29,2\r\nSexe\r\nMa s cul i n 48,7 10,3 29,8\r\nFémi ni n 48,8 8,7 28,6\r\nWilaya\r\nHodh Echa rgui 11,5 13,9 10,4\r\nHodh El Ga rbi 51,1 10,1 39,1\r\nAs s a ba 34,6 10,7 25,1\r\nGorgol 48,5 16,6 34,7\r\nBra kna 61,8 4,8 30,4\r\nTra rza 66,2 6,5 28\r\nAdra r 56,6 6 42,8\r\nNoua dhi bou 87,7 0 31,5\r\nTa ga nt 40,3 6,1 28,2\r\nGui di ma gha 30,9 17,4 38,9\r\nTi ri s Zemour 71,5 5,3 51\r\nInchi ri -75,8 -3,1 -31,2\r\nNoua kchott 63,8 4,4 29,5\r\nMilieu de résidence\r\nUrba i n 58,5 5,6 30,2\r\nRura l 40,4 12,8 28,3\r\nNiveau dinstruction de la\r\nmère\r\nAucun 47,7 14,3 29,3\r\nCora ni que/Ma ha d. 34,5 9,6 24,3\r\nPri ma i re 49,2 8,5 32,1\r\nSeconda i re & + 69,1 3 29,3\r\nMa nqua nt/NSP (*) (*) (*)\r\nIndice de bien-être\r\néconomique\r\nLe pl us pa uvre 31,1 16,3 26,6\r\nDeuxi ème 38,2 12,2 27\r\nMoyen 48,6 8,6 32,1\r\nQua tri ème 57 5,6 30,7\r\nLe pl us ri che 73,1 3,3 29,8\r\nLangue du chef de ménage\r\nAra be 44,6 9,5 25,5\r\nPoul a r 64,7 8,4 45,6\r\nSoni ke 51 19,2 40,4\r\nWol of -75,6 0 -24,1\r\nAutre l a ngue (*) (*) (*)\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 8: Couverture Sanitaire\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 99\r\n\fFigure 7: Structures de santé de base par habitant\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 100\r\n\fFigure 8: Personnel de Santé\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 9: Ratio ressources humaines par habitant\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 101\r\n\fFigure 10: Qualité des infrastructures: Centres de santé\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 11: Qualité des infrastructures: Postes de Santé\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 102\r\n\fAnnexe 13 : Quelques données statistiques sur l’accès aux ser-\r\nvices d’éducation formelle dans les régions couvertes par le\r\nRIMRAP.\r\nSources : MICS 2016, RIM Annuaire des statistiques scolaires 2016/2017.\r\n\r\nFigure 9: Fréquentation de lécole primaire\r\n\r\n Garçons Filles T otal\r\n Taux net de fréquenation ajusté Taux net de fréquenation ajusté Taux net de fréquenation ajusté\r\nTotal 49,7 53,5 51,6\r\nWilaya\r\nHodh Echargui 41,6 45,9 43,8\r\nHodh El Garbi 34,8 39,9 37,3\r\nAssaba 42,4 44,1 43,2\r\nGorgol 47,2 44,5 45,9\r\nBrakna 50,1 56 53,1\r\nTrarza 55,6 61,2 58,4\r\nAdrar 72,7 75,6 74,2\r\nNouadhibou 71,3 78,6 74,8\r\nTagant 61,1 64,6 62,9\r\nGuidimagha 36,5 43,4 40\r\nTiris Zemour 78,3 79 78,7\r\nInchiri 67,6 76,7 71,7\r\nNouakchott 68,6 71,1 69,9\r\nMilieu de résidence\r\nUrbain 62,4 65,4 63,9\r\nRural 41,1 45,1 43,1\r\nNiveau dinstruction de la mère\r\nAucun 41,1 45,2 43,2\r\nCoranique/Mahadra 45,8 49,5 47,6\r\nPrimaire 58,9 60,2 59,6\r\nSecondaire & + 75,6 83 79,4\r\nManquant/NSP 55,5 43 49,7\r\nIndice de bien-être économique\r\nLe plus pauvre 35,9 37,7 36,8\r\nDeuxième 39,2 45 42,1\r\nMoyen 52,9 53,1 53\r\nQuatrième 59,6 63,9 61,7\r\nLe plus riche 73,5 79,4 76,7\r\nLangue du chef de ménage\r\nArabe 50,2 53,7 52\r\nPoular 45,5 53,2 49,5\r\nSonike 50,8 50,8 50,8\r\nWolof 66,2 54 60,3\r\nAutre langue (*) (*) (*)\r\n[1] Indicateur MICS 7.4 ; Indicateur OMD 2.1 - Taux net de fréquentation de lécole primaire (ajusté)\r\n[a] Le pourcentage denfants en âge daller à lécole primaire qui sont hors de lécole sont ceux qui ne vont pas à lécole et ceux qui vont au préscolaire // (*) basé sur moins de 25 cas non pondérés\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 103\r\n\fFigure 10: Nombre denfants scolarisés par niveau - primaire\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 11: Proportion décoles à cycle complet\r\n Wilaya Ecoles à cycle complet Ecoles avec effectif %Eco comp/écoles avec effectif\r\n Hodh Charghi 120 576 21%\r\n Hodh Gharbi 75 470 16%\r\n Assaba 95 348 27%\r\n Gorgol 85 307 28%\r\n Brakna 152 321 47%\r\n Trarza 141 366 39%\r\n Adrar 39 86 45%\r\n NDB 33 44 75%\r\n Tagant 49 137 36%\r\n Guidimagha 101 263 38%\r\n Tiris Zemour 21 26 81%\r\n Inchiri 10 22 45%\r\n Nouakchott ouest 27 31 87%\r\n Nouakchott nord 68 79 86%\r\n Nouakchott sud 80 95 84%\r\n National 1 096 3 171 35%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 104\r\n\fFigure 12: Répartition des écoles selon le mode dorganisation pédagogique\r\n\r\nWilaya % écoles simples % écoles multigrades % écoles double flux % écoles double vacation\r\n\r\n01-HODH CHARGHI 29% 4% 5% 63%\r\n\r\n02-HODH GHARBI 51% 7% 0% 41%\r\n\r\n03-ASSABA 48% 1% 0% 51%\r\n\r\n04-GORGOL 45% 2% 1% 52%\r\n\r\n05-BRAKNA 56% 2% 4% 38%\r\n\r\n06-TRARZA 53% 1% 1% 46%\r\n\r\n07-ADRAR 56% 0% 0% 44%\r\n\r\n08-DAKHLET NOUADHIBOU 93% 4% 0% 3%\r\n\r\n09-TAGANT 56% 2% 0% 42%\r\n\r\n10-GUIDIM AGHA 44% 7% 2% 47%\r\n\r\n11-TIRIS ZEM OUR 90% 0% 8% 2%\r\n\r\n12-INCHIRI 87% 0% 1% 13%\r\n\r\n13-NOUKACHOTT Ouest 99% 1% 0% 0%\r\n\r\n13-NOUKACHOTT Sud 96% 1% 2% 0%\r\n\r\n13-NOUKACHOTT Nord 97% 2% 0% 1%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nNATIONAL 62% 3% 2% 34%\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 13: Nature et qualité des infrastructures scolaires dans le primaire\r\n % en état\r\n Etat bon/ mauvais\r\nWilaya en dur semi dur banco paillotes autres Total % en dur bon ou\r\n acceptable état\r\n acceptable\r\n01-HODH CHARGHI 701 500 273 16 11 1226 275 1501 47% 82%\r\n02-HODH GHARBI 727 519 42 39 38 929 436 1365 53% 68%\r\n03-ASSABA 756 360 30 14 7 982 185 1167 65% 84%\r\n04-GORGOL 671 501 18 2 5 894 303 1197 56% 75%\r\n05-BRAKNA 558 1090 27 2 15 1054 638 1692 33% 62%\r\n06-TRARZA 1050 657 6 3 22 1518 220 1738 60% 87%\r\n07-ADRAR 281 79 23 2 58 351 92 443 63% 79%\r\n08-DAKHLET NOUADHIBOU 395 16 10 6 410 17 427 93% 96%\r\n09-TAGANT 332 210 25 3 3 510 63 573 58% 89%\r\n10-GUIDIM AGHA 697 417 24 4 10 1012 140 1152 61% 88%\r\n11-TIRIS ZEM OUR 223 86 4 304 9 313 71% 97%\r\n12-INCHIRI 97 27 1 1 1 115 12 127 76% 91%\r\n13-NOUKACHOTT OUEST 422 39 1 426 36 462 91% 92%\r\n13-NOUKACHOTT NORD 972 69 1 1 1000 43 1043 93% 96%\r\n13-NOUAKCHOTT SUD 891 86 918 59 977 91% 94%\r\nTotal 8773 4656 475 97 176 11649 2528 14177 62% 82%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 14: Niveau dexpérience des enseignants dans le primaire\r\n Nbre Ens Nbre Ens\r\n Nbre Ens % ensei-\r\n Recrut An- Recrut Année Nbre Total\r\n Wilaya Recrut Année gnants recru-\r\n nées Précé- Dernière - Enseignants\r\n Indet. tés en 2016\r\n dentes 2016\r\n Total 01-HODH CHARGHI 1029 303 15 1347 22%\r\n Total 02-HODH GHARBI 1150 123 19 1292 10%\r\n Total 03-ASSABA 940 217 3 1160 19%\r\n\r\n 105\r\n\f Total 04-GORGOL 713 246 6 965 25%\r\n Total 05-BRAKNA 1104 321 33 1458 22%\r\n Total 06-TRARZA 1293 182 36 1511 12%\r\n Total 07-ADRAR 367 9 2 378 2%\r\n Total 08-DAKHLET NOUHADIBOU 471 17 2 490 3%\r\n Total 09-TAGANT 474 21 1 496 4%\r\n Total 10-GUIDIMAGHA 666 314 6 986 32%\r\n Total 11-TIRIS ZEMOUR 333 33 0 366 9%\r\n Total 12-INCHIRI 101 10 0 111 9%\r\n Total 13-NOUKACHOTT OUEST 1284 129 1 1414 9%\r\n Total 13-NOUKACHOTT nord 2267 288 6 2561 11%\r\n Total 13-NOUKACHOTT sud 2138 318 14 2470 13%\r\n Total général 14330 2531 144 17005 15%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFigure 15: Fréquentation de lécole secondaire\r\n Garçons Filles Total\r\n Ta ux Net de fréquention a jus té Ta ux Net de fréquention a jus té Ta ux Net de fréquention a jus té\r\nTotal 29,5 26,6 28\r\nWilaya\r\nHodh Echa rgui 17,7 13,1 15,2\r\nHodh El Ga rbi 15,2 18,8 17,1\r\nAs s a ba 19,7 13,3 16,4\r\nGorgol 21,6 18,3 20\r\nBra kna 33,8 29,4 31,3\r\nTra rza 32,2 36,7 34,5\r\nAdra r 34,3 23,8 28,6\r\nNoua dhi bou 47,1 42,2 44,5\r\nTa ga nt 29,2 25,4 27,3\r\nGui di ma gha 21 10,1 15,5\r\nTi ri s Zemour 42,4 46 44,2\r\nInchi ri 46,8 39,2 42,8\r\nNoua kchott 48,4 44,9 46,5\r\nMilieu de résidence\r\nUrba i n 41,7 39,1 40,3\r\nRura l 18,7 16 17,3\r\nNiveau dinstruction de la mère\r\nAucun 19,8 16,8 18,2\r\nCora ni que/Ma ha dra 23,2 18,2 20,7\r\nPri ma i re 30,7 29,9 30,3\r\nSeconda i re & + 59,4 61,3 60,4\r\n [b] 39,7 39,9 39,8\r\nNe peut être détermi né\r\nMa nqua nt/NSP 41,1 27,6 32,8\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 106\r\n\fAnnexe 14 : Listes de sigles et des abréviations\r\nAFD Agence Française de Développement\r\nAMAD Association Mauritanienne pour l’Auto -développement\r\nCNRADA Centre National de Recherche Agronomique et de Développement Agricole\r\nCRBV Centre de Recherche pour la Valorisation de la Biodiversité\r\nDPCSE Direction des Politiques, de la Coopération et du Suivi-Evaluation\r\nDDFCA Direction du Développement des Filières et du Conseil Agricole (MA)\r\nDA Direction de l’Agriculture\r\nDAR Direction de l’Aménagement Rural\r\nDRFV Direction de la Recherche Formation et Vulgarisation\r\nFAO Organisation des nations unies pour l’agriculture et l’alimentation\r\nFIDA Fonds International de Développement Agricole\r\nGNAP Groupement National des Associations de coopératives agro-sylvo-Pastorales de RIM\r\nIMF Institution de Micro Finance\r\nLOAP Loi d’Orientation Agro-Pastorale\r\nMA Ministère de l’Agriculture\r\nMC Ministère du Commerce\r\n\r\nMICO Mutuelle dInvestissement et de Crédit Oasien\r\nONG Organisation Non Gouvernementale\r\nOP Organisation de producteurs\r\n\r\nPDDO Programme de Développement Durable des Oasis\r\n\r\nPCDA Programme pour la Compétitivité et la Diversification Agricole\r\n\r\nPFNL Produits forestiers non ligneux\r\n\r\nPPP Partenariat public-privé\r\n\r\nPREFIMIDIM Produits d’Excellence d’une Filière de plantes Médicinales en Mauritanie\r\n\r\nPRODEFI Projet de Développement des Filières Inclusives\r\n\r\nProLPRAF Programme de Lutte contre la Pauvreté Rurale par lAppui aux Filières\r\n\r\nPSF Plan stratégique filière\r\n\r\nUMM Unité Monétaire Mauritanienne (ouguiya)\r\n\r\nRIM République Islamique de Mauritanie\r\nROSA Réseau des Organisations pour la Sécurité Alimentaire\r\n\r\nSCD Société de Conservation de Dattes\r\n\r\nSDSR Stratégie de Développement du Secteur Rural\r\n\r\nSONADER Société Nationale de Développement Rural\r\n\r\nSONIMEX Société Nationale d’Importation et Exportation\r\n\r\nTDR Termes de référence\r\nUE Union Européenne\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 107\r\n\f" }, "D29947765": { "id": "29947765", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Burkina Faso", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Education for all,Other social protection and risk management,Social Protection and Labor Policy & Systems,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-01T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/320401527874327574/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P124015.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/320401527874327574/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P124015.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/320401527874327574/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P124015", "projectid": "P124015", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/320401527874327574/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P124015", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Social Safety Net Project (P124015)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES28268\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n SOCIAL SAFETY NET PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON APRIL 23, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n BURKINA FASO\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & LABOR\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Stefano Paternostro\r\n Task Team Leader: Rebekka E. Grun\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Social Safety Net Project (P124015)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP124015 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nNot Required (C) Not Required (C)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n23-Apr-2014 31-Aug-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Ministry of Economics and Finances,Ministry of Social\r\nBurkina Faso Action and National Solidarity,Ministere de la Femme, de\r\n la Solidarite Nationale, et de la Famille\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe project development objective (PDO) is to provide income support to poor households and to lay the foundations\r\nfor a basic safety net system in Burkina Faso.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-54290 23-Apr-2014 17-Jun-2014 26-Sep-2014 31-Aug-2020 50.00 18.18 27.61\r\nTF-A3975 07-Dec-2016 27-Jan-2017 04-Apr-2017 30-Jun-2018 6.00 1.45 4.55\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Social Safety Net Project (P124015)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n 1. In its 3rd year of implementation, the Sahel Adaptive Social Protection Program continues to make progress. A\r\n shift from Bank-executed to Recipient-executed activities is being observed and the capacity of the country to respond\r\n to disasters using the foundations of social protection has increased.\r\n\r\n 2. From the recipient side, key highlights include a final design of the package of productive activities that aim to\r\n strengthen the resilience and economic activities of poor households, which will cover at least 5,000 beneficiaries. The\r\n package is being tested in the existing project areas (Yatenga, Zondoma) as well as the two new provinces in the Nord\r\n region (Lorum and Passoré). Equally, piloting the use of the cash transfer program as a response mechanism to\r\n address vulnerability and shocks to reach 5,000 households in the Boulkiemdé province is successful and an additional\r\n 2636 households has been incorporated following the release of the ‘’Cadre Harmonise’’ food security assessment.\r\n These households have now already received two payments.\r\n\r\n 3. The project core activities have been implemented. Even though the disbursement rate of the project at the\r\n moment is at 24,1 percent, the disbursement path is good and this will significantly increase in the incoming months\r\n based on the agreed projection done with the PIU. The overall project is on track to reach its development objective\r\n which is to increase access of poor and vulnerable households to safety nets and to lay the foundations for an adaptive\r\n safety net system in Burkina Faso. This extension request will permit to reinforce the ongoing policy dialogue create a\r\n solid base of adaptive social protection in the country.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-54290 Effective 31-Aug-2019 31-Aug-2020\r\nTF-A3975 Effective 30-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019 30-Jan-2020\r\n\f" }, "D29945741": { "id": "29945741", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Togo", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Malaria,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Human development", "docdt": "2018-06-01T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/781091527842160581/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Maternal-and-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Services-Support-Project-P143843.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/781091527842160581/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Maternal-and-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Services-Support-Project-P143843.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/781091527842160581/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Maternal-and-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Services-Support-Project-P143843", "projectid": "P143843", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/781091527842160581/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Maternal-and-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Services-Support-Project-P143843", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES30131\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n MATERNAL AND CHILD HEALTH AND NUTRITION SERVICES SUPPORT PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON FEBRUARY 19, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF TOGO\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Gaston Sorgho\r\n Task Team Leader: Elizabeth Mziray\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\nANC Antinatal Consultations\r\nASC Community Health Worker (Agent de Santé Communautaire)\r\nCD Country Director\r\nCHW Community Health Worker\r\nCRI Corporate Results Indicator\r\nDHS Demographic and Health Survey\r\nDHIS2 District Health Information System\r\nFM Financial Management\r\nHMIS Health Management Information System\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nLLIN Long-Lasting Insecticide-treated Malaria Nets\r\nMCH Maternal Child Health\r\nMIS Malaria Indicator Survey\r\nMWMP Medical Waste Management Plan\r\nNEA Essential Nutrition Actions\r\nNSP National Strategic Plan (Actions Essentielles en Nutrition)\r\nPASMIN Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (Projet d’Appui aux services de Santé\r\n Maternelle et Infantile et de Nutrition)\r\nPCIMNE-C Comprehensive Community-Based Child and Newborn Disease Package\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPNLP National Malaria Control Program (Programme National de Lutte contre le Paludisme)\r\nPSE Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (Plan de Suivi et Evaluation)\r\nRDT Rapid Diagnostic Test\r\nSNIS National Health Information System (Système National d’Information Sanitaire)\r\nSP Sulfadoxinepyrimethamine\r\nTF Trust Fund\r\nUNICEF United Nations Childrens’ Fund\r\nUSAID United States Agency for International Development\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP143843 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n19-Feb-2014 31-Oct-2018\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nRepublic of Togo Ministry of Health\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nTo increase utilization of selected maternal and child health and nutrition services for pregnant women and children.\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-H9110 19-Feb-2014 06-May-2014 23-Feb-2015 31-Oct-2018 14.00 10.20 2.49\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nNote to Task Teams: End of system generated content, document is editable from here.\r\n\r\n\r\nI. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n 1. The Grant was approved on February 19, 2014, in the amount of SDR9.1 million (US$14 million equivalent) and\r\n became effective a year later on February 23, 2015, following which there was another 8 months delay until the\r\n project launch (September 2015). This was the first World Bank operation in the health sector in Togo over a\r\n decade. As such the project was designed to build on the lessons learned from other social sector projects in\r\n Togo. The project supports the ongoing effort of the Government of Togo and its partners to improve access to\r\n proven, cost-effective and high impact malaria control and nutritional services through routine delivery of\r\n Maternal and Child Health (MCH) services. The Project Development Objective (PDO), which still remain relevant,\r\n is to increase utilization of selected maternal and child health and nutrition services for pregnant women and\r\n children.\r\n\r\n 2. Progress toward achievement of the PDO (DO) is rated Moderately Unsatisfactory (MU) and Implementation\r\n Progress (IP) Moderately Satisfactory (MS) in the last ISR. Three of the five PDO indicators require survey data for\r\n their measurement. Due to the unavailability of survey data the project has utilized proxy indicators to report on\r\n the results framework and to assess the progress towards the achievement of the PDO (see Table 1 below). One\r\n of the five PDO indicators has surpassed its end of project target value “Proportion of suspected malaria cases\r\n tested by community health workers using an RDT”.\r\n\r\n Original Indicator and Source Proxy Indicator Used and Source\r\n Proportion of pregnant women who slept under a LLIN Percentage of Pregnant women receiving LLINs during\r\n the previous night (DHS) ANC visits (PNLP routine monitoring data)\r\n Proportion of women who received IPT during ANC visits Percentage of pregnant women who received 3 doses\r\n during their last pregnancy (DHS) of SP (IPT) during ANC visits (PNLP routine monitoring\r\n data)\r\n Percentage of pregnant women attending ANC who Proportion of pregnant women who received 90 IFA\r\n received 90 IFA tablets during their last pregnancy in the tablets during ANC visits (Nutrition Program routine\r\n project supported regions (Centrale & Plateaux) monitoring data)\r\n\r\n 3. The project includes two components (each with sub-components), to (i) support increased utilization of\r\n maternal and child health, and nutrition services for pregnant women and children; and (ii) strengthen the overall\r\n health managenent information system. Progress under each component is as follows:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n COMPONENT 1: Improved utilization of malaria and nutrition services (US$10.0 million)\r\n\r\n a) Subcomponent 1.1: Support for (i) malaria control in pregnancy through provision of LLINs and SPs as part of the\r\n basic package of ANC services; (ii) community-based diagnosis and treatment of malaria; and (iii) management,\r\n supervision, and behavioral changes to ensure effective utilization (US$7.0 million). Activities under this sub-\r\n component are on-going and progressing well with significant implementation progress made in 2017 and the\r\n first quarter of 2018. Eighty percent of these activities planned for 2017 have been completed. Some of the\r\n achievements include: (i) Implementation of the advanced ANC strategy in the 10 districts including training of\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n health facility managers, midwives and birth attendants on the Comprehensive Community-Based Child and\r\n Newborn Disease Package (PCIMNE-C) and Essential Nutrition Actions (NEA); (ii) acquisition of inputs: 345,700\r\n LLINs, 422,258 RDT kits and 785,736 doses of Sulfodoxinepyrimethamine (SP); (iii) review of the Malaria National\r\n Control Program (PNLP); (iv) development of the new National Strategic Plan (NSP) and Monitoring and Evaluation\r\n Plan (PSE) all of the aforementioned activities have resulted in an increase in coverage of the distribution of LLINs,\r\n and improvements in access and quality of ANC services including increasing access to IPT for pregnant women.\r\n In addition, in 2016 the project was able to rapidly respond to a meningitis outbreak that killed close to 200 people,\r\n through the provision of both technical and financial support. The interventions under this sub-component fill\r\n the funding gap in complement to the financing from the Government of Togo and the Global Fund to fight AIDS\r\n TB and Malaria (GFATM).\r\n\r\nb) Subcomponent 1.2: Community - based nutrition services for pregnant women and young children under five years\r\n of age (US$3.0 million). Following the slow start of this sub-component, with scaling up of activities only beginning\r\n in 2017, there has been significant progress. Eighty percent of activities planned for 2017 were completed with\r\n the rest ongoing by end-December 2017. In addition, the CHWs supported by PASMIN have generated significant\r\n demand for nutrition services in the Plateaux and Centrale region that in some cases exceeds the supply in terms\r\n of availability of inputs for the treatment of severe and moderate acute malnutrition. Some of the challenges that\r\n currently exist include the insufficient supervision of the ASCs to ensure the quality of the data collected; the\r\n significant delays in the delivery of the tools for conducting the anthropometric measurements, and the\r\n distribution of enriched flour. There is no recent data available on the prevalence of malnutrition, a SMART survey\r\n was planned for 2016 with UNICEF financing but it has not been launched yet due to lack of financing.\r\n\r\n COMPONENT 2: Strengthening Health Monitoring and Evaluation Systems; Project\r\n Management (US$4.0 million).\r\n\r\nc) Subcomponent 2.1: Strengthening the health monitoring and evaluation system, particularly the HMIS, including\r\n the Government’s capacity to monitor its MCH programs (US$2.6 million). Strengthening Health Monitoring and\r\n Evaluation Systems; Project Management. Activities under this sub-component have been progressing on a\r\n number of fronts including the support provided for strengthening the national information system and\r\n implementation of DHIS2. Training has been provided to 648 National Health Information System focal points,\r\n and the monthly data quality control missions at all levels of the health system have taken place.\r\n\r\nd) Subcomponent 2.2: Project coordination and implementation support (US$1.4 million). Activities under this sub-\r\n component have been carried out by the Project Coordination Unit under the Ministry of Health such as: day to\r\n day project management, overseeing of financial management and audit; procurement; training and supervision,\r\n including costs related to supporting the government in its implementation of safeguards policy measures\r\n (notably the medical waste management plan (MWMP).\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n 4. The Financial Management (FM) arrangements, includng planning and budgeting, accounting, financial reporting,\r\n external audit, internal controls and fund flow at the Project Impementation Unit are overall satisfactory and\r\n acceptable to the Bank. Therefore, Financial Management requirements under the Project (including audit\r\n compliance) as stipulated in the Financing Agreement are satisfactory and complied with. There are no overdue\r\n audit reports under the Project. The amount disbursed under the Project is US$10.20 million, representing 80.36\r\n percent of the committed amount.\r\n\r\n 5. Environmental Safeguards. The Project’s rating on safeguards compliance is Satisfactory. An Environmental\r\n Management Framework developed and adopted for guiding site-specific environmental work is being followed\r\n through.\r\n\r\nRationale for Restructuring\r\n\r\n 6. The mid-term review (MTR) of March 2017 and the in-depth supervision mission of February 2018, have\r\n identified a number of areas in the project that require revisions, including: (i) the reallocation of funding\r\n between components to include new activities such as preparatory activities for the pipeline Performance Based\r\n Financing (PBF) project and the introduction of a Contingent Emergency Response Component (CERC) to allow\r\n for rapid reallocation of project proceeds in the event of a natural or man-made disaster or crisis; (ii) the revision\r\n of the Results Framework to better reflect the achievements of the project and to assess the progress towards\r\n achievement of the PDO; and (iii) the extension of the Closing Date for 1 year to allow Government to complete\r\n all planned activites.\r\n\r\n II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nThis Level 2 restructuring includes:\r\n\r\n\r\n 7. Revisions of Project Components and costs: The original cost for Component 1 of US$10 million will be reduced\r\n to US$9.23 million; and the original cost for Component 2 of US$4 million would be increased to US$4.76 million.\r\n The change in the component costs under Component 2, notably the increase in allocation to subcomponent 2.2.\r\n will enable the MOH to fill the financing gap in Project Coordination and Implementation Support including for\r\n undertaking the preparatory activities for the pipeline PBF project to meet the environmental and social\r\n safeguards requirements as well as strengthening the capacity of key MOH staff on PBF; and for continued\r\n support to the project management unit (PMU) for overseeing and monitoring project implementation, and\r\n coordinating with key stakeholders during the extension period.\r\n\r\n Table 1. Reallocation between components in US$ million\r\n\r\n Components Original Revised\r\n allocation allocation\r\n\r\n Component 1: Improved Utilization of Malaria and Nutrition Services 10,000,000 9,236,070\r\n\r\n 1.1. Improved Utilization of Malaria Services 7,000,000 5,836,454\r\n 1.2. Community-based nutrition services for pregnant women and young 3,000,000 3,399,616\r\n children\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Component 2: Strengthening Health Monitoring and Evaluation System; 4,000,000 4,763,930\r\n Project Management\r\n\r\n 2.1. Strengthening the Health Monitoring & Evaluation System (HMIS) 2,600,000 2,278,540\r\n 2.2. Project Coordination and Implementation Support 1,400,000 2,485,390\r\n\r\n Total 14,000,000 14,000,000\r\n\r\n\r\n 8. Introduction of Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response Component: All IDA financed projects are advised\r\n to include the Contingent Emergency Response Component (CERC) to facilitate rapid response to a possible\r\n emergency which could threaten the health of the population. The implementation of this component would\r\n follow the procedures governed by OP/BP 10.00 paragraph 12 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies). If\r\n during the life of the project an epidemic or outbreak of public health importance or other health emergency\r\n occurs, this component would allow the Government to receive support by reallocating funds from other project\r\n components or serving as a conduit to process Additional Financing from the Pandemic Emergency Facility (PEF)\r\n or other funding sources for eligible emergencies to mitigate, respond and recover from the potential harmful\r\n consequences arising from the emergency situation. Disbursements under this component will be subject to the\r\n declaration of emergency[1] and the preparation of an “Emergency Response Operational Manual” to be included\r\n in the Project Implementation Manual.\r\n\r\n 9. Revision of the Results Framework: This restructuring will revise the results framework by changing the indicators\r\n to ones that utilize routine monitoring data and enable the assessment of progresss towards achievement of the\r\n PDO. Consequently, the baseline and target values for PDO and Intermediate results indicators will be revised to\r\n reflect implementation progress, improve measurability of specific indicators, and ensure consistency of data\r\n sources.\r\n\r\n 10. Due to the unavailability of survey data most of the outcome indicators have not been reported on since the\r\n baseline in 2014. The baseline data for the project was informed by the Demographic and Health Survey (DHS)\r\n and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS), conducted in 2013 and 2010, respectively; and the first Malaria\r\n Indicator Survey (MIS)1 is currently being conducted with support from USAID. Fieldwork was completed at the\r\n end of 2017, however, and it is unclear when results will be available. This restructuring will formalize the use of\r\n proxy indicators to measure the project’s performance since it is not possible to report on three of the original\r\n PDO indicators. Other changes include (i) the revision of some of the target values for PDO and intermediate\r\n results indicators; (ii) ensuring consistency of data sources (see section IV on the proposed revisions of the Results\r\n Framework). The changes are summarized in Table 2 below.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n[1] The Government of Togo, the international community or the UN needs to issue a declaration of emergency.\r\n\r\n 1MIS collects data on all internationally recognized malaria indicators including two of the PDO indicators related to household\r\n ownership of insecticide-treated mosquito nets and their use, especially by children under five years of age and pregnant\r\n women; and Intermittent Preventive Treatment (IPT) against malaria during pregnancy.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTable 2. Results Framework - Summary of proposed changes\r\n\r\n PDO Indicators\r\n Original Indicator Revised Indicator Baseline (2014) Actual Values Target Target Source\r\n (2017) Values Values\r\n (2018) (2019)\r\n 1. Proportion of pregnant  This indicator is being changed 2.7% 25% 75% 82% PNLP\r\n women who slept under to “Percentage of pregnant Routine\r\n women receiving LLINs during Monitoring\r\n a LLIN the previous night\r\n ANC visits” because it depends Data\r\n on survey data that is currently\r\n unavailable.\r\n  Baseline and target values\r\n revised.\r\n 2. Proportion of women  This indicator is being changed 30% 35% 72% 74% PNLP\r\n who received IPT during to “Percentage of pregnant Routine\r\n ANC visits during their women who received 3 doses of Monitoring\r\n last pregnancy SP (IPT) during ANC visits Data\r\n because it depends on survey\r\n data that is currently\r\n unavailable\r\n  Source of data, baseline and\r\n target values revised.\r\n 3. Proportion of suspected  The indicator is revised to 0% 92% 82% 83% PNLP\r\n malaria cases tested by “Percentage of suspected Routine\r\n community health malaria cases tested by Monitoring\r\n workers using an RDT community health workers Data\r\n using an RDT”\r\n  The end target has been\r\n changed from 60% to 82% for\r\n 2018 and to 83% for 2019\r\n 4. Proportion of infants 0-5 Plateaux: Plateaux: Plateaux: Plateaux: Nutrition\r\n months (less than 180 50.8% 61% 63% 63% Program\r\n days) of age who were Data\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n exclusively breastfed No change. Target added for 2019 Centrale: Centrale: Centrale: Centrale:\r\n (Plateaux and Centrale which will remain the same as 65.2% 75% 77% 77%\r\n regions) target for 2018\r\n5. Percentage of women  This indicator is being revised Plateaux: 28% Plateaux: Plateaux: Plateaux: Nutrition\r\n attending ANC who to use the proxy indicator: Centrale: 49% 71.72% 75% 80% Program\r\n received 90 IFA tablets Proportion of pregnant Centrale: Centrale: Centrale: Data\r\n during their last women who received 90 79.26% 80% 85%\r\n pregnancy in the project tablets of Folic Acid Iron\r\n supported regions during ANC visits.\r\n (Centrale & Plateaux)  Baseline and target values\r\n added\r\n\r\n Intermediate Indicators\r\n Original Indicator Revised Indicator Baseline (2014) Actual Values Target Target Source\r\n (2017) Values Values\r\n (2018) (2019)\r\n6. Number of pregnant The end target for this indicator 0 203,037 203,476 213,440 DSMI\r\n women receiving has decreased from 312,653 to Routine\r\n antenatal care during a 213,440 Monitoring\r\n visit to a health provider Report\r\n7. Percentage of pregnant  This indicator is being changed 57% 24% 64% 69% DSMI\r\n women who attend at to “Proportion of pregnant annual\r\n least four antenatal care women attending at least four reports\r\n visits during the last antenatal care visits\r\n pregnancy in two regions\r\n (Plateaux & Centrale)\r\n8. Number of LLIN  This indicator is not 0 42,042 203,476 213,440 PNLP\r\n distributed to pregnant progressing. Only 42,042 LLIN Routine\r\n women during ANC visits have been distributed to Monitoring\r\n (routine distribution of pregnant women in 2017 Data\r\n LLIN) against an annual target of\r\n 230,477. Therefore, the end\r\n project target has been revised\r\n from 512,165 to 213,440\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 9. Number of long-lasting 345,700 LLIN were distributed in 0 345,700 521,165 02 PNLP\r\n insecticide-treated 2017 against an annual target of Routine\r\n malaria nets purchased 230,477. No purchases of bednets Monitoring\r\n and/or distributed planned in 2019 as the project will Data\r\n be wrapping up.\r\n 10. Percentage of children The end target is being revised from Plateaux: 31% Plateaux: Plateaux: Plateaux: Nutrition\r\n under 2 years of age who 88% to 90% (an average for the 2 Centrale: 73% 70.1% 76% 80% Program\r\n attend the GMP session regions Plateaux and Centrale) Centrale: Centrale: Centrale:\r\n at least once during the 78.5% 100% 100%\r\n previous month in the\r\n regions (Centrale &\r\n Plateaux) supported by\r\n the project\r\n 11. Percentage of household  In 2017, this indicator had 0 61% 68% 75% Nutrition\r\n with children under age surpassed (61%) it’s end of Program\r\n of two which was visited project target (60%). The end\r\n by CHW to support infant of project target has been\r\n and child nutrition revised to 75%\r\n practices in the Centrale\r\n and Plateaux regions\r\n 12. Percentage of health  In 2017, this indicator had 0 95.5% 70% 85% DIS Reports\r\n facilities submitting surpassed (95.5%) its end of\r\n standardized HMIS project target of 70%. The\r\n monthly reports within target for 2019 has been set at\r\n one month of the 85%.\r\n reporting month\r\n\r\n 13. Percentage of districts  In 2017, this indicator had 0 100% 50% 80% DIS Reports\r\n where at least 25% of the surpassed (100%) its end of\r\n received HMIS reports project target of 50%. The end\r\n were verified of project target has been\r\n revised to 80%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2 This indictor is not cumulative, it is a stand-alone annual indictor\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 14. Basic list of health  No changes No Yes Yes Yes DIS Reports\r\n facilities developed and\r\n updated as planned\r\n 15. Direct project  1,055,689 beneficiaries were 0 1,055,698 1,369,462 1,408,355 DIS, PNLP\r\n beneficiaries (number) of reached in 2017 against an and\r\n which women annual target of 1,331,644. Nutrition\r\n (percentage)  The end of project target is Reports\r\n revised from 5,190,968 to\r\n 1,408,355\r\n\r\nThe above-mentioned changes will not affect the scope of the project and the expected project outcome.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n 11. Extension by 12 months of the Closing Date: The project experienced more than a one-year delay in starting\r\n implementation, therefore, this request to extend the Closing Date from October 31, 2018 to October 31, 2019 is\r\n necessary to continue the implementation and the full completion of the planned activities. As per BP 10.00 Paragraph\r\n 47 for Extension of Closing Date, the project objectives continue to be achievable; the performance of the Borrower\r\n and the Project Coordination Unit is satisfactory; the Borrower has prepared a specific action plan acceptable to the\r\n Bank to facilitate implementation of Project activities.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\nChange in Results Framework ✔\r\nChange in Components and Cost ✔\r\nChange in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\nChange in Implementing Agency ✔\r\nChange in DDO Status ✔\r\nChange in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\nCancellations Proposed ✔\r\nReallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\nChange in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\nChange in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\nChange in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\nChange in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\nChange of EA category ✔\r\nChange in Legal Covenants ✔\r\nChange in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\nChange in Financial Management ✔\r\nChange in Procurement ✔\r\nChange in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\nOther Change(s) ✔\r\nChange in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\nChange in Technical Analysis ✔\r\nChange in Social Analysis ✔\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_RESULTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\nPDO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of Pregnant women receiving LLINs during ANC visits\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 2.70 25.00 82.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Percentage of pregnant women who received 3 doses of SP (IPT) during ANC visits\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 30.00 35.00 74.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Percentage of suspected malaria cases tested by community health workers using an RDT\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 88.00 92.00 83.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Proportion of infants 0-5 months (less than 180 days) of age who were exclusively breastfed (Plateaux and Centrale\r\n regions)\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 58.00 58.00 70.00 No Change\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2013 30-Sep-2017 31-Oct-2018\r\n Proportion of pregnant women who received 90 tablets of Folic Acid Iron during ANC visits\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 38.00 75.00 83.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Indicators\r\nIO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of pregnant women receiving antenatal care during a visit to a health care provider (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 203037.00 213440.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Long-lasting insecticide-treated malaria nets purchased and/or distributed (number)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 345700.00 0.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Percentage of household with children under age of two which was visited by CHW to support infant and child\r\n nutrition practices in the Centrale and Plateaux regions\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 61.00 75.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Percentage of health facilities submitting standardized HMIS monthly reports within one month of the reporting\r\n month (Percentage Custom)\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nValue 0.00 95.50 85.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\nPercentage of districts where at least 25% of the received of HMIS reports were verified\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 100.00 80.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\nProportion of pregnant women attending at least four antenatal care visits\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 57.00 24.00 69.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\nNumber of LLIN distributed to pregnant women during ANC visits (routine distribution of LLIN)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 42042.00 213440.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\nPercentage of children under 2 years of age who attend the GMP session at least once during the previous month\r\nin the regions (Centrale & Plateaux) supported by the project\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 52.00 74.00 90.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\nDirect project beneficiairies (number) of which women (percentage\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Services Support Project (P143843)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1055698.00 1408355.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n Basic list of health facilities developed and updated as planned\r\n Unit of Measure: Text\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value Yes/No Yes Yes New\r\n\r\n Date 31-Oct-2014 31-Dec-2017 31-Oct-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n OPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_COMPONENTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n COMPONENTS\r\n Current\r\n Current Proposed Proposed\r\n Cost Action\r\n Component Name Component Name Cost (US$M)\r\n (US$M)\r\n Improved utilization of malaria Improved utilization of malaria\r\n 10.00 Revised 9236070.00\r\n and nutrition services and nutrition services\r\n Strengthening Health Monitoring Strengthening Health\r\n and Evaluation Systems; Project 4.00 Revised Monitoring and Evaluation 4763930.00\r\n Management Systems; Project Management\r\n Contingent Emergency\r\n 0.00 New 0.00\r\n Response\r\n TOTAL 14.00 14,000,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_LOANCLOSING_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-H9110 Effective 31-Oct-2018 31-Oct-2019 29-Feb-2020\r\n\f" }, "D29977334": { "id": "29977334", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Cote d'Ivoire", "docty": "Implementation Completion and Results Report", "theme": "Education for all,Conflict prevention and post-conflict reconstruction,Gender,Nutrition and food security", "docdt": "2018-05-30T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/651771528744980357/pdf/ICR-Final-P119328-for-submission-to-BOS-06052018.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/651771528744980357/text/ICR-Final-P119328-for-submission-to-BOS-06052018.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/651771528744980357/Cote-dIvoire-Emergency-Basic-Education-Support-Project", "projectid": "P119328", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/651771528744980357/Cote-dIvoire-Emergency-Basic-Education-Support-Project", "doc-text": " Document of\r\n The World Bank\r\n FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY\r\n\r\n\r\n Report No: ICR00004288\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT\r\n TF - 12500\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n GRANT\r\n\r\n IN THE AMOUNT OF US$41.4 MILLION\r\n\r\n TO THE\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF COTE D’IVOIRE\r\n\r\n FOR AN\r\n EMERGENCY BASIC EDUCATION SUPPORT PROJECT - GPEF GRANT ( P119328 )\r\n\r\n May 30, 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEducation Global Practice\r\nAfrica Region\r\n\f CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS\r\n\r\n (Exchange Rate Effective May 9, 2018)\r\n\r\n\r\n Currency Unit = CFAF\r\n CFAF 552.27 = US$1\r\n US$ 1.0 = 0.701 SDR 1\r\n\r\n FISCAL YEAR\r\n July 1 - June 30\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Pierre Frank Laporte\r\nSenior Global Practice Director: Jaime Saavedra Chanduvi\r\n Practice Manager: Meskerem Mulatu\r\n Task Team Leader(s): Patrick Philippe Ramanantoanina\r\n ICR Main Contributor: Richard J. Carroll\r\n\f ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\n\r\nCAFOP Centre d’Animation et Formation Pédagogique (Teacher Training Center)\r\nCFAF Central African Franc\r\nCMEF Club des Mères d’élève fille (Mothers – Student-daughters club)\r\nCOGES Comité de Gestion Scolaire (School-based management committee)\r\nCTMO Comité Technique de Mise en Oeuvre (Implementation Technical Committee)\r\nDPES Direction de la Planification, de l’Evaluation et des Statistiques (Directorate of\r\n Planning, Evaluation and Statistics)\r\nDREN Direction Régionale de l’Education Nationale (Regional Education Directorate)\r\nEBESP Emergency Basic Education Support Project\r\nEMIS Education Management Information System\r\nENSETE Enquête nationale sur la situation de lemploi et du travail des enfants\r\nEPP Emergency Project Paper\r\nERR Economic Rate of Return\r\nESP Education Sector Plan\r\nGA Grant Agreement\r\nGPEF Global Partnership for Education Fund\r\nIDP Internally Displaced Person\r\nISR Implementation Status and Results Report\r\nM&E Monitoring and Evaluation\r\nMCC Millennium Challenge Corporation\r\nMDG Millennium Development Goal\r\nMEF Ministère de l’Economie et des Finances (Ministry of Economy and Finance)\r\nMEN Ministère de l’Education Nationale (Ministry of National Education)\r\nMTEF Medium-term Expenditure Framework\r\nMTR Mid-Term Review\r\nNPV Net Present Value\r\nPASEF Projet d’Appui au Secteur Educatif et Formation\r\nPCU Project Coordination Unit\r\nPDO Project Development Objective\r\nPPU Programme Presidentiel d’Urgence (Presidential Emergency Program)\r\nPUAEB Projet d’Urgence d’Appui a l’Education de Base (Emergency Basic Education\r\n Support Project - EBESP)\r\nRF Results Framework\r\nRP Restructuring Paper\r\n\f TABLE OF CONTENTS\r\nDATASHEET ........................................................................................................................... 1\r\nI. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 5\r\n A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................5\r\n B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................. 13\r\nII. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 15\r\n A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 15\r\n B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 16\r\n C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 23\r\n D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 25\r\n E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY)............................................................................ 26\r\nIII. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 27\r\n A.KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION .................................................................................... 27\r\n B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 28\r\nIV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .... 29\r\n A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 29\r\n B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 30\r\n C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 31\r\n D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 32\r\nV. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................ 33\r\nANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 35\r\nANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 43\r\nANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 45\r\nANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 46\r\nANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 50\r\nANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 59\r\nANNEX 7. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND OFFICIAL REVISION ................................................... 60\r\nANNEX 8. L’APPUI A LA SCOLARISATION DES FILLES ............................................................. 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDATA SHEET\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC INFORMATION\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\nProject ID Project Name\r\n\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support\r\nP119328\r\n Project - GPEF Grant\r\n\r\nCountry Financing Instrument\r\n\r\nCote dIvoire Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Revised EA Category\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Implementing Agency\r\n\r\nMinistry of Finance Ministry of Education\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe objectives of the Project are: (i) restoring and increasing access to basic education; (ii) rehabilitating and\r\nimproving the conditions for teaching and learning; and (iii) restoring and strengthening institutional capacity to\r\ndeliver quality basic education.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 1 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFINANCING\r\n\r\n Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$)\r\n World Bank Financing\r\n 41,400,000 41,400,000 41,349,656\r\n TF-12500\r\n Total 41,400,000 41,400,000 41,349,656\r\n Non-World Bank Financing\r\n Borrower 0 0 0\r\n Total 0 0 0\r\n Total Project Cost 41,400,000 41,400,000 41,349,656\r\n\r\n\r\nKEY DATES\r\n\r\nApproval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing\r\n04-Apr-2012 15-Oct-2012 15-Jul-2014 30-Sep-2015 30-Aug-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING\r\n\r\nDate(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions\r\n18-Aug-2015 22.36 Change in Results Framework\r\n Change in Components and Cost\r\n Change in Loan Closing Date(s)\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories\r\n05-Oct-2016 34.25 Change in Loan Closing Date(s)\r\n10-May-2017 39.56 Change in Results Framework\r\n Change in Components and Cost\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKEY RATINGS\r\n\r\nOutcome Bank Performance M&E Quality\r\nModerately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 2 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs\r\n\r\n Actual\r\nNo. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements\r\n (US$M)\r\n01 29-Dec-2012 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1.97\r\n02 24-Jun-2013 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 2.40\r\n03 30-Dec-2013 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 3.08\r\n04 28-Jun-2014 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 8.33\r\n Moderately\r\n05 25-Dec-2014 Moderately Unsatisfactory 13.34\r\n Unsatisfactory\r\n Moderately\r\n06 10-Jul-2015 Moderately Unsatisfactory 20.95\r\n Unsatisfactory\r\n Moderately\r\n07 08-Feb-2016 Moderately Unsatisfactory 29.30\r\n Unsatisfactory\r\n Moderately\r\n08 19-Aug-2016 Moderately Unsatisfactory 31.98\r\n Unsatisfactory\r\n09 11-Mar-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 39.48\r\n10 30-Aug-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 41.14\r\n\r\n\r\nSECTORS AND THEMES\r\n\r\nSectors\r\nMajor Sector/Sector (%)\r\n\r\n\r\nEducation 100\r\n Primary Education 80\r\n Secondary Education 10\r\n Other Education 10\r\n\r\n\r\nThemes\r\nMajor Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 3 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSocial Development and Protection 10\r\n Fragility, Conflict and Violence 10\r\n Conflict Prevention 5\r\n\r\n Post-conflict reconstruction 5\r\n\r\nHuman Development and Gender 90\r\n Gender 10\r\n\r\n Education 70\r\n Access to Education 35\r\n\r\n Education Financing 35\r\n\r\n Nutrition and Food Security 10\r\n Nutrition 5\r\n\r\n Food Security 5\r\n\r\n\r\nADM STAFF\r\nRole At Approval At ICR\r\nRegional Vice President: Obiageli Katryn Ezekwesili Makhtar Diop\r\n\r\nCountry Director: Madani M. Tall Pierre Frank Laporte\r\n\r\nSenior Global Practice Director: Ritva S. Reinikka Jaime Saavedra Chanduvi\r\n\r\nPractice Manager: Peter Nicolas Materu Meskerem Mulatu\r\n Patrick Philippe\r\nTask Team Leader(s): Hamoud Abdel Wedoud Kamil\r\n Ramanantoanina\r\nICR Contributing Author: Richard J. Carroll\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 4 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES\r\n\r\n A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL\r\n\r\n Context\r\n\r\n 1. Côte d’Ivoire is a West African Country, which, at the time of appraisal of the Emergency Basic Education\r\n Support Project (EBESP), had an estimated population of 20.9 million in 2011, half of which was younger than\r\n 15 years old. The per capita gross national income was US$1,130, the gross enrollment rate (GER) was 81.6\r\n percent, and life expectancy at birth was 51 years in 2011 (World Bank).1 Côte d’Ivoire is the second largest\r\n economy in the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), accounting for 40 percent of its Gross\r\n Domestic Product (GDP). While the average per capita income was among the highest in West Africa, it was\r\n unevenly distributed, with a Gini coefficient of 0.5 in 2008. The proportion of the population living below the\r\n poverty line had increased dramatically over the previous 25 years from around 14 percent in 1985, to 38 percent\r\n in 2002, and to 43 percent in 2008.2 Poverty had increased most in rural areas and in the North, reaching over\r\n 60 percent, and was much lower in the South, around 21 percent.\r\n\r\n 2. The country is the largest exporter of cocoa and raw cashew nuts in the world, the largest African\r\n exporter of rubber and palm oil, and the third largest exporter of non-oil products in sub-Saharan Africa. At\r\n the time of project appraisal, it had a relatively diversified agricultural economy (contributing to approximately\r\n 24 percent of GDP), significant manufacturing (16 percent of GDP) and services sectors (53 percent of GDP) and\r\n oil, gas and energy (7 percent of GDP). The Emergency Project Paper (EPP) (April 2, 2012) for the EBESP described\r\n short- to medium-term growth prospects as “very good,” provided there were a steady post-conflict recovery.\r\n\r\n 3. Côte d’Ivoire underwent a period of severe political crisis beginning in the late 1990s, owing to issues\r\n of national identity and exclusion. In September 2002, a troop mutiny in the northern region escalated into a\r\n full-scale rebellion. The Linas-Marcoussis Peace Agreement brokered by the French in January 2003 created the\r\n framework for resolution of some key issues. UN peacekeeping forces (ONUCI) and French forces (Licorne)\r\n created a buffer zone between the two areas in conflict, i.e. the Center North West and the South. From 2003 to\r\n 2007, mediation efforts failed to help the country make sufficient progress toward national elections. A peace\r\n agreement was brokered in 2007 with the support of the UN, the Ouagadougou Peace Accord, mapping the way\r\n for national elections.\r\n\r\n 4. There was further violent conflict following the November 2010 elections, which took a heavy toll on\r\n human life with more than 3,000 dead during violent street clashes. Such violence had negative repercussions\r\n for the economy, the provision of key social services (including education), and on infrastructure. There were\r\n 2.3 million internally displaced persons (IDPs), more than 10 percent of the population. The damage to the\r\n economy was estimated at 40 percent of one-year’s GDP. Though there is a lack of hard data, it is estimated that\r\n GDP declined by roughly 15 to 20 percent in the first four months alone of 2011 due to the crisis. As a result of\r\n the crisis, the education sector also suffered damage from neglect and loss of class time. Further, government\r\n\r\n 1 See website: https://data.worldbank.org/country/cote-divoire\r\n 2 The poverty rate in 2015 was 46.3 percent - CIA world factbook - https://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=iv&v=69\r\n\r\n Page 5 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ncapacity in education sector management at the national, regional and local levels,had been seriously weakened\r\nduring the crisis.\r\n\r\n5. The EBESP of US$41.4 million (funded by a Global Partnership for Education Fund-GPEF Grant) was\r\nprepared and appraised on an emergency basis (under OP/BP 8.00)3 given the urgent need to restore and\r\nimprove the provision of basic education services.\r\n\r\nEducation Sector Context\r\n\r\n6. Côte d’Ivoire’s education system was seriously disadvantaged in the decade leading up to project\r\nappraisal, especially in the former conflict zones of the North and North-West. At the time of appraisal, 84\r\npercent of school-age children in the South had access to primary education, compared to only 35 percent and\r\n41 percent in the North and North West, respectively. Primary completion rates declined overall with only 46\r\npercent of children completing primary school (52 percent of boys and 39 percent of girls). Demand for education\r\nhad fallen during the crisis as household incomes fell due to disruptions in economic activity. Income declines\r\nincreased the opportunity costs of education because child labor was needed by the household to help sustain\r\nincomes through increased participation in agriculture and commercial activities. The EPP for the EBESP noted\r\nthat studies on Côte d’Ivoire estimated that a 10 percent fall in household income was associated with a 3.2\r\npercent decrease in school enrolment and a 5.1 percent increase in child labor. This situation was aggravated by\r\nthe declining quality of schools which was a disincentive for parents to enroll and keep their children in school.\r\n\r\n7. Although schools were supposed to reopen in early 2011, new political unrest caused further delays\r\nand as a result, 800,000 children missed four to six months of school . In the West and South, many teachers,\r\nstudents and their families fled to other regions or to neighboring countries due to the deteriorating security\r\nsituation. Schools were abandoned and many school facilities, equipment and supplies were (partially) destroyed\r\nor pilfered (e.g., as a desperate measure, student desks were sometimes used as firewood). Overall,\r\napproximately one million children normally enrolled in school in Côte d’Ivoire were out of school at the height\r\nof the post-electoral crisis.\r\n\r\n8. The resolution of the crisis and the commitment of resources to the education sector through the EBESP\r\nwere expected to lead to a rapid increase in demand for schooling in all regions, especially with the return of\r\nIDPs, as well as refugees who had temporarily fled to neighboring countries. The EBSEP was aligned with the\r\n2012-2014 Plan d’Actions à Moyen Terme (PAMT) which emphasized three areas for the sector: (i) strengthening\r\naccess to education; (ii) improving education quality; and (iii) improving institutional capacity and governance,\r\nwhich the EBESP also emphasized.\r\n\r\n9. At the time, investments in new primary school classrooms and maintenance were needed, especially\r\nin the most seriously affected areas. Complicating this challenge was that the capacity to construct, repair and\r\nmaintain schools also had eroded during the crisis. The option of using communities to compensate for this\r\nerosion in the construction industry was limited due to dislocation of some communities in an insecure\r\n\r\n 3 OP/BP 8.00 “Post Conflict and Emergency Operations” (February 27, 2007): The policy sets out a framework for a more rapid and\r\n effective response to crises and emergencies that is better aligned with borrower needs and the Bank’s experience and current\r\n engagement. It supports the Bank’s complementary role to other partners, including the United Nations (UN) and regional\r\n organizations, and includes provisions to facilitate the Bank’s participation in and/or support to integrated international r esponse to\r\n crises and emergencies.\r\n\r\n Page 6 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nenvironment. As a result, school places were becoming increasingly limited, not only because of a lack of\r\ninvestment in new schools, but also because the utility of existing classrooms was reduced as they fell into\r\ndisrepair. These demand and supply side factors help explain the high drop-out rates and the increasing number\r\nof illiterate young children. However, during the three years leading up to appraisal, communities had\r\nconstructed 3,800 classrooms using a community-based approach.4 In contrast, the government had not built\r\nany schools, thus forcing communities to mobilize their own resources to meet education infrastructure and\r\nteacher needs. Moreover, the government did not have accurate statistics on the number of classrooms that\r\ncould be or needed to be rehabilitated.\r\n\r\n10. These deficiencies in access to schools affected girls in rural communities more than those in urban\r\nareas. Girls’ participation was more affected because the opportunity cost of girls’ labor in the home was higher\r\nthan for boys. Historically, girls in rural areas were more likely to be employed in household work, farming and\r\ncommerce than boys. In addition, there was a disincentive for girls to travel to schools far from home as it was\r\nunsafe to travel long distances in an insecure environment. These factors are in addition to other institutional\r\nand cultural barriers to girls’ participation in the system.\r\n\r\nRationale for Bank Involvement\r\n\r\n11. The Bank and the GPE rationale for assistance was predicated, in part, on the fact that not enough\r\ndonors were active in supporting basic education. The Bank had been supporting various pieces of analytical\r\nwork on the sector and promoting initiatives to monitor the evolution of the education system, especially\r\nlearning assessment. To complement this, the GPEF had helped prepare sector plans and promote increased\r\ncollaboration among partners to increase efficiency in the use of sector resources. The Millennium Development\r\nGoals (MDGs) also acted as a stimulus for the government to pursue universal completion of primary education\r\nmore aggressively. The Bank concentrated its support in the southern, central and eastern parts of the country,\r\nwhile the French government concentrated its efforts in the northern region.\r\n\r\n12. The main challenges that the EBESP intended to help the Government address were also areas of Bank\r\ncomparative advantage and included:\r\n\r\n • Shortage of classrooms in basic education due to neglect in maintenance and new construction, along\r\n with a diminished capacity in the construction sector;\r\n • Low teacher quality, partly because of an erosion of the pre-service teacher training capacity;\r\n • Weak system of teacher supervision, support and accountability as well as infrequent standardized\r\n student learning assessments also denied the system the possibility to properly monitor the pedagogical\r\n processes to identify and adequately address student learning weaknesses at the school, regional and\r\n national levels;\r\n • Severe shortage of textbooks and teaching materials during the crisis period;\r\n • Deterioration of the nutritional and health status of students;\r\n • Substantial inefficiencies and administrative and pedagogical management weaknesses in the education\r\n system; and\r\n\r\n 4 Togive an idea of the significance compared to the country as a whole, the MEN School Statistics publication 2016/17 reported there\r\n were a total 16,324 primary schools (13,195 public, 2,128 private and 1,001 communal) and 90,970 primary classrooms. Total primary\r\n enrollment increased from 2.9 million in 2012/13 to 3.8 million in 2016/17, an increase of 31 percent.\r\n\r\n Page 7 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n • A collapse of essential administrative functions and pedagogical support, monitoring and management.\r\n\r\n13. The project, with Bank/GPE support, would help address a funding gap and would promote attainment\r\nof MDGs. The estimates of the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) for the 2011-2014 period and the\r\nGovernment’s Medium-Term Action Plan (2012-2014) revealed a significant funding gap for basic education,\r\neven after factoring in considerable government support. In order to capitalize on Côte d’Ivoire’s commitment\r\nto invest in education and implement the Action Plan, GPEF financial resources would help support the most\r\nurgent and critical interventions and ensure the strategic and efficient use of scarce financial resources. In\r\nparticular, the EBESP would directly support the following Medium-Term Action Plan (2012-2014) activities: (i)\r\nincreasing access to primary education; (ii) improving the learning environment; (iii) improving pre-service\r\nteacher training; (iv) providing adequate in-service teacher training; (v) systematically evaluating student\r\nlearning achievements at the primary level; and (vi) acquisition of student textbooks and teachers’ guides. The\r\nproject also aimed at the attainment of two MDGs: Goal 2: “Achieving universal primary education”; and Goal 3:\r\n“Promoting gender equality and empowering women”. The project contributed to the Country Partnership\r\nStrategy (CPS, 2010-2013), in particular, to the objectives of Pillars One (“Strengthening Governance and\r\nInstitutions”) and Four (“Infrastructure Renewal and Basic Services”).\r\n\r\nTheory of Change (Results Chain)\r\n\r\n14. The set of activities and interventions to be supported under the Project aimed to: (i) restore and\r\nincrease access to basic education; (ii) rehabilitate and improve the conditions for teaching and learning; and\r\n(iii) restore and strengthen institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education. These changes incorporated\r\na number of key reforms for the education sector, such as teacher training reform, the establishment of small\r\ncollèges (collèges de proximité), use of the community-based approach for construction, and the sub-cycle\r\napproach to grade promotion.5 The project reforms were also concerned with reducing the repetition rate which\r\nwas above 15 percent. The regular learning assessment and the set-up of the directorate in charge of learning\r\nassessment were also key measures in the theory of change. A number of other measures of change included: a\r\nshift in the reading method (to a syllabic one) following the reading assessment; a study on early pregnancy which\r\nwas taken into account in the demographic dividend strategy; and an audit of the curriculum which led to the\r\nreform of the curriculum and the implementation of a curriculum policy framework. This was a challenging\r\nprogram particularly given that it was launched only a few months after the crisis had ended.\r\n\r\n15. The Project-financed classroom construction was expected to provide classrooms to accommodate the\r\nexpected increase in demand for primary education mainly in the central, central-western and south-eastern\r\nareas of the country. The project aimed at rehabilitating classrooms as well as undertaking new classroom\r\nconstruction. With the increase in demand there would also be a need for more teachers. The project, therefore,\r\nsupported an increased supply of teachers, not only for the new classrooms, but for other classrooms as well. In\r\naddition, it was important that uncertified teachers receive additional training to improve quality of instruction.\r\n\r\n 5 Primary education in Cote d’Ivoire is divided into three sub-cycles: 1st and 2nd grades (« Cours Préparatoires 1ère année » and « Cours\r\n\r\n Préparatoires 2ème année » - CP1 and CP2); 3rd and 4th grades (« Cours Elémentaires 1ère année » and « Cours Elémentaires 1ère\r\n année » - CE1 and CE2); 5th and 6th grades (« Cours Moyens 1ère année » and « Cours Moyens 2ère année » - CM1 and CM2). With\r\n sub-cycles, there is not a high stakes assessment between grades in a sub-cycle, so that students can continue to upper grade and catch\r\n up without repeating the grade if they are lagging behind.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 8 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThe project also supported institutional strengthening which was critical in a post crisis environment. It was\r\nnecessary to restore and improve the capacity of the Ministry of National Education (Ministère de l’Education\r\nNationale) to generate data and to be able to design and implement policies based on reliable data. This trio of\r\ninterventions was designed to improve the environment for teaching and learning as well as to strengthen the\r\ninstitutional environment for delivery of basic education services.\r\n\r\n\r\n Table 1: Theory of Change for Access to Basic Education, Teaching and Learning and Educational Policies\r\n\r\n Inputs Outputs Intermediate Long-Term Outcomes\r\n Outcomes\r\n\r\n Providing resources and Completed classrooms Children attending Children better able to\r\n training to communities for primary and lower schools built by the make life choices, better\r\n to build and rehabilitate secondary schools project and teachers able to matriculate to\r\n primary and lower graduating from - higher levels of education.\r\n secondary schools, Teacher Training Teachers delivering higher\r\n mainly through a Centers (CAFOPs)6 quality instruction,\r\n community-based that received institutions supporting\r\n approach. support from the teachers and students\r\n project. more effectively.\r\n\r\n Fund education Completed education Communities\r\n campaigns in areas of campaigns in 67 low- placing higher value\r\n low female enrolment. female enrolment on education for\r\n areas girls and\r\n maintaining and\r\n Incentives for high test Textbooks and laptops\r\n increasing female\r\n performance by females provided to females\r\n enrolment.\r\n with highest test scores\r\n\r\n Providing funding for Construct and Greater supply of\r\n CAFOP (teacher training operationalize teaching certified teachers,\r\n centers) both for new training centers thus reducing the\r\n construction and teacher deficit.\r\n rehabilitation. These would help\r\n limit an increase in\r\n the Student:\r\n Teacher ratio of\r\n 43:1 expected from\r\n universal education\r\n policy.\r\n\r\n\r\n 6 CAFOP stands for Centre d’Animation et Formation Pédagogique.\r\n\r\n Page 9 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Funding for PIU, Central-PIU head leads More timely\r\n trainers, consultants, ESP, train DPES7 staff, publishing of\r\n equipment and Bank assistance for education statistics\r\n staff supervision to legislation to establish to help improve\r\n improve education roles at all levels of policy. Improve\r\n institutional capacity at govt. DRENs’8 efficiency in\r\n all levels. decision making,\r\n Regional-Shift decision\r\n collaboration with\r\n power to DREN,\r\n school officials, and\r\n training of regional\r\n better ability to\r\n staff including DRENS\r\n carry out new roles.\r\n School level-clarify COGES better able\r\n Comité de Gestion to carry out\r\n Scolaire (COGES) roles, responsibilities such\r\n sensitize and provide as financial and\r\n training to carry out school resource\r\n new roles. management.\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives (PDOs)\r\n\r\n16. The objectives of the project were to assist in: (i) restoring and increasing access to basic education; (ii)\r\nrehabilitating and improving the conditions for teaching and learning; and (iii) restoring and strengthening\r\ninstitutional capacity to deliver quality basic education.9\r\n\r\nKey Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators\r\n\r\n17. Restoring and increasing access to basic education. As a result of an increase in the supply of classrooms\r\nconstructed by the project, it was expected that a greater number of students would have access to basic primary\r\nand lower secondary education. The project’s support to increasing the supply of qualified teachers10 also aimed\r\nto contribute to access by ensuring students will have instruction in the classroom. This outcome was measured\r\nin the project results framework (RF) by the numbers of direct project beneficiaries reaching the targeted number\r\nof students enrolled in primary and secondary schools built/rehabilitated by the project, with girls accounting for\r\nat least 45 percent of total enrollment.\r\n\r\n18. Rehabilitating and improving conditions for teaching and learning. Achieving improved conditions for\r\nteaching and learning would be supported by: i) rehabilitation of classrooms; ii) the increased supply of qualified\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 7 DPES is the Direction de la Planification, de l’Evaluation et des Statistiques (Directorate for Planning, Evaluation and Statistics).\r\n 8 DREN is the Direction Regionale de l’Education Nationale (Regional Education Directorate).\r\n 9 The PDO in the Grant Agreement and the Emergency Project Paper are identical.\r\n 10 A qualified teacher means a teacher who graduates from pre-service teacher training delivered by the CAFOP. During the crisis\r\n\r\n communities recruited untrained teachers to respond to the demand.\r\n\r\n Page 10 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nteachers; and iii) support for a school health and nutrition program. The project RF included an intermediate\r\nresults indicator that indirectly measured learning conditions: the student-teacher ratio is maintained at 43:1.\r\n\r\n19. Institutional capacity strengthening. The project aimed to achieve this objective through capacity-building\r\nactivities and support to new policies. The project RF measured this outcome through two indicators: the\r\nimplementation of a system for learning assessment at the primary level (scale of 3)11, and reliable annual data\r\non the education sector produced on time. Intermediate results indicators measure the number of Regional\r\nEducation Directorate (Direction Regionale de l’Education Nationale – DRENs) and other regional staff trained on\r\nwhat the project was expected to deliver and how, including the community approach, increase in certified\r\nteachers, and data requirements, all of which indicate institutional strengthening.\r\n\r\nComponents\r\nComponent 1: Restoring and increasing access to basic education services (US$20 million; US$19.25 million;\r\nActual: 96.25 percent)\r\n\r\n20. The project promoted access to basic education by expanding the number of classrooms at primary and\r\nlower secondary (collège) levels through construction and rehabilitation. This included: (i) construction and\r\nequipment of 1,000 new classrooms, using community-based approaches, or private contractors; (ii)\r\nrehabilitation and replacement of (originally estimated) 500 existing classrooms as well as installation of latrines\r\nand water points; (iii) provision of desks in existing schools; (iv) introduction of incentive schemes to promote\r\ngirls’ education, including awards for girls12 who have scored highest on exams and special ceremonies for\r\ngraduating girls, similar to successful programs run in Mauritania13 and information and sensitization campaigns\r\n(see Annex 8); and (v) restoration of administrative services.\r\n\r\nComponent 2: Rehabilitating and Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning (US$12 million; US$13.17\r\nmillion; Actual: 109.75 percent)\r\n\r\n21. This component addressed the issue of poor teaching quality in large part because the pre-service\r\nteacher training was weak and lacked clear standards. The initial comprehensive audit of the teacher training\r\nsystem revealed a number of weaknesses in the system: i) lack of standards for teacher skills; ii) disparities\r\nbetween the curriculum and what was actually taught in the schools; iii) weak selection criteria for student\r\nteachers; iv) teacher trainers who did not master professional skills; and v) mentors who were not sufficiently\r\ntrained to supervise in-class training. In light of these needs, the project aimed to increase quality and capacity of\r\n\r\n 11 This indicator is measured on a scale of 0-4 based on the following criteria:\r\n STAGE 1\r\n Official purpose of the assessment is to measure overall student progress toward agreed system learning goals YES or NO Assessment\r\n is given to a representative sample or census of the target grades or age levels YES or NO\r\n Score of 0 if NO on either one of the two Stage 1 criteria\r\n STAGE 2\r\n Data are analyzed and results are reported to education policymakers and/or the public YES or NO\r\n Results are reported for at least one of the following student subgroups: gender, urban/rural, geographic region YES or NO\r\n The assessment exercise is repeated at least once every 5 years for the same subject area(s) and grade(s) YES or NO\r\n Score of 2 if YES, on any one of the three criteria, 3 if YES on any two of the three criteria, 4 if all criteria are met.\r\n 12 The awards were textbooks for primary and lower secondary female students and laptops for upper secondary females.\r\n 13 Implementation Completion and Results Report for the “Education Sector Development Program,” The World Bank, Report No:\r\n\r\n ICR00001567, April 15, 2011. Awards also include certificates of achievement from the minister and international organizations.\r\n\r\n Page 11 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nteachers by, among other things, financing the construction of two new teacher training centers (Centres\r\nd’Animation et de Formation Pédagogique - CAFOP) and rehabilitating and equipping seven existing CAFOPs. The\r\ngovernment selected about 24,000 new student teachers to benefit from the CAFOPs. Component 2 also included\r\na program of in-service teacher training designed to upgrade teaching skills of teachers already in the education\r\nsystem and a program of training for the improvement of the assessment system for student learning. There\r\nwould also be support to the system for learning assessment to improve its ability to properly measure student\r\nlearning outcomes and achievements to guide efforts to improve quality and relevance. The project also\r\nsupported the training of headmasters and inspectors to improve school-level pedagogic support.\r\n\r\n22. Component 2 also aimed to improve the availability of pedagogical inputs in primary and lower\r\nsecondary education. The target of providing one million textbooks was exceeded. The textbooks covered math\r\nand reading at each of the six primary levels. This covered 24 percent of the nation’s primary schools. The\r\ncomponent intended to promote school health and nutrition through a school-based program of feeding and\r\nhealth services. School feeding was later dropped from the project, though the health component (vaccinations,\r\nlimited health services and hand washing campaign) remained.\r\n\r\nComponent 3: Restoring and strengthening institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education (US$9.4\r\nmillion; US$8.98 million; Actual: 95.53 percent)\r\n\r\n23. The main activities were to rebuild a solid basic education sub-sector through: (i) the collection and\r\nanalysis of data to produce a reliable Annual School Statistics Report at the end of the 2011/2012 school year;\r\nand (ii) the development of the training program for inspectors to be trained under Component 2. In addition,\r\nComponent 3 supported: (i) reinforcing the capacity of key central-level departments involved in the planning and\r\nmonitoring of the ESP, and clarifying roles and responsibilities at national, central and school levels; (ii) re-\r\nestablishing capacity at the regional level to manage responsibilities devolved to the regions, through clarification\r\nof the respective mandates of central and regional levels; and (iii) at the local level, clarifying and strengthening\r\nthe roles and responsibilities of school-based management committees (Comités de Gestion Scolaire – COGES) in\r\nclose collaboration with regional directorates and local public administration officials.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 12 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nB. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION\r\n\r\n Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets\r\n\r\n 24. The PDO was not revised, but there were three level 2 restructurings which included a number of\r\n revisions to the outcome targets, which are detailed in Annex 7. The three restructurings are described in Table\r\n 2.\r\n\r\n Table 2: Summary of EBESP Restructurings\r\n\r\n Restructuring 1. (August 2015) - 54 percent disbursed\r\n\r\n • The closing date was extended by 12 months (from September 30, 2015 to September 30, 2016).\r\n • US$3 million in grant proceeds were reallocated from components 2 and 3 to component 1 (The\r\n reallocation was possible because of (i) efficiency gains realized in the procurement of textbooks\r\n under component 2, and (ii) availability of funds (due to exchange rate gains and the cancellation of\r\n the EMIS activity) re-directed towards construction costs for classrooms.\r\n • The PDO-level indicator target for the “number of classrooms rehabilitated at primary level” was\r\n revised downwards from 500 to 267 to reflect realities on the ground (some schools for\r\n “rehabilitation” were temporary structures).\r\n Restructuring 2 (October 2016) - 83 percent disbursed\r\n\r\n • The closing date was extended by 11 months (from September 2016 to August 2017).\r\n • Two subcomponents (school feeding program and EMIS platform), were proposed to be revised\r\n though these revisions were not enacted until the third restructuring.\r\n • Because GPE Board Approval was given in October 2016, this was an Interim Restructuring.\r\n Changes to the RF were mentioned but not proposed since they were dependent on GPE approval.\r\n They were approved by GPE in late October and proposed in a third restructuring. (see Annex 7).\r\n\r\n Restructuring 3 (May 2017) - 96 percent disbursed\r\n\r\n Changes to the RF:\r\n PDO-level indicators:\r\n (i) Downward revision of the targets for “Total number of direct beneficiaries” and for “Students\r\n enrolled in primary schools built by the project” both to account for changes in number of classrooms\r\n rehabilitated.\r\n Intermediate results indicators:\r\n (ii) Removal of “Number of children receiving food supplies as a result of project intervention”; and\r\n “EMIS system in place and functioning”;\r\n (iii) Upward revision of the targets for the indicators: “Number of heads of DREN, school directors,\r\n inspectors”; and “Number of teachers trained in-service”; and\r\n (iv) Downward revision of target for indicator “Student teacher ratio” to account for actual enrollment\r\n growth.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 13 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n25. The main changes to the indicator targets under the first restructuring included: a reduction in the\r\nnumber of rehabilitated classrooms (Restructuring 1-RP 1-August 5, 2015) and related number of beneficiaries\r\nas well as change student-teacher ratio target. The number of classrooms that could be rehabilitated was\r\noverestimated by the MEN during appraisal owing to the extremely weak education database in the post-crisis\r\nenvironment. Given that the Project was prepared on an emergency basis, a thorough assessment could not be\r\nundertaken. However, a more thorough examination by engineers undertaken later in the project life found that\r\nmany of the classrooms were in such a state of disrepair that they could not be rehabilitated. Thus, on the basis\r\nof this assessment the estimated number of classrooms to be rehabilitated was revised. The target number was\r\nreduced from 500 to 267. (The commensurate reduction in the number of students enrolled in classrooms —\r\nbeneficiaries—built/rehabilitated by the Project was not made until the second restructuring—October 2016). In\r\naddition, because of the lower number of classrooms, and savings resulting from the efficient procurement of\r\ntextbooks, US$3 million of funds were reallocated to components 1 and 2. The target change during the second\r\nrestructuring (October 17, 2016) was increasing the student-teacher ratio from its initial target of 40:1 to 43:1.\r\nThis change (i.e., maintaining the existing ratio) was justified by the institution of the new national policy for a\r\nfree and compulsory basic education (primary and lower secondary) which increased the demand for student\r\nplaces.14\r\n\r\nRevised PDO Indicators\r\n\r\n26. Annex 7 provides a comprehensive review of the modifications to the RF throughout the Project life. The\r\nchanges to the RF aimed to ensure that the project could continue to systematically track and measure the\r\noutputs and outcomes achieved during project implementation.\r\n\r\nRevised Components\r\n27. The school feeding program under the Project was dropped as was the Project’s support to establishing\r\na comprehensive education management information system (EMIS) was scaled back. The Bank worked closely\r\nwith the Government to design and undertake this activity to increase health and nutritional well-being among\r\ntargeted students and to incentive increased enrollment. Given the decentralized nature of this activity, and that\r\nthe Government had not yet developed an official school feeding policy, the Bank insisted that a policy to include\r\na systematic tracking system be established by the Government to monitor this activity and that household\r\ncontributions to the activity would be eliminated (and these provisions figured in the Grant Agreement). As this\r\npolicy did not materialize, the Bank redirected resources for this activity to interventions which would ensure the\r\njudicious use of resources and contribute to the further achievement of the PDO (US$3.745 million was\r\nreallocated from category 1 to categories 2 and 3 (RP 2) – supporting construction and other aspects of the\r\ncollèges de proximité, in particular, the provision of potable water and sanitation. Further, in line with the original\r\naim of the sub-component, limited health services, vaccinations and a handwashing campaign at the school level\r\nwere supported (some of which were implemented with UNICEF in response to the Ebola Virus Disease crisis).\r\nThe establishment of an EMIS was no longer feasible within the project timeframe due to accumulated delays in\r\nimplementation, the complexity and the time required of unifying several platforms in a post-crisis context, and\r\n\r\n\r\n 14In 2011, the Government announced a free basic education policy and after the crisis the government integrated community schools\r\n into its education system, which put upward pressure on the student teacher ratio. In 2016, the Government announced a mandatory\r\n basic education policy. The increase in the number of students resulted in a higher student teacher ratio.\r\n\r\n Page 14 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the decision by the Islamic Development Bank to finance this activity moving forward. Despite this adjustment to\r\n the design, the Project supported improvements in the collection, analysis and dissemination of education system\r\n data (see Section II for additional details).\r\n\r\n 28. The third restructuring of the project reallocated the Grant proceeds between disbursement categories\r\n and changed the cost of components. The RP reports that with the updating of the project accounting system,\r\n following the second restructuring and the hiring of a new financial management (FM) specialist in the PIU, it was\r\n discovered that component 1 was overfunded, while components 2 and 3 required additional funds to pay for\r\n activities that were validated as part of the extension (a reverse shift of the reallocation under RP 2). Additional\r\n component 2 costs included the procurement of 1,550 pedagogic tablets, 36,000 wall boards, in-service training\r\n activities and other smaller items. Component 3 required funding for training 1,500 teachers and 500\r\n headmasters and project management for the 11 months of extension. The funds from component 1 were\r\n available because of the reduction in the number of rehabilitated classrooms (267 instead of 500) and more\r\n importantly because of gains linked to the increased value of the US dollar during the implementation of the\r\n project.\r\n\r\n Other Changes\r\n N.A.\r\n Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change\r\n\r\n 29. Despite changes in some activities during the course of the project, the project’s theory of change was\r\n preserved. Building and rehabilitating classrooms contributed to increases in access to education. Although the\r\n number of rehabilitated classrooms was reduced, the government’s program compensated for this reduction by\r\n rehabilitating 233 classrooms. Training of teachers, both in-service and pre-service, exceeded targets and helped\r\n to improve teaching and learning conditions. The dropping of the nutrition activity was mitigated by providing\r\n health services. The potential negative effect on school attendance was not measured, but the project did meet\r\n its revised enrollment targets.\r\n\r\nII. OUTCOME\r\n\r\n A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs\r\n Rating: High\r\n Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating\r\n 30. The PDOs have been and continue to be highly relevant: i) Increasing access to education; ii) improving\r\n the conditions for teaching and learning; and iii) restoring and strengthening institutional capacity. The PDO was\r\n consistent with the recommendations of the 2011 World Development Report “Conflict, Security and\r\n Development”, which emphasized the key roles that re-establishing social services for communities and\r\n addressing social exclusion can play in restoring cohesion in post-conflict situations. This included financing of\r\n institutional and technical activities to help restore government capacity in education sector management at the\r\n national, regional and local levels, which had been seriously weakened during the crisis.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 15 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 31. The EBESP also mirrored the national education strategy as expressed in the Government’s Medium-\r\n Term Action Plan (2012-2014). This Action Plan had identified the following three priorities: (i) strengthening\r\n access to education; (ii) improving education quality; and (iii) improving institutional capacity and governance.\r\n In addition to supporting the objectives of the Action Plan, the EBESP’s objectives were also strongly aligned with\r\n the President’s Emergency Recovery Plan (Plan Présidentiel d’Urgence). The PDOs were consistent with the CPS\r\n (2010-2013) which emphasized the importance of “continued progress in crisis recovery and improved prospects\r\n for sustained peace”, as well as “improved basic social service delivery”. While the PDO-level indicator targets\r\n were ambitious for a three-year timeframe, it is important to note that a three-year implementation period was\r\n required by the GPE.15 Moreover, as noted previously, this operation was prepared and appraised on an\r\n emergency basis with limited access to reliable figures – especially with regards to the number of classrooms\r\n that needed rehabilitation or replacement. However, the extension of the project’s closing date ultimately\r\n allowed the project to either achieve or exceed the vast majority of indicator targets (refer to last two columns\r\n in Table 3).\r\n\r\n 32. The PDOs are also relevant to the current Country Partnership Framework for FY2016-19 (August 17,\r\n 2015) –aligned with Focus Area 2 Building Human Capital for Economic Development and Social Cohesion.\r\n Under this focus area, the CPF has three objectives one of which is to improve education service delivery and\r\n youth employability (Objective 5). Education and market-responsive skills are critical for the economic\r\n transformation sought by the Government, for which a sounder basic education system is a pre-requisite. The\r\n CPF also states that integration of youth into the labor market will be pursued through targeted support to\r\n educational services at primary, secondary and higher levels.\r\n\r\n 33. Despite a shift in the context and recent gains in the sector, the current relevance of the PDO remains\r\n high. Consistent with the PDO of the EBESP, the recently submitted Education Service Delivery Enhancement\r\n Project (P163218) seeks to improve learning outcomes and supports some of the same activities (e.g., teacher\r\n training, capacity-building, school health, etc.) Moreover, the PDO remains consistent with one of the key sought\r\n outcomes of the current Education Sector Plan (ESP) (2016-2025) which is for children (ages 6 to 11 years) to\r\n have access to and to complete primary education. In light of the above, the relevance of the objectives is rated\r\n high.\r\n\r\nB. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY)\r\n 34. The PDO consisted of three sub-objectives: (i) restoring and increasing access to basic education; (ii)\r\n rehabilitating and improving the conditions for teaching and learning; and (iii) restoring and strengthening\r\n institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education. Each of these sub-objectives is assessed separately and\r\n according to the established time intervals (see below).\r\n\r\n 35. The ICR splits the rating at two points, the first and second restructurings (with the analysis focusing\r\n therefore on three intervals of time) and weights the final outcome rating on a 6-point scale. With the first\r\n restructuring and the reduction in the targeted number of rehabilitated classrooms (and by extension, the\r\n targeted students enrolled in project built/rehabilitated classrooms) on August 5, 2015, US$22.36 million (54\r\n\r\n\r\n 15 This policy has been modified in recent years, allowing for a longer implementation timeframe – especially in post-conflict and/or\r\n fragile contexts.\r\n\r\n Page 16 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\npercent of project funds) had been disbursed. Between the first and the second restructuring, approximately\r\nUS$11.9 million of the grant was disbursed (the next 29 percent). After the second restructuring, US$7.2 million\r\n(17 percent) of the total amount was disbursed. In addition to looking at the project’s performance in this more\r\ncompartmentalized fashion, the ICR also provides a global assessment of achievement on each of the sub-\r\nobjectives as these remained unchanged throughout the life of the project.\r\n\r\n Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome\r\n36. The three intervals for the split efficacy ratings are described below. The rating for each interval is\r\nprovided in the heading for each sub-objective:\r\n\r\n 1. Pre-Restructuring 1: Effectiveness to Restructuring 1—October 15, 2012-August 2015 (54 percent disbursed)\r\n 2. Restructuring 1 to Restructuring 2—August 2015-October 17, 2016 (additional 29 percent disbursed)\r\n 3. Restructuring 2 to Project Close—October 17, 2016-August 31, 2017 (final 17 percent disbursed)\r\n\r\n37. The sub-ratings are based on progress in meeting key indicators relative to the plan at appraisal. The\r\noverall efficacy rating and justification is provided for each sub-objective. Table 3 provides the planned and actual\r\nachievement of results indicator targets at each of the three restructuring. The numbers in bold are actual\r\nachievements reported at the time of the restructuring.\r\n Table 3: Planned and Actual Achievement of PDO-level and Intermediate Results Indicator Targets for\r\n Restructurings 1, 2 and 3\r\n Indicator Rest. 1-Aug. 2015- Rest. 2-Oct. 2016- Rest. 3-Aug. 2017-\r\n Project Year 3 Project Year 4 (ext.) Project Year 5 (ext.)\r\n PDO-level Planned Actual Planned Actual Planned Actual\r\n No. Additional qualified primary 7,500 15,253 7,500 15,253 15,200 24,000\r\n teachers\r\n No. additional primary classrooms- 1,500 470 1,212 1,267 1,272\r\n total 1,000 303 1,000 996 1,000 1,002\r\n Built 500 167 267 216 267 270\r\n Rehabilitated\r\n Direct project beneficiaries: 62,400 18,800 62,400 41,000 53,080 53,280\r\n Students enrolled in primary schools 60,000 18,800 60,000 38,760 50,680 50,880\r\n built by EBESP\r\n Students enrolled in “collèges de 2,400 0 2,400 2,240 2,400 2,400\r\n proximité” built by the project\r\n % Female 45% 46.6% 45% 47% 45% 47%\r\n System for learning assessment at 3 1 3 3 3 3\r\n the primary level\r\n Timely annual production of reliable Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes\r\n school statistics\r\n Intermediate Results\r\n Number of girls receiving incentives 450 300 450 463 450 463\r\n Teachers trained in service 15,000 887 15,000 15,020 16,500 16,797\r\n No. of textbooks purchased and 1 million 1 million 1 million 1,000,267 1 million 1,000,267\r\n distributed\r\n Student-teacher ratio 40:1 43:1 40:1 43:1 43:1 43:1\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 17 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of children receiving food 60,000 0 60,000 0 Dropped Dropped\r\n supplies as result of intervention\r\n EMIS System in place and functioning Yes No Yes No Yes Dropped\r\n Number of heads of DREN, school\r\n directors, inspectors and pedagogical 3,000 556 3,000 8,000 8,500 8,670\r\n advisors trained\r\n Number of COGES trained 3,000 4,790 3,000 4,790 3,000 4,790\r\n Note that project years 4 and 5 are in the extensions of closing date periods as the original project was originally for\r\n 3 years. Project year 3 shows the original PDO targets from the results framework in the EPP.\r\n\r\n\r\nSub-objective 1: Restoring and increasing access to basic education: 1. Modest; 2. Substantial; 3. Substantial—\r\nOverall: Substantial\r\n\r\n38. The EBESP helped restore and increase access to basic education through the building and rehabilitation\r\nof mainly primary schools but also secondary school classrooms and by increasing the supply and qualification\r\nof teachers. It also promoted girls’ education through additional incentives for girls’ performance in schools.\r\nWith these interventions, students who would not otherwise have had access were able to be enrolled in school.\r\n\r\n39. Pre-restructuring 1: Implementation progress was modest leading up to the first restructuring (August\r\n2015). The progress in classroom construction reached about one-third of rehabilitated and new classrooms of\r\nthe original target of 1,500 (which was to be reached by project year 3). The construction of lower secondary\r\nschools in rural areas had commenced in October 2014, but it was behind schedule. Only 19 percent of the\r\nconstruction of the new CAFOPs (which also contributed to sub-objective 2) had been completed and three of\r\nthe eight centers had been rehabilitated. Support to school feeding was delayed. Based on the information\r\nprovided above, the level of attainment of this sub-objective during this period is rated modest.\r\n\r\n40. Restructuring 1-2: The pace of project implementation significantly improved with 969 of the, ultimately\r\n1,002 classrooms built by the second restructuring, more than triple the amount completed since the first\r\nrestructuring (only 14 months earlier). All of the “collèges de proximité” were completed by the second\r\nrestructuring and enrollment had reached 2,240 students (more than 90 percent of the project’s final target).16\r\n\r\n41. Restructuring 2 - Project close: The number of classrooms built or rehabilitated was 1,002 (against a\r\ntarget of 1,000). All other targets were met/exceeded for this sub-objective including enrollment of students in\r\n“collèges de proximité” (2,400); total beneficiaries (revised target for students enrolled was 53,080 with the\r\nactual number of students enrolled of 53,280) and the percentage of females enrolled (47 percent), for a\r\nsubstantial rating.\r\n\r\n42. Overall: The project met several of the relevant targets of indicators for classroom construction and\r\nteacher training that are evidence of achievement of this PDO sub-objective. First the target of building 1,000\r\nadditional classrooms was met (1,002 actual), and the revised target for rehabilitating classrooms was also met\r\n(267 target vs. 270 actual). The reduction in the target from 500 to 267 was compensated for by the Presidential\r\nemergency program which funded the construction of 233 new classrooms (the amount of the shortfall). The\r\ncompletion of these activities allowed the project to exceed/meet the revised targets for direct beneficiaries (i)\r\nin primary schools (50,680 target vs. 50,880 actual) and (ii) secondary schools (2,400 target and actual). Thus,\r\nrestored and increased access to basic education was achieved because of the additional capacity for students\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 18 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nat the primary and secondary levels. With the reduction in the outcome target in the case of classroom\r\nrehabilitation, there is a basis for a split rating of project outcome at this point even though this initial\r\noverestimate was affected by the emergency circumstances under which the project was prepared and the fact\r\nthat accurate rehabilitation estimates often require a more thorough examination of the condition of classrooms\r\nthan was feasible at preparation (even under more favorable conditions).\r\n\r\n43. The increase in the supply of teachers (discussed below) also contributed to increased access by\r\nensuring that the new classrooms would have teachers (and with improved qualifications). The intermediate\r\nresults indicator for access was the number of girls receiving incentives (i.e., awards, textbooks, laptops) and the\r\ntarget of 450 girls receiving awards was exceeded (463 actual). See Annex 8 for more details. In addition, the\r\ntarget for the indicator on proportion of beneficiaries who were female was also exceeded (45 percent target vs.\r\n47.5 percent actual). See section on Gender for additional details.\r\n\r\nSub-objective 2: Rehabilitating and improving the conditions for teaching and learning-1. Modest; 2.\r\nSubstantial; 3. Substantial—Overall: Substantial.\r\n\r\n44. The project helped improve the conditions for teaching and learning, not only by constructing new\r\nclassrooms, but also by providing support for training teachers. By setting up CAFOPs, the supply of trained\r\nteachers could be increased. The constraint of time and cost for boarding teachers was avoided because CAFOPs\r\ndid not require teachers to be housed at the training facility. With improved qualifications and better adherence\r\nto the school curriculum, learning conditions could improve.\r\n\r\n45. Pre-restructuring 1: Indicator progress during this period was better for sub-objective, but was still mixed:\r\n(i) the target of 7,500 for the number of additional qualified teachers was exceeded as the actual number was\r\n15,253; (ii) out of 15,000 teachers to receive an in service training, only 887 had been trained (falling short of the\r\ntarget); and (iii) for the rehabilitation of eight pre-existing teacher training centers (CAFOPs) and the construction\r\nof two new CAFOPs, about 19 percent of the work had been completed, though there was progress on all eight.\r\nOut of the eight pre-existing centers, the refurbishing of three centers was completed, while the rehabilitation of\r\nthe other five centers was underway. This achievement of this sub-objective during this period is rated modest\r\nsince although the pre-service teacher training greatly exceeded its target, the in-service teacher training lagged,\r\nalong with CAFOP renovation.\r\n\r\n46. Restructuring 1-2. Key PDO-level indicators had improved and most met their targets: (i) the number of\r\nadditional qualified primary teachers as a result of project interventions had previously met its target, which was\r\nrevised upward from 7,500 to 15,200; (ii) the number of students enrolled in “collèges de proximité” constructed\r\nby the project stood at 2,400 (against the target of 2,400); and (iii) 15,020 teachers were trained in service\r\n(meeting the original target of 15,000) by the time of the second restructuring supporting a substantial rating for\r\nthis period.\r\n\r\n47. Restructuring 2- Project close. The pace of implementation of most activities accelerated and most targets\r\nwere either met or exceeded. For pre-service training, the original target was 7,500 which was revised upward to\r\n\r\n\r\n 16Between Restructurings 1 and 2, because of exchange rate changes with the U.S. dollar, the project gained substantial resources of\r\n CFAF 4.05 billion (US$6.9 million equivalent). While this was beneficial to the project, the measured disbursement rate was only 78.14\r\n percent rather than the 92.70 percent without the exchange rate gain.\r\n\r\n Page 19 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n15,200 teachers. The actual achieved was 24,000 teachers (or 157.9 percent of the revised target). The number\r\nof in-service teachers trained increased to 16,797 exceeding the upward-revised target of 16,500 (originally\r\n15,000). These achievements allowed for the student-teacher ratio to remain 43:1 meaning that the increase in\r\nteachers had kept up with the increased demand for schooling. With respect to the school feeding program, as\r\nexplained previously, since a policy was not adopted by the Government (a provision in the Grant Agreement),\r\nthe school feeding activity was dropped and instead this sub-component supported health related items and\r\nactivities (micronutrients, deworming, handwashing, etc.) As a result, the ICR lowers the sub-rating from high to\r\nsubstantial for this sub-objective.17\r\n\r\n48. Overall: The main PDO-level indicator supporting achievement of this sub-objective was the increase in\r\nqualified primary teachers – the target of which was exceeded. The increase in qualified teachers helped meet\r\nthe objective of improved learning conditions for students. At the same time, however, there was a large influx\r\nof students (due to the policy of universal education), which required revising the targeted student-teacher ratio\r\n(intermediate results indicator) from 40:1 to 43:1 a ratio that was almost met (43.6:1). Without the large number\r\nof additional teachers, this ratio would have been significantly higher and conditions for learning less favorable.\r\nAnother important consideration for the overall rating is that the RF likely underestimated the number of\r\nbeneficiaries because that estimate was only explicitly linked to the number of classrooms (40 students times the\r\n1,267 classrooms or 50,680 beneficiaries). The fact that there was a much larger increase in trained teachers than\r\ntargeted translates into a higher number of beneficiaries than just those being taught in new and rehabilitated\r\nclassrooms. Though that number was not estimated, in all likelihood the original target number of beneficiaries,\r\n60,000, was surpassed.\r\n\r\n49. Also contributing to the improved learning environment was the supply of textbooks, updated school\r\ncurriculum and adherence to that curriculum by better trained teachers. An important intermediate results\r\nindicator was the provision of more than 1 million textbooks (exceeding the target of 1 million), which were\r\ndistributed to the schools. This contributed to an improved teaching and learning environment, particularly since\r\nrecently trained teachers were more inclined to actually use the distributed texts.\r\n\r\nSub-objective 3: Restoring and strengthening institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education-1. Modest;\r\n2. Substantial; 3. Substantial—Overall: Substantial\r\n\r\n50. The Project made a strong contribution to the improvement of the quality of national education data\r\nand its timely availability. Since 2012 school statistical surveys have been fully supported through the domestic\r\nbudget and education statistics are regularly produced during the academic year. This is an important\r\nachievement as it informs MENETFP’s planning related to education service delivery. In addition, data quality\r\n(including its completeness) has improved, allowing the production of specific analyses on teacher deployment\r\nand sector efficiency. This was made possible by the fact that: (i) the project encouraged the government to\r\ninclude this activity in the Government budget and (ii) the project supported the implementation of the national\r\nstrategy for the production of key statistics.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 17 The PIU could not confirm whether the cancellation of the nutrition activity hurt the learning environment because it could not\r\n determine whether nutrition was provided from another source. In addition, while the project measured enrollment, it did not measure\r\n attendance. An impact evaluation was not carried out given difficulties in carrying out random sampling during project preparation\r\n\r\n Page 20 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n51. Pre-restructuring 1: In terms of institutional capacity, the pace of attainment of most targets was delayed:\r\n(i) The learning assessment system was established but its utility was still rated 1 out of 3; (ii) only 556 heads of\r\nDREN, school directors, inspectors and pedagogical advisors had been trained, against the Project target of 3,000\r\nwhich was to be achieved by project year 3. Thus, the rating for this sub-objective is modest for this time period.\r\n\r\n52. Restructuring 1-2: By the time of the second restructuring, 93 percent of heads of DREN, school directors,\r\ninspectors and pedagogical advisers had been trained, most other project outputs were completed and the\r\nmajority of outcomes were achieved, and exceeded, in some cases. The number of COGES trained reached 4,790,\r\nwell in excess of the target of 3,000 meaning that 50 percent more school-based management committees\r\nbenefited from the EBESP than originally planned. The number of DRENs and regional staff trained increased to\r\n8,000, far in excess of the target of 3,000. The system for learning assessment at the primary level attained the\r\ntarget level of 3 and there was ‘Timely annual production of reliable school statistics’. Based on this performance\r\nthe achievement of this sub-objective during this period was high.\r\n\r\n53. Restructuring 2-Project close: All project indicators’ revised targets were met or exceeded for this sub-\r\nobjective. The PDO-level indicator to establish a learning assessment system at the primary level (scale of 3) was\r\nmet. This activity is evidence of a stronger institutional capacity because the MEN has a critical tool to determine\r\nwhere school performance is lagging. A score of 3 means that the assessment’s purpose is to measure overall\r\nstudent progress toward agreed goals, and that the assessment uses a representative sample of the target grades\r\nor age level. It also means that the data are analyzed and results are reported to policy -makers and/or the public,\r\nis carried out at least once every five years and produces results for student sub-groups: gender, urban/rural, and\r\ngeographic region. Capacity was also promoted through extensive training of heads of DREN, school directors and\r\nother staff. The original target was revised upward from 3,000 to 8,500 and was exceeded (with the total number\r\ntrained reaching 8,670) . The target of number of COGES trained was exceeded target (5,232 actual vs. 3,000\r\ntarget). While the indicator on the establishment and functioning of EMIS was formally dropped. Although this\r\nactivity did not materialize, much was achieved in establishing timely production of reliable data. Separate efforts\r\nto collect and report education sector data were successful resulting in a number of national publications of\r\neducation sector data. On balance the achievement of this sub-objective during this period is rated substantial.\r\n\r\n54. Overall: The project supported capacity-building at the school, regional and central levels. At the local\r\nlevel, as stated, the number of COGES trained was much greater than the end-of-project target. This is expected\r\nto have a positive impact on community participation and enhance accountability of teachers, school staff and\r\ncontractors who built or rehabilitated classrooms. The project also financed the training of 8,170 school heads of\r\nadministrative and pedagogic management of schools. At the regional level, the project supported the training of\r\n500 staff of inspectorates and regional directorates of education as well as the establishment of regional offices\r\nof General Inspectorate of Education, through equipment. At the central level, activities implemented by the\r\nproject include the training of six groups of staff from General Inspectorate of Education, Department of Finance,\r\nDepartment of Statistics and Planning, Department of Pedagogy and in-service training on various themes, such\r\nas M&E, results based management, planning, use of learning assessments, etc. A key output of the project is the\r\nautomatization of the deliberation of national exams as well as the setting up of a platform to archive, store and\r\nsecure all national certifications from primary to upper secondary education. The project helped the government\r\nundertake a national learning assessment for Grade 1 to Grade 3 in reading and mathematics. Following the\r\nassessment, the MEN changed the reading method by the introduction of the syllabic approach. With the project\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 21 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nthere was a strong emphasis on capacity building and the government has been able to continue implementing\r\nnational standardized student learning assessments in primary and secondary education. Remedial actions are\r\nalso designed and teachers trained but continued improvements are still needed. Cote d’Ivoire has successfully\r\ncollected, analyzed and published national education data, a vast improvement and significant achievement over\r\nthe relative absence of data in the post-crisis period, thus meeting the PDO-level indicator target. The statistics\r\nhave also been widely distributed in the form of pocket sized booklets. Though a comprehensive EMIS was not\r\nproduced, this is only a moderate shortcoming because it is mitigated by the improvements in education sector\r\ndata reporting.\r\n\r\n55. There were also positive impacts of the project that were not explicitly measured by the RF. Reforms\r\nsupported by EBESP were introduced in the education sector strategy (2016-2025), which will allow for\r\nconsolidation of project achievements. For example, the new model of lower secondary school in remote rural\r\nareas is being implemented by other development partners providing financing to the education sector, such as\r\nthe Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). The reform of initial teacher training led to the development of a\r\nnew curriculum, as well as changes in the governance of the training centers. Furthermore, with the support of\r\nthe project, sub-cycles in primary education have been created. With the community-based approach for\r\nconstruction in primary education, local communities were fully involved in the construction and maintenance of\r\nthe new infrastructure, in particular, with the local water management committees they are highly committed to\r\npreserving the new system of potable water, which is benefitting participating schools as well as surrounding\r\nvillages. There were some temporary labor benefits because under the community approach, local contractors\r\nthat were hired used local labor.\r\n\r\n56. The evidence thus supports an overall substantial rating for this sub-objective.\r\n\r\nJustification of Overall Efficacy Rating\r\n\r\n57. The overall efficacy rating is Substantial. Following the analysis provided above, Table 4 provides the sub-\r\nobjective ratings for each interval.\r\n\r\n Table 4: Summary of Overall Efficacy Rating\r\n\r\n Sub-objective\r\n Period Restoring and Rehabilitating and Restoring and Strengthening\r\n Increasing Access Improving Institutional capacity to\r\n to Basic Teaching/Learning Delivery Quality Basic\r\n Education Conditions Education\r\n1: Pre-Restructuring Modest Modest Modest\r\n2: Restructuring 1 – 2 Substantial Substantial Substantial\r\n3: Restructuring 2 – Project close Substantial Substantial Substantial\r\n Overall Substantial Substantial Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n58. Despite the challenges in establishing accurate target values for some of the project indicators and\r\nactivities initially given that the project was prepared under emergency conditions as well as some challenges\r\nwith undertaking the school feeding activity and establishing a fully-fledged EMIS, the Project substantially\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 22 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n achieved its stated objectives. What began as an emergency project, evolved into an operation which provided\r\n key inputs to provide quality education in Cote d’Ivoire and to strengthen capacity to manage and to deliver\r\n effective education services in the medium- to long-term. In addition to providing a number of critical inputs into\r\n a damaged system following the crisis, the Project supported several institutional and innovative changes in the\r\n education sector (e.g., collèges de proximité, strengthening community-based construction, etc.) In addition to\r\n ensuring that the education system could accommodate the expected increase in enrollment as a result of\r\n government policy, the Project also provided training to a larger number of teachers than initially planned – a\r\n critical input to the quality of education provided. The Project was also instrumental in rebuilding the Ministry’s\r\n capacity to provide such training and strengthened its capacity to carry out regular learning assessments at the\r\n primary level. These contributions are likely to continue to be useful in informing decision-making and guiding\r\n policies and efforts to further strengthen the quality and delivery of education services.\r\n\r\nC. EFFICIENCY\r\n Assessment of Efficiency and Rating\r\n 59. Efficiency over the life of the Project is rated substantial. There were some initial delays in\r\n implementation including those related to the identification of construction sites and to develop local\r\n communities’ capacity to support this and other activities. This resulted in the need to extend the closing date\r\n from the original three-year time frame (which had been mandated by GPE). Despite this, the vast majority of\r\n project outputs and outcomes were either achieved or exceeded by the project closing date and approximately\r\n 99 percent of the grant was disbursed by the project closing date. Available evidence as presented below points\r\n to substantial efficiency gains realized over the life of the Project.\r\n\r\n Economic Analysis\r\n\r\n 60. Analysis of the project’s quantifiable financial benefits show the returns to education to be high. The\r\n financial benefits estimate takes into account the incremental income that will be earned by children enrolled in\r\n project-built classrooms. Income flows are based on wages expected to be earned by the students during their\r\n working years, minus the opportunity costs (forgone earnings). The salary corresponds to the average wage of\r\n workers with primary and lower secondary education. The assumed lifetime of primary classrooms is 5 years and\r\n 10 years for lower secondary classrooms. Lastly, given that the total wage income depends on the unemployment\r\n rate, the net present value (NPV) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) of the project are estimated using the\r\n unemployment rates for primary and lower secondary education, estimated using 2013 Enquête Nationale sur la\r\n Situation de lEmploi et du Travail des Enfants (ENSETE) data. In terms of investment, the analysis takes into\r\n consideration the whole cost of the project, depreciation and recurrent cost of education in primary and lower\r\n secondary education. With these parameters, the NPV is US$151.8 million. The economic rate of return (ERR) is\r\n 27.5 percent. The appraisal did not estimate an ERR for the project.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 23 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Table 5: Parameters and Returns from Economic Analysis\r\n\r\n Variables / Assumptions Values\r\n\r\n Number of direct beneficiaries 278,400\r\n\r\n Activity time (years) 20\r\n\r\n Average annual salary, primary education (US$) 1,327\r\n\r\n Lifetime of primary education classrooms (year) 5-10 years\r\n\r\n Annual unit cost (recurrent) (US$) 265-556\r\n\r\n Annual opportunity cost (US$) 1,184 – 1,421\r\n\r\n Discount rate (percent) 15\r\n\r\n Project cost, depreciation and recurrent costs (I, US$) 87,169,291\r\n\r\n NPV (US$) 151,799,751\r\n\r\n Economic rate of return 27.5%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n61. There were also several positive developments that increased implementation efficiency. The project\r\napproach promoted efficiency gains in public expenditures on capital investments. All financial audits were of\r\nunqualified opinion providing evidence that resources were used in judicious manner and for intended purposes.\r\nWhen the policy required for the school feeding activity did not materialize (and a robust tracking mechanism\r\nwas not established), the Bank redirected resources to activities which were strongly tied to the PDO and were\r\nvalue-for-money could be better assured. The introduction of the new model for lower secondary schools,\r\n“collèges de proximité” in rural areas resulted in lower student unit costs with the introduction of bivalent\r\nteachers (teachers trained to teach two subjects). In addition to increasing efficiency, this also increased equity.\r\nThe government is using this low-cost model for the expansion of the supply of secondary education in rural\r\nareas at lower costs using this model -- and parents in rural areas will no longer have to bear any additional costs\r\nto enroll their children in distant secondary schools. Support to community-based construction led to important\r\nefficiency gains with the unit cost of classroom construction being US$12,000 – significantly lower than the cost\r\nusing the traditional approach of approximately US$26,000. Annex 4 provides additional information on\r\nefficiency gains realized under the life of the Project and lists some positive externalities associated with some\r\nof the project-supported activities.\r\n\r\n62. Early in the project there were implementation delays in project implementation and slow progress\r\nresulting in a modest rate of implementation efficiency during that time. While 54 percent of the project\r\nproceeds were disbursed by the first restructuring, a number of quantitative indicators were below half of their\r\ntargets. Project outputs lagged behind disbursements in part because advances from the project were made to\r\nschool management committees upon the signing of financing agreement for school/classrooms construction,\r\nwhile the actual works were delayed. The delays were also because of the prolonged time required to identify\r\n\r\n Page 24 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the sites and to develop local communities’ capacity. Once going, however, the community approach to\r\n classroom construction worked well; it saved money and achieved a high level of satisfaction according to\r\n beneficiaries interviewed during the ICR. The CAFOP model also alleviated the constraint in training teachers by\r\n offering a model where teacher trainees did not have to be boarded, thus saving budget resources and time of\r\n the student teachers.\r\n\r\n 63. The overall rating for efficiency is substantial. Implementation efficiency began as modest but then\r\n recovered to a substantial level. It also validated the community approach to school construction and the CAFOP\r\n model for teacher training. With the strong economic returns to education, the efficiency demonstrated by the\r\n project was substantial.\r\n\r\nD. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING\r\n 64. The overall outcome rating is moderately satisfactory. Based on the project’s performance during the\r\n pre- and post-restructuring periods, weighted by the portion of the grant disbursed at each interval, the overall\r\n outcome score is 3.92 (rounded to 4) or moderately satisfactory (Table 6). This rating is also consistent with the\r\n substantial efficiency rating and the high relevance rating. All PDO-level indicator targets were met, five\r\n intermediate results targets were met, and one almost met (Table 7). Two indicators were dropped because\r\n they were no longer relevant to the project’s activities. Efficacy during the pre-restructuring period was modest\r\n because the initial project implementation period experienced significant delays in the implementation of most\r\n project’s activities, but the project implementation caught up rapidly after a few years. Under the project, the\r\n majority of indicator targets were achieved, or exceeded, providing evidence of achievement of the PDO.\r\n\r\n Table 6: Outcome Ratings Calculation\r\n\r\n Period Efficacy Relevance Efficiency % Outcome by Weighted\r\n disbursed interval Score\r\n\r\n Pre-RP 1- Modest High 54% Mod. Unsat.=3 1.62\r\n 08/05/2015\r\n Substantial\r\n RP 1-RP 2- Substantial High 29% Satisfactory=5 1.45\r\n 10/17/2016\r\n\r\n Post-RP 2-Close- Substantial High 17% Satisfactory=5 0.85\r\n 08/31/2107\r\n\r\n Total Overall Substantial High Substantial 100% Mod. Satisfact. 3.92\r\n Score\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 25 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Table 7: Summary of Achievement Final Results Indicators\r\n Achieved Mostly Not Dropped Total\r\n Achieved achieved\r\n Component/PDO\r\n\r\n PDO 5 0 0 0 5\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n Comp. 1- Improve Access to Basic 1 0 0 0 1\r\n Education Services\r\n\r\n Comp. 2-Improve Quality of Teaching 2 1 0 1 4\r\n and Learning\r\n\r\n Comp. 3-Strengthen Institutional 2 0 0 1 3\r\n Capacity\r\n\r\n Total 10 1 0 2 13\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nE. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY)\r\n Gender\r\n\r\n 65. The project introduced measures to promote girls’ education and community participation in schools in\r\n areas most affected by the conflict. These measures complemented initiatives to foster state/society compact in\r\n the Fourth Economic Governance and Recovery Grant financed by the Bank. The project design recognized the\r\n fact that 67 localities had under-enrollment of girls and sought to address the issue through several measures.\r\n One was to provide incentives for female enrollment and for girls’ academic performance. The incentive provided\r\n to girls through awards for academic achievement sent a strong signal to girls and communities that their\r\n educational achievement was of high value. Another important initiative promoting girls’ education was a\r\n sensitization campaign implemented by non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the Club des Mères d’élève\r\n fille (CMEF) (Mother – Student-Daughters Club)—which helped sensitize mothers in the role they could play in\r\n ensuring that their daughters are educated. In one school in Bodokro where this initiative was started there were\r\n fewer girls at the beginning of the year, but over the course of the year there were more girls than boys, better\r\n reflecting the population of the village. Project-wide, the target of 45 percent enrollment for females was met\r\n by the project, with 47.5 percent actually achieved. There was also a study conducted under the project on the\r\n determinants of pregnancies during schooling. The study’s recommendations contributed to a campaign to\r\n reduce pregnancies among school-age girls.\r\n\r\n 66. The “collèges de proximité” are expected to have significant impact on gender disparity and early\r\n pregnancy. Lower secondary school is key for girls to acquire life skills and avoid early pregnancy. In terms of\r\n gender disparities, overall there are issues in access to secondary education as the gender parity index in gross\r\n enrollment in secondary education was only 0.71 in 2014. This index is likely to be lower in rural areas because\r\n girls are more likely to be employed as housekeepers, rural workers and in trade compared to boys. Moreover,\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 26 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the importance of the distance between schools and dwellings is a serious discouraging factor for girls for whom\r\n it is risky to travel long distances.\r\n\r\n Institutional Strengthening\r\n\r\n\r\n 67. The project contributed to an increase in institutional capacity, particularly in the areas of teacher and\r\n school officials’ training, and production for reliable sector data. The support to CAFOPs helped create an\r\n institution that could train and certify much-needed teachers. Support to MEN helped build capacity to develop\r\n and publish data needed for transparency and planning in the education sector. The project focused also on\r\n regional capacity with resources allocated to training for heads of DREN, school directors, inspectors and\r\n pedagogical advisors.\r\n\r\n 68. There was also institutional capacity building of the school-based management committees (COGES) to\r\n ensure success of the community approach. This led to generally good implementation with low cost and good\r\n quality of construction in building the 3- or 6-classroom school buildings. Beneficiaries reported in ICR field\r\n interviews that the experience of using the community-based approach helped bring the community closer\r\n together and build a sense of common purpose. This approach is now part of MEN’s model for classroom\r\n construction. It is expected that the ministry will make wider use of this approach in the coming years.\r\n\r\n\r\n Mobilizing Private Sector Financing\r\n\r\n Not applicable\r\n\r\n Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity\r\n\r\n 69. The project responded to the emergency situation under OP/BP 8.00 with funds to address the\r\n education sector’s most critical needs. The funding supported institutional and technical activities to help\r\n restore government capacity in education sector management at the national, regional and local levels, which\r\n was damaged during the crisis. The project focused on areas most affected by the conflict and introduced\r\n measures to promote girls’ education. Therefore, the beneficiaries were among the poorer segments of the\r\n population. Initiatives such as the “collèges de proximité” were aimed at rural areas and are likely to have helped\r\n reduced educational and social disparities between rural and urban areas.\r\n\r\n Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts\r\n\r\n Not applicable\r\n\r\nIII. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME\r\n\r\n A.KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION\r\n 70. The Project’s objectives were aligned with the Government’s strategic agenda as outlined in the\r\n Medium-Term Action Plan (2012-2014) and the President’s Emergency Recovery Plan (Plan Présidentiel\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 27 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n d’Urgence) which included education as a national priority. The original objectives of the Project were also\r\n consistent with the CPS (2010-2013) which emphasized the importance of “continued progress in crisis recovery\r\n and improved prospects for sustained peace”, as well as “improved basic social service delivery”. (Additional\r\n details can be found in the relevance of PDO section).\r\n\r\n 71. The original design was informed by findings from the Education Country Status Report (RESEN)\r\n developed in 2009, which highlighted the main challenges for the education system in Cote d’Ivoire. The major\r\n issues identified included limited and inequitable access to primary and secondary education resulting mostly\r\n from supply-side constraints, poor quality and low internal efficiency (high repetition and dropout rates), low\r\n institutional capacity for systems management, and inadequate funding and sub-optimal allocation and\r\n management of resources, particularly at the school level.\r\n\r\n 72. The project design benefited from lessons learned from other projects in Cote d’Ivoire and in other\r\n countries. One lesson was to mainstream project implementation for better results, unlike for the previous\r\n education project, the implementation of the EBESP was mainstreamed within the MEN and used the existing\r\n MENETFP structures. The design also considered lessons from similar projects in other countries. These lessons\r\n included the importance of capacity building to enhance community participation in project implementation, the\r\n need to strengthen M&E, as well as the need to set up relevant incentives to enhance girls’ attendance. In the\r\n case of M&E, while the EBESP tried to improve this function, it was not until late in the project that capacity was\r\n present in the form of a qualified M&E officer. The Project’s results chain was clear insofar as the activities and\r\n objectives supported across each of the Project’s components were logically linked to the overall objectives, as\r\n described in Table 1. However, the original Project design did not fully take into consideration the time required\r\n to: (i) identify the sites for classroom construction and the classrooms to be rehabilitated; and (ii) train local\r\n communities for school construction.\r\n\r\nB. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION\r\n\r\n 73. For the earlier stages of implementation, the administration of the project was affected by changes\r\n in the team at the Ministry and time needed to gain an understanding of the project. At the same time\r\n administrative capacity needed to be rebuilt, which took time and energy for the Bank team to support on a day\r\n to day basis.\r\n\r\n 74. Other factors contributing to the slow implementation during the early years of the project include\r\n weak project management and some delays in establishing a fully functional M&E system. The original project\r\n coordinator did not have, nor did he acquire adequate technical engineering expertise to oversee the building of\r\n classrooms and COFEP. Consequently, implementation was slow, and promised deadlines for completion were\r\n not realistic. For the Project team, the Bank raised many times to the Government the need to change the Project\r\n Coordinator, but there was resistance from the Ministry. The decision was made after a meeting with the Prime\r\n Minister.\r\n\r\n 75. After the second extension of the closing date and the change of key staff of the PIU in September\r\n 2016, implementation improved rapidly. Key members of the Project team, including the coordinator, were\r\n replaced. The new team added an engineer to better manage the classroom construction. It also updated the\r\n project accounting system. This contributed to a rapid increase of the disbursement rate with the registration of\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 28 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n all commitments. A key success factor was that the new project coordinator had experience in a Bank project\r\n that had recently closed and could apply that knowledge to improve implementation of the EBESP.\r\n\r\n 76. Achievement of the PDO and implementation under the Project were both upgraded to Moderately\r\n Satisfactory (MS). The project experienced a significant improvement of its overall management, after the\r\n extension of the closing date by 11 months to August 31, 2017 in September 2016. The project disbursement\r\n rate has increased from 54 percent at the first restructuring, to 79.13 percent at the second restructuring and\r\n was fully disbursed at project closure.\r\n\r\n 77. Project financing was significantly affected by the increase in the exchange rate of the US dollar\r\n against the CFA Franc. The project benefited from additional resources of 4.05 billion CFA Franc in comparison\r\n to what was originally planned. Although it allowed the project to cover some of the financing gap for\r\n construction, for instance, this represented a challenge, as it contributed unexpectedly to lower the project\r\n disbursement rate, compared to what it would had been without the increase in the exchange rate.\r\n\r\n IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME\r\n\r\nA. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E)\r\n Rating: Substantial\r\n M&E Design\r\n\r\n 78. The project RF captured project activities and linked them with the PDO and components reasonably\r\n well. The six PDO-level indicators and the intermediate results indicators covered access to basic education\r\n (numbers of classrooms and beneficiaries), quality of learning and teaching environment (teachers trained and\r\n student-teacher ratio) and improved sector capacity (reliable statistics, system for learning assessment and\r\n trained regional staff and school management committees). The indicators were feasible to be measured and\r\n did not pose any undue challenge in their monitoring. One omission was the measurement of school\r\n attendance. This was important because the project initially had planned to provide school feeding which was\r\n viewed as an important incentive to attend school. The omission of an attendance indicator precluded a\r\n determination of whether attendance was affected by cancellation of this activity. The project’s design itself\r\n promoted M&E by the government. The project’s support to national M&E capacity in the production of\r\n education statistics was beyond the project M&E, and aimed at facilitating policy analysis for the sector.\r\n Specifically, the project supported the establishment of a directorate which carries out learning assessments on\r\n a periodic basis, a system for monitoring teacher performance and to record inspectors’ feedback, and a secure\r\n system for tracking/archiving examination results. Further, the Project has supported the production of annual\r\n statistical yearbooks since 2013. Each of these were useful in guiding efforts to improve sector performance.\r\n\r\n M&E Implementation\r\n\r\n 79. There was regular reporting on project activities, but it was not until a new M&E officer was in place,\r\n the team was able to more fully track PDO and intermediate results targets. M&E implementation was weak\r\n in the earlier years of the project, mainly because the M&E officer was not adequately qualified to carry out the\r\n duties. To compensate for this weakness, additional human resources were allocated to produce a detailed mid-\r\n\r\n Page 29 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nterm review (MTR) which was carried out in August 2014. The MTR laid out detailed progress of the project’s\r\nactivities and identified areas where implementation needed to improve. In addition, the restructurings also\r\nwere key to project M&E. The first restructuring included a good stocktaking of results indicators. When the\r\nproject team was overhauled in September 2016 with new management, including a new M&E officer, project\r\nresults monitoring improved. The results framework was fully supported and all indicators were regularly\r\nupdated. The RF did not undergo significant revisions (though school attendance should have been measured),\r\nattesting to its stability from the beginning. Quarterly progress reports provided detailed tracking of all project\r\nactivities. These reports also cited problems with implementation and recommended measures for their\r\nresolution (for example see quarterly report for April 1 to June 30, 2017)18. The support to the national M&E\r\nsystem for MEN was successful, resulting in timely reporting of reliable education statistics, including “School\r\nStatistics 2016-2017” in both English and French.\r\n\r\nM&E Utilization\r\n\r\n80. The M&E function was useful for managing the project, particularly for the three restructurings. The\r\nMTR provided a good quality review of the project’s progress, and led, with a slight lag, to a beneficial\r\nrestructuring. Project M&E provided critical inputs to the decisions made in the first restructuring and was\r\ncritical to restructuring and management of the project thereafter. As M&E improved, monitoring data and\r\nregular reporting later in the project helped determine what was required to ensure project relevance and\r\nimproved implementation through the second and third restructurings, in particular, adjustments to the\r\ncomponents and RF.\r\n\r\nJustification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E\r\n\r\n81. With design rated substantial, implementation modest and utilization substantial, the overall rating for\r\nthe quality of M&E is substantial.\r\n\r\nB. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE\r\n82. Financial Management (FM) is rated Moderately Satisfactory. Early in the project FM capacity issues\r\narose, but even then, annual audit reports were received on time, revealed no irregularities, and were of\r\nunqualified opinion. Interim unaudited financial reports were also submitted in a timely manner and in\r\naccordance with Bank procedures. In instances in which minor issues were identified, corrective actions were\r\nenacted by the Bank and the Government. Bank supervision missions were conducted regularly and where\r\nrequired, appropriate mitigation measures were put in place. The final ISR and the ICR rate FM moderately\r\nsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n83. Procurement performance is rated Satisfactory. From the beginning of the project to the project\r\nclose, procurement performance remained strong with 725 bidding process completed out of 726 planned\r\n(nearly a 100 percent execution of the plan). The payment time for invoices improved during the course of the\r\nproject averaging 35 days on average before the second restructuring to 15 days thereafter. In addition, the\r\nfinal bid amounts were aligned to the estimated amounts in the project procurement plan. Initial delays were\r\nnot related to any procurement bottlenecks. During implementation, the Project complied with the\r\n\r\n 18 Rapport Trimestriel (01 avril-30 juin 2017), Don IDA No.TF12500, Juillet 2017.\r\n\r\n Page 30 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n procurement procedures and there were no procurement issues. The final ISR rated procurement for the project\r\n satisfactory.\r\n\r\n 84. Environmental and social safeguards are rated Moderately Unsatisfactory . Civil works commenced\r\n without completed environmental studies and thus and Environmental Audit and a Social Audit were conducted.\r\n The main issue identified was that communities needed to be compensated for the land/sites they were offering\r\n for schools because these were government schools. Both environmental and social studies were done and\r\n actions plans developed to reverse the situation, i.e., appropriate compensation from the government to the\r\n communities, were established. Still, the action plans were not implemented with the appropriate sequence,\r\n with the environmental and social assessments done prior. Rather civil works continued although the\r\n Environmental and Social Impact Assessment were not completed. Consequently, the rating in the final ISR for\r\n environmental and social safeguards and this ICR is Moderately Unsatisfactory.\r\n\r\n\r\nC. BANK PERFORMANCE\r\n Quality at Entry\r\n\r\n 85. Moderately Satisfactory. The Bank worked with the education sector counterparts to design a project\r\n of high relevance to the urgent needs in the education sector in an emergency context that ultimately required\r\n only moderate design and results framework changes to complete. There were significant the challenges posed\r\n in a post-crisis context, including the lack of good data for setting some of the indicator targets that could have\r\n been available had it been possible to conduct a full needs assessment. Despite these challenges, the original\r\n results framework was relevant to both the project activities and assessment of the PDO. One shortcoming was\r\n the underestimation of the cost of rehabilitating classrooms and of identifying classrooms that actually could be\r\n rehabilitated. But this was a minor shortcoming that was remedied when school rehabilitation targets were\r\n revised and the government compensated for the reduction in the number of schools rehabilitated.\r\n\r\n 86. The project’s objectives, as further defined by indicator targets were ambitious in light of the original\r\n three-year implementation period, which may be viewed as a quality at entry shortcoming . Two extensions of\r\n the project’s closing date were needed to complete implementation during which most of original targets were\r\n reached. These restructurings maintained project relevance, but also were somewhat of a reduction in project\r\n scope mainly because of the cancellation of the school feeding program and of the EMIS. The former change was\r\n forced in compliance with the GPEF Grant agreement. The latter change may have been too ambitious in that\r\n unifying data platforms in a post-conflict context was not realistic. The latter shortcoming was mitigated by the\r\n fact that data collection and reporting improved considerably from the post-crisis status, but that the data\r\n platforms (schools, human resources, pupils enrolled) were not yet consolidated under a formal EMIS.\r\n\r\n Quality of Supervision\r\n\r\n 87. Moderately Satisfactory. The Bank conducted regular supervision from the field and supported three\r\n restructurings which improved project implementation and achievement of the PDOs. The changing of the\r\n project team at the ministry was key to concluding the project successfully. Several key people had successfully\r\n implemented another Bank-supported project that had recently closed. This change of the team might have been\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 31 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n carried out earlier, rather than simply wait for the contracts to expire. However, restructurings were appropriate\r\n both in terms of component adjustments and modifications to the results framework. The extension of the Project\r\n closing date had also allowed further progress on intermediate-level indicators, many of which met or exceeded\r\n their targets. The restructuring papers and ISRs were complete and discussed issues clearly. FM and procurement\r\n were well supervised with good compliance with Bank requirements. Safeguards were rated moderately\r\n unsatisfactory however because an assessment needed to be carried out regarding community school sites.\r\n Though the issue was resolved with compensation to the communities, it was a shortcoming on the Bank’s part\r\n not to have ensured that the assessment took place prior to starting civil works.\r\n\r\n 88. The Bank made the difficult decision to cancel the school feeding program, though it was forced by the\r\n Grant agreement. The school feeding program was cancelled because the appropriate mechanisms were not in\r\n place to adequately monitor how contributions from school families are spent for this activity. The Government\r\n was to have created such a mechanism but did not do so. The team was concerned by the equity aspect of\r\n requiring family contributions and related reputational risk for the Bank. Consequently, the activity was dropped.\r\n The Bank might have done a better job mitigating this policy by arranging for some back up program for school\r\n nutrition. School nutrition was highlighted in the context section of the PAD and was linked to attendance.\r\n However, the project only measured enrollment, not attendance.\r\n\r\n Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance\r\n 89. Moderately Satisfactory. Both quality at entry and supervision are rated moderately satisfactory based on\r\n reasonably good performance with moderate shortcomings, and so the overall rating is moderately satisfactory,\r\n which is also consistent with the outcome rating.\r\n\r\nD. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME\r\n 90. Moderate. The general security situation has improved with the number of IDPs falling from a peak\r\n of 2.3 million in 2011 to 300,000 by the end of 2016 ( http://www.internal-displacement.org). A number of\r\n important measures under the project will help reduce any risk to development outcome going forward. One\r\n measure is the community approach for building and rehabilitating classrooms. With the community-based\r\n approach for construction in primary education, local communities were fully involved in the supervision of the\r\n construction and a mechanism for maintenance of the new infrastructure was established with the Comité\r\n Technique de Mise en Oeuvre (CTMO) for each COGES\r\n\r\n 91. In particular through the local water management committees they are firmly committed to\r\n preserve the new system of potable water, which benefits participating schools as well as surrounding villages.\r\n This approach has led to cost savings which provides incentives for sustainability in efficiency in the use of\r\n education funds (see Box 1 for an example of successful application of the community approach). The reform of\r\n initial teacher training has led to the development of a new curriculum, as well as changes in the governance of\r\n the training centers. The overall reduction in political turmoil has also created an environment where educational\r\n investments can expand, as shown in the FY 2016-19 CPF. The upcoming Education Services Delivery\r\n Enhancement project will follow up in several areas of EBESP including curriculum content in primary education,\r\n teacher training and the community approach for construction. It is hoped that the government will adopt this\r\n approach on a wider basis for future school construction.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 32 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Box 1: Use of the expertise of the MCTOs by the heads of the decentralized communities\r\n\r\n In the Guenon Region, the village of Bagouho benefited from the construction of three classrooms\r\n using the community approach. The construction was exceptionally well supervised by the CTMO\r\n team with a quick and effective result. Having observed the good result from this team, the\r\n Regional Council of Guemon requested the same team to help him to supervise another\r\n construction site and to complete the building of three more classrooms whose work had been\r\n halted for quite a while. These classrooms are now satisfactorily completed.\r\n\r\n\r\n 92. The “collèges de proximité” in rural areas, the CAFOPs and the CMEF are expected to promote\r\n sustainability and are receiving broader support. The “collèges de proximité” will help achieve an increase in\r\n access to lower secondary schools. During the project, this model achieved lower student unit costs which\r\n allowed the government to increase the supply for secondary education services in rural areas. The low student\r\n unit cost is a combined result of the introduction of bivalent teachers, the adaptation of curriculum content to\r\n five blocks of disciplines and the changes in teacher training. With the expansion of this new model the\r\n government is also expected to stimulate the demand from parents in rural areas who will no longer have to pay\r\n additional costs to enroll their children in distant secondary schools after completion of primary school. This new\r\n model of lower secondary schools in remote rural areas has been adopted by the French Development Agency\r\n (Agence francaise de developpement - AFD), MCC, Japanese Aid Agency (JICA) and the U.S. Agency for\r\n international Development (USAID). CAFOPs contribute to sustainability because they also offer a lower cost\r\n option to train teachers because the teachers are not boarded at the training facility. CAFOPs have also attracted\r\n support from the MCC. The CMEF has created a supportive structure to help maintain and increase girls’\r\n enrollment in school.\r\n\r\n 93. The Project emphasized capacity-building at all levels of the education system in an effort to\r\n promote skills transfer and sustainable development of the system. The Project supported the continued\r\n development of statistical capacity within the central ministry while it also worked to encourage the government\r\n to secure continued funding and resources from the national budget to finance the yearly production of statistical\r\n data for the sector (statistical yearbook). Along with this, the Project also supported the development of a\r\n national strategy for statistics production. In addition to this, the Project’s support to the establishment of a\r\n directorate in charge of evaluations (with an autonomous budget), the development of a system for monitoring\r\n teachers and recording inspectors’ findings, and to archive examination results – are likely to be useful tools to\r\n guide decision-making in the sector moving forward.,\r\n\r\n\r\nV. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS\r\n\r\n 94. Lesson 1: Ingredients in improved project management include: knowledge of Bank operations,\r\n regular communication with the project team, and a willingness to respond to issues arising in the project. The\r\n EBESP implementation struggled for several years precisely because of the lack of these factors and improved\r\n substantially when a new core of the team was introduced. One action of the new team was not to renew the\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 33 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n contract of the engineering team which had not performed satisfactorily in advancing the construction of\r\n classrooms. Key members of the new team were taken from the Post-Conflict Assistance Project.\r\n\r\n 95. Lesson 2: An audit of the pre-service teacher training can form a critical basis for effective reform if\r\n it covers all stages of the process. The education sector audit financed prior to the project was key in providing\r\n details for the recruitment, training and development of competences and all the way to certification. The\r\n important thing was for the audit to cover the whole process of teacher development so that all the pieces of\r\n the reform fit together.\r\n\r\n 96. Lesson 3: Decentralized (regional) teacher training is a model that can save money and lower the\r\n cost of pre-service teacher training. A lot of teacher training includes boarding at the training facility. This might\r\n be good for a fuller emersion experience, but it is costly because the facility must board the students and it lowers\r\n capacity because lodging replaces classrooms. The capacity constraint is severe in Cote d’Ivoire and the CAFOP\r\n model helped ease the constraint.\r\n\r\n 97. Lesson 4: Tracking textbook delivery at the central level is a good way to ensure that the right\r\n number of textbooks is delivered to the Regions when there are multiple suppliers and funders. In other\r\n projects, there were instances of regions misreporting the numbers of textbooks received. This risk can lead to\r\n over-supply and profiting from the sale of textbooks which are supposed to be provided free of charge. In\r\n addition, the textbooks financed by the project (1,000,270) had cover stamp prohibiting any sale of the textbook.\r\n\r\n 98. Lesson 5: In the case of an emergency project, it is important that the project design has activities\r\n that are ‘ready to go.’ The EBESP was partially successful in this in that it identified and pursued the most urgent\r\n priorities, though it did not anticipate two difficulties. It was not anticipated that the school feeding program\r\n would run into difficulty as it was not yet settled whether beneficiary contributions would be eliminated or\r\n properly monitored (if not eliminated). As a result, there was no back up plan when school feeding fell through,\r\n though the team was able to effectively redirect funds to other activities critical to the aims of the sub-\r\n component and of the PDO more broadly. The other example was that of EMIS, as it was rather ambitious to\r\n expect that a consolidated data system could be achieved under an emergency project. That said, important\r\n progress was made in upgrading data collection and reporting for the education sector.\r\n\r\n 99. Lesson 6: The community approach used by EBESP is cost-effective in building local schools and it\r\n may have a positive impact on social cohesion. This approach lowered construction costs while also engaging\r\n the community which may have had gains in terms of strengthening community cohesion which can often be\r\n damaged as a result of conflict. The community approach also built capacity of the COGES which put the training\r\n provided by the EBESP to practical use. Field visits during the ICR mission to a number of villages in the eastern\r\n part of the project area, confirmed through interviews improvements in community cooperation in planning and\r\n building primary school classrooms.\r\n.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 34 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nA. RESULTS INDICATORS\r\n\r\nA.1 PDO Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n Objective/Outcome: Restoring and increasing access to basic education\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\n Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\n Number of additional Number 0.00 1500.00 1267.00 1272.00\r\n classrooms built or\r\n rehabilitated at the primary 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 22-Dec-2017\r\n level resulting from project\r\n interventions.\r\n\r\n Number of classrooms Number 0.00 500.00 267.00 270.00\r\n rehabilitated\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Mar-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of classrooms built Number 0.00 1000.00 1000.00 1002.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Jan-2017\r\n\r\n Comments (achievements against targets): Archived revised targets.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 35 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nDirect project beneficiaries Number 0.00 62400.00 53080.00 53280.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Mar-2017\r\n\r\n Female beneficiaries Percentage 0.00 45.00 45.00 47.50\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Mar-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n students enrolled in Number 0.00 2400.00 2400.00 2400.00\r\n colleges de proximite\r\n constructed by the project 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Jan-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n students enrolled in primary Number 0.00 60000.00 50680.00 50880.00\r\n schools built by the project\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Mar-2017\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Achieved revised targets. (DSPS/MEN for % of females)\r\n\r\n\r\nObjective/Outcome: Rehabilitating and improving the conditions for teaching and learning\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nTeachers recruited or trained Number 0.00 7500.00 15200.00 24000.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 30-Aug-2017\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Achieved and exceeded (157.9% of target).\r\n\r\n Page 36 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nNumber of additional Number 0.00 1500.00 1267.00 1272.00\r\nclassrooms built or\r\nrehabilitated at the primary 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 22-Dec-2017\r\nlevel resulting from project\r\ninterventions.\r\n\r\n Number of classrooms Number 0.00 500.00 267.00 270.00\r\n rehabilitated\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Mar-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of classrooms built Number 0.00 1000.00 1000.00 1002.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 31-Jan-2017\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Archived revised targets.\r\n\r\n\r\nObjective/Outcome: Restoring and strengthening intuitional capacity to deliver quality basic education\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nTimely annual production of Text No No Yes Yes\r\nreliable school statistics\r\n(yes/no) 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets):\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 37 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Unlinked Indicators\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\n Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\n System for learning Yes/No N N Y Y\r\n assessment at the primary\r\n level 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n Utility of the learning Number 0.00 0.00 3.00 3.00\r\n assessment system\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Achieved\r\n\r\n\r\nA.2 Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n Component: Restoring and increasing access to basic education services\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\n Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\n Number of girls receiving Number 0.00 450.00 450.00 463.00\r\n incentives\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments (achievements against targets):\r\n\r\n\r\n Component: Rehabilitating and improving the quality of teaching and learning\r\n Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\n\r\n Page 38 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Target Completion\r\nTeachers trained in-service Number 0.00 15000.00 16500.00 16797.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Target achieved (101.8%)\r\n\r\n\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nNumber of textbooks Number 0.00 1000000.00 1000000.00 1000270.00\r\npurchased and distributed\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Target achieved (100.2%)\r\n\r\n\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nStudent:teacher ratio in Text 42:1 40:1 43:1 43.63:1\r\npublicly financed schools\r\n(disaggregated by region) 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Target mostly achieved. The revised target reflected the increasing demand for education owing to the new\r\nuniversal education policy and the post crisis recovery.\r\n\r\n\r\nComponent: Restoring and strengthening institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\n\r\n Page 39 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Target Completion\r\nNumber of heads of DREN, Number 0.00 3000.00 8500.00 8670.00\r\nschool directors, inspectors\r\nand pedagogical advisors 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Aug-2017 23-Sep-2016\r\ntrained\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Target revised at 2nd restructuring and achieved (102.0%). (DPFC)\r\n\r\n\r\n Formally Revised Actual Achieved at\r\nIndicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target\r\n Target Completion\r\n\r\nNumber of COGES trained Number 0.00 3000.00 3000.00 5232.00\r\n\r\n 02-Apr-2012 02-Apr-2012 30-Sep-2016 23-Sep-2016\r\n\r\n\r\nComments (achievements against targets): Target exceeded (174.4%)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 40 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nB. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Objective/Outcome 1\r\n 1. Number of additional classrooms at the primary level resulting from\r\n project intervention, (i) built-1000 (ii) rehabilitated 500\r\n 2. Direct project beneficiaries: (i) students enrolled in primary schools\r\n Outcome Indicators\r\n built by the project (ii) students enrolled in collèges de proximité\r\n constructed by the project including total no;\r\n (iii) of which % of female (45%)\r\n 1. Number of girls receiving incentives\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n 2. Establishment of CMEF (not part of results framework)\r\n 1. 1,002 newly constructed classrooms\r\n 2. 267 rehabilitated classrooms\r\n Key Outputs by Component\r\n 3. 463 girls received academic awards for high performance on tests\r\n (linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 1)\r\n 4. 50,880 primary school enrollees\r\n 5. 2,400 secondary school enrollees\r\n\r\n Objective/Outcome 2\r\n\r\n 1. Number of additional qualified primary teachers resulting from\r\n Outcome Indicators\r\n project intervention\r\n 1.Teachers trained in-service\r\n 2. Number of textbooks purchased and distributed (cumulative)\r\n 3. Student-teacher ratio in publicly financed schools (disaggregated by\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators region)\r\n 4. Number of children receiving food supplies as a result of project\r\n intervention (indicator dropped in favor of health services)\r\n 5. Student-teacher ratio maintained at 43.6 vs. revised target of 43.0\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 41 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 1. 24,000 additional qualified primary teachers trained\r\n 2. 16,797 in-service teachers trained\r\nKey Outputs by Component\r\n 3. 60,000 children receiving basic health services (hand washing,\r\n(linked to the achievement of the Objective/Outcome 2)\r\n vitamins and de-warming, but not nutrition)\r\n 4. 1,000,267 textbooks distributed\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 42 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nA. TASK TEAM MEMBERS\r\n\r\nName Role\r\nPreparation\r\nHamoud A.W. Kamil Task Team Leader(s)\r\nSupervision/ICR\r\nHamoud A.W. Kamil Task Team Leader(s)\r\nPatrick Philippe Ramanantoanina Task Team Leader(s)\r\nMaurice Adoni Procurement Specialist(s)\r\nJean Charles Amon Kra Financial Management Specialist\r\nAbdoul Wahabi Seini Social Safeguards Specialist\r\nAndre Francis Ndem Team Member\r\nAbdoulaye Gadiere Environmental Safeguards Specialist\r\nHaoua Diallo Team Member\r\nAlison Marie Grimsland Team Member\r\nOumou Coulibaly Team Member\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nB. STAFF TIME AND COST\r\n\r\n\r\n Staff Time and Cost\r\nStage of Project Cycle\r\n No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs)\r\nPreparation\r\nFY11 0 59,455.67\r\nFY12 45.363 400,732.31\r\nFY13 0 1,592.37\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 43 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTotal 45.36 461,780.35\r\nSupervision/ICR\r\nFY12 0 0.00\r\nFY13 15.200 115,565.30\r\nFY14 26.007 195,945.24\r\nFY15 27.774 151,567.08\r\nFY16 53.763 253,719.10\r\nFY17 54.062 221,916.51\r\nFY18 1.922 43,395.26\r\nTotal 178.73 982,108.49\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 44 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Amount at Approval Actual at Project Percentage of Approval\r\nComponents\r\n (US$M) Closing (US$M) (US$M)\r\nComponent 1: Restoring and\r\nincreasing access to basic 20.0 19.25 96.25\r\neducation services\r\nComponent 2: Rehabilitating\r\nand improving the quality of 12.0 13.17 109.75\r\nteaching and learning\r\nComponent 3: Restoring and\r\nstrengthening institutional\r\n 9.4 8.98 95.53\r\ncapacity to deliver quality\r\nbasic education\r\nTotal 41.40 41.40 100.0\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 45 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS\r\n\r\n 1. This annex provides an overview of the social, economic and financial benefits of the project, including\r\n the following: (i) project outputs in terms of enrolment, (ii) social outcomes and positive externalities\r\n associated to the project, (iii) efficiency of implementation and efficiency gains in education sector linked\r\n to the project, (iv) returns to education and cost-benefit analysis of the project’s quantifiable financial\r\n benefits and (v) fiscal sustainability in the post-project period.\r\n\r\n (i) Enrolments in primary and lower secondary education, as a result of project implementation\r\n\r\n 2. At the project’s closing, a large number of outputs were completed and the majority of outcomes\r\n were achieved, if not exceeded. With regards to enrolments in primary and lower secondary education,\r\n the project financed the construction or the rehabilitation of 1272 classrooms in primary education and 7\r\n schools in secondary education. This contributed to the enrolment of 50680 students in primary education\r\n and 2400 students in lower secondary, as direct beneficiaries of the project, out of which 47.5 % of girls.\r\n However, it’s important to take into account the fact that the final number of direct project beneficiaries\r\n will be much higher, as the classrooms and school built will continue to operate years after the project’s\r\n closing.\r\n\r\n 3. With the assumption that lifetime of the constructions will go 5 years after the project for primary\r\n school and 10 years for lower secondary schools (which is an underestimation) the final numbers of direct\r\n beneficiaries would be 254400 in primary and 24000 in lower secondary education.\r\n\r\n (ii) Social outcomes and positive externalities associated to the project\r\n\r\n In the short term\r\n\r\n 4. In the short term, beyond the enrolment of children to main activities can be taken into account in\r\n terms of positive externalities of the project.\r\n - The construction of 7 water points in the lower secondary schools allowed to have a clean water\r\n supply for the whole community in each of the concerned village. Even if the number of\r\n beneficiaries cannot be estimated this will have an impact in several social dimensions. With\r\n regards to the health status of the population, it will limit the frequency of water related diseases\r\n (especially for young children) as the families will have access to a quality water point. It will also\r\n enhance women autonomy and girls’ attendance in school, as access to water will not be a\r\n constraint any more. In those case, women and girls generally have to devote a significant amount\r\n of their time to water collection with important consequences on their ability to engage in other\r\n economic activities or to go to school.\r\n\r\n - The “college de proximite” will also have important positive externalities. Indeed, these colleges\r\n will diminish the distance between home and schools, reducing transport costs with\r\n disproportionate benefits for poor families that are facing harder budget constraints. They will\r\n also encourage girls’ attendance since they are often the most penalized by poor families in rural\r\n areas. Indeed, distance between schools and dwellings is a serious discouraging factor for girls for\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 46 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n whom it is risky to travel long distances in an environment of uncertain security and other risks\r\n such as early pregnancies.\r\n\r\n\r\n In the long term\r\n\r\n 5. A large number of social outcomes are linked to higher education attainment, especially for women,\r\n including children’s schooling, literacy, demographic variables, maternal health, child health and\r\n mortality, etc. This analysis takes into account variables related to demography, maternal health, and child\r\n health and mortality. The table below presents the relationship between education and some variables in\r\n the areas indicated, in Cote d’Ivoire.\r\n\r\n No Primary Lower Upper Tertiary\r\n schooling secondary secondary\r\n Age on giving birth to first child\r\n 17,81 18,01 19,15 20,68 24,50\r\n (years)\r\n Use of contraception (percent) 12,73 24,84 29,85 30,76 30,76\r\n Birth spacing (years) 2,99 3,36 3,70 3,99 4,56\r\n Medically-assisted childbirth\r\n 54,57 66,00 71,88 75,30 79,89\r\n (percent)\r\n Mortality before the age of 5\r\n 121,58 93,93 78,82 69,01 55,19\r\n (‰)\r\n\r\n 6. The estimation shows that the age of women at the birth of their first child grows from 17.8 years for\r\n women who never attended school to 19.1 for those who reached the end of lower secondary and 24.5\r\n in higher education. Regarding the maternal health, the percentage of medically assisted childbirths is\r\n 54.6 for women without schooling but 79.9 percent for women with tertiary education level. Under five-\r\n year mortality also varies significantly with the schooling duration of the mother, falling from 121.6 deaths\r\n for 1,000 childbirths when the mother has never attended school to around 94 for 1,000 when she has\r\n completed primary education, and 69 for 1,000 for complete upper secondary education.\r\n\r\n (iii) efficiency of implementation and efficiency gains in education sector linked to the project\r\n\r\n 7. The Project has contributed to important innovations and reforms in education system, with a\r\n significant impact on the overall sector efficiency and which will require further support. These include:\r\n (i) the community-based approach for classrooms’ construction; (ii) the reform of initial teacher training;\r\n and (iii) the creation of a new model for lower secondary schools in remote rural areas (collèges de\r\n proximité), based on the bivalence of teachers.\r\n\r\n 8. As forecasted at appraisal stage, the unit cost for classroom construction with the community based\r\n approach stood at around FCFA 5 million per classroom, much lower compared to higher cost for\r\n classrooms built using other procurement methods. The Project approach allowed efficiency gains in\r\n public expenditures on capital investments. In addition, the Project contributed to the piloting of a new\r\n model of lower secondary schools, “collèges de proximité” in rural areas and to evidence the low student\r\n unit costs with the introduction of bivalent teachers. This has two-fold advantages, better efficiency and\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 47 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n increased equity. The government will be able to expand the supply for secondary education service in\r\n rural areas at lower costs and parents in rural areas will no longer have to afford additional costs to enroll\r\n their children in distant secondary schools after completion of primary school.\r\n\r\n 9. Streamlining the community-based approach for construction regardless of the source of funding is\r\n key to ensure a lower construction unit cost. The new model of lower secondary school in remote rural\r\n areas is being adopted by other development partners in the education sector, such as Millennium\r\n Challenge Corporation (MCC) and Agence Française de Développement (AFD).\r\n\r\n (iv) returns to education and cost-benefit analysis of the project’s quantifiable financial benefits\r\n\r\n 10. The project is financially profitable, with a Net Present Value (NPV) that, although underestimated,\r\n is higher than the project investment cost.\r\n\r\n 11. The financial benefits estimate takes into account the income of children who will be enrolled in\r\n classrooms built or rehabilitated by the project. Income flows are represented by wages to be earned by\r\n the pupils enrolled, throughout their careers, minus the opportunity costs (forgone earnings). The salary\r\n corresponds to the average wage of workers with primary and lower secondary education. The life time\r\n of infrastructures is 5 years for primary education and 10 years for lower secondary education. Lastly,\r\n given that the total wage income depends on the unemployment rate, the Net Present Value (NPV) and\r\n Rate of Return (RR) of the project are estimated using the unemployment rates for primary and lower\r\n secondary education, estimated via ENSETE 2013 data. In terms of investment, the analysis takes into\r\n consideration the whole cost of the project, depreciation and recurrent cost of education in primary and\r\n lower secondary education.\r\n\r\n 12. In light of the assumptions used, the Net Present Value stands at US$151.8 million. The Internal Rate\r\n of Return is 74.1 percent for a discount rate of 15 percent, and the Economic Rate of Return is 27.5\r\n percent.\r\n\r\n Variables / Assumptions Values\r\n Number of direct beneficiaries 278,400\r\n Activity time (years) 20\r\n Average annual salary, primary education (USD) 1,327\r\n Lifetime of primary education classrooms (year) 5-10 years\r\n Annual unit cost (recurrent) (UDS) 265-556\r\n 1,184 –\r\n Annual opportunity cost (USD)\r\n 1,421\r\n Discount rate (percent) 15\r\n Project cost, depreciation and recurrent costs (I,\r\n 87,169,291\r\n USD)\r\n NPV (USD) 151,799,751\r\n Internal rate of return 74.14\r\n Economic rate of return 27.5\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 48 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n (v) fiscal sustainability in the post-project period\r\n\r\n 13. Several activities or strategies implemented in the project represent efficiency gains for service\r\n delivery in education sector and some of them are being scaled up. As indicated the new model for rural\r\n lower secondary school based on recruitment of multidisciplinary teachers is adopted by several donors,\r\n and constitutes the reference for expansion of lower secondary education. The community based\r\n approach for classroom construction in primary education not only can be adopted in the national\r\n investment budget in education sector to save resources, but it could also be adopted for infrastructure\r\n development in other sectors (health, water, etc.), in order to reduce the costs of corresponding\r\n investments, alleviate the burden on the overall national investment budget, while empowering the\r\n communities for better citizen participation and service delivery.\r\n\r\n 14. The Project has contributed to important innovations and reforms in education system, which are\r\n supported and financed on the national resources. These include: (i) the reform of initial teacher training,\r\n (ii) the establishment of national learning assessment system, (iii) the strengthening of data collection and\r\n statistical activities, (iv) the informatization of national examinations in primary and secondary education,\r\n and (v) the decentralization of the General Inspectorate of Education, in charge of evaluation and overall\r\n reforms.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 49 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS\r\n\r\n\r\nRESUME EXECUTIF\r\n1. Le PUAEB a bénéficié du Fonds du Partenariat Mondial pour l’Éducation, à travers l’accord de Don n°\r\n012500 signé le 16 juillet 2012 entre l’IDA et la République de Côte d’Ivoire, un Don d’un montant\r\néquivalent à 41,4 millions de Dollars USD. Le PUAEB avait pour objectifs (i) de restaurer et d’accroitre\r\nl’éducation de base ; (ii) réhabiliter et améliorer les conditions d’enseignement et d’apprentissage ; et (iii)\r\nrétablir et renforcer les capacités institutionnelles pour assurer un enseignement de base de qualité.\r\n\r\n2. Conformément à l’Instruction n°192 du 22 septembre 2008, le Projet a bénéficié de la nomination par\r\nle Ministère de l’Economie et des Finances d’un Contrôleur Financier et d’un Agent Comptable. L’Agent\r\nComptable a pris fonction le 09 novembre 2012, et le Contrôleur Financier le 24 juillet 2012. L’avance\r\ninitiale d’un montant de 1 milliard de FCFA a été créditée sur le compte Désigné du projet le 29 novembre\r\n2012. Une deuxième avance d’un montant de 1 milliard de FCFA a été créditée sur le compte Désigné du\r\nprojet le 02 avril 2015, portant ainsi l’avance initiale à 2 milliards de FCFA.\r\n\r\nEtat d’exécution\r\n3. Compte tenu des difficultés dexécution des différentes activités, le PUAEB a reçu une première\r\nprorogation ramenant la date de clôture du projet du 30 septembre 2015 au 30 septembre 2016, suite à\r\nune requête du Gouvernement en date du 1er juin 2015. Cette prorogation a permis d’enregistrer des\r\nprogrès considérables qui ont permis d’atteindre les résultats acceptables dans la mise en œuvre des\r\nactivités de toutes les composantes opérationnelles.\r\n\r\n4. Du fait de l’évolution constante du cours du Dollar qui a permis au projet de disposer d’un montant\r\nde 1,6 milliard de F CFA non engagés à quelques jours de sa date de clôture, le PUAEB a sollicité et obtenu\r\nune extension et une restructuration prorogeant la date de clôture définitive du projet au 30 aout 2017.\r\nCette seconde prorogation a été accompagnée de mesures de restructuration suivantes : (i) la nomination\r\nd’un nouveau Coordonnateur, (ii) le recrutement d’un nouveau RAF ; (iii) le non renouvellement du contrat\r\ndu RSE ; et (v) la restructuration de certaines activités du Projet qui ont conduit à des modifications\r\nd’indicateurs de résultats :\r\n- suppression de l’indicateur relatif aux cantines scolaires et l’indicateur relatif à la mise en place\r\nd’un SIGE ;\r\n- ajustement de l’indicateur relatif au nombre de salles de classe à réhabiliter qui est passé de 500\r\nà 267 ;\r\n- ajustement de l’indicateur relatif au nombre de bénéficiaires.\r\n\r\n5. La composante 1 : « Restauration et accroissement de l’accès à l’enseignement de base » a permis\r\nd’accroître modérément l’offre scolaire publique au primaire et au premier cycle du secondaire en\r\nrépondant à des besoins d’urgence en matière de construction et d’équipement des établissements\r\nscolaires.\r\n\r\n6. En ce qui concerne le primaire, (i) 1 002 salles de classes dont 201 par appel d’offres et 801 selon\r\nl’approche communautaire comprenant 192 bureaux et magasins pour les directeurs d’écoles ont été\r\n\r\n Page 50 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n construites et équipées en mobiliers et matériels didactiques ; (ii) 20 040 table-bancs, 1002 bureau-maitres\r\n et 192 bureaux-directeurs sont acquis et livrés dans les écoles construites ; (iii) 270 salles de classes ont été\r\n réhabilitées ; (iv) 142 blocs latrines de 3 cabines ont été construits ; (v) 25 069 table-bancs additionnels ont\r\n été acquis et distribués dans 521 écoles primaires réparties dans 9 DRENET. Ces infrastructures ont permis\r\n à un peu plus de 40 000 enfants principalement en zone rural d’avoir accès à l’école dans de meilleures\r\n conditions environnementales.\r\n\r\n7. Par ailleurs, le projet a expérimenté l’approche communautaire ou DDP pour la réalisation des\r\ninfrastructures scolaires. A ce titre outres les classes réalisées, (vi) 24 030 membres des COGES et des\r\norganes additionnels (CTMO et CIC) ont eu leurs capacités renforcées sur 5 modules de formation en gestion\r\nà la base ; (vii) 5 232 membres des 267 organes de gestion constitués ont été formés sur les modules\r\norganisation de la dynamique communautaire, passation des marchés, gestion financière suivi-évaluation\r\nparticipatif et entretien maintenance des infrastructures scolaires. Cette approche s’est avérée pertinente\r\ncar elle a permis de réduire de manière significative les coûts de réalisation des salles de class. Ainsi le coût\r\nunitaire est en moyenne entre 5 et 6 millions de FCFA contre 8 à 10 millions FCFA pour l’approche classique\r\nappel d’offre et des investissements réalisés sur d’autres financements. En outre, l’implication des\r\nbénéficiaires à travers les COGES, améliore l’appropriation des investissements par les populations\r\nbénéficiaires et rassure quant au suivi de l’entretien des bâtiments et équipement.\r\n\r\n8. Concernant le secondaire, 7 collèges de proximité ont été construits et accueillent les élèves depuis\r\n décembre 2015. Ils sont tous équipés de mobiliers de bureau et de matériel didactique et de forages de\r\n type HVA pour assurer l’accès à l’eau potable des usagers. Le matériel scientifique est également acquis\r\n pour les 7 collèges. Il faut préciser que tous les collèges sont terminés et réceptionnés. En plus des 7\r\n collèges, le collège de la ville d’Abongoua a connu une extension avec la construction et l’équipement en\r\n mobiliers de 12 salles de classes et 3 salles spécialisées en sciences physiques.\r\nCes résultats ont eu un impact en termes d’équité car les enfants en milieu rural peuvent accéder au\r\nsecondaire dans de meilleur condition puisqu’il reste à proximité de leur famille. Mieux, cela assure un\r\nmeilleur taux d’accès aux filles dont à tort ou à raison, les raisons craignent de les envoyer « en ville » d’où\r\nelles reviennent avec des grossesses non désirées.\r\n\r\n9. Concernant l’appui aux enfants défavorisés, 1 512 enfants ont été eu l’opportunité de retourner dans\r\nle système éducatif à travers 46 classes passerelles. Aussi pour encourager la scolarisation de la jeune fille,\r\nle Projet a initié deux cérémonies de récompense des meilleures élèves. A ce titre, 463 filles lauréates ont\r\nété récompensées. Dans le même sens, des campagnes IEC ont été organisées dans 67 localités de sous-\r\nscolarisation dans le cadre de l’encouragement à la scolarisation de la jeune fille. Enfin, le PUAEB a\r\négalement réalisé une étude sur les déterminants des grossesses en milieu scolaire. La restitution publique\r\ndes résultats a été effectuée le 22 décembre 2016 afin de sensibiliser la communauté éducative de l’ampleur\r\ndu phénomène et les permettre de comprendre les facteurs de risque et les pistes de remédiation à\r\nexplorer.\r\n\r\n10. Dans le cadre de la réalisation des deux CAFOP, un audit social et un audit environnemental\r\nconformément aux recommandations de la Banque mondiale ont été réalisés. Les principales conclusions\r\nde ces audits ont été exploitées par le projet, et les rapports transmis à la Banque mondiale.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 51 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n11. La composante 2 « Réhabilitation et amélioration de la qualité de l’enseignement et de\r\nl’apprentissage » a permis de réaliser plusieurs activités, notamment : (i) la construction de 2 CAFOP\r\n(Bondoukou et à San Pedro) dont celui de San-Pedro, équipé d’un système autonome d’eau potable ; (ii) la\r\nréhabilitation de 7 CAFOP (Odienné, Daloa, Gagnoa, Abengourou, Dabou, Aboisso et Bassam) ; (iii)\r\nl’équipement des CAFOP de Bondoukou, San Pedro et des 7 CAFOP réhabilités en mobiliers ; (iv)\r\nl’équipement du CAFOP de Gagnoa d’un système d’alimentation en eau potable de type HVA. Ces\r\ninvestissements ont permis d’accroitre de près de 30% les capacités d’accueil et de formation des élèves -\r\nmaîtres au niveau national. De plus et surtout, les nouveaux types de CAFOP ont montré que ce choix était\r\npertinent tant au niveau du coût que la flexibilité qu’ils offrent en termes d’effectifs d’accueil\r\ncomparativement aux anciens CAFOP.\r\n\r\nD’autres résultats ont marqué également cette composante, il s’agit :\r\n\r\n ✓ L’incitation du Gouvernement à faire un recrutement relativement massif de 24 000 instituteurs\r\n (inscrit comme indicateur de résultats) entre 2013 et 2016 pour combler le déficit d’enseignants et\r\n contribuer à la mise en œuvre de la politique de scolarisation obligatoire (PSO) ;\r\n ✓ Une contribution substantielle à l’amélioration de la qualité de l’école à travers la réforme de la\r\n formation initiale. Il s’est agi l’élaboration du référentiel de compétences du maître du primaire et\r\n du plan de gouvernance des CAFOP. Cela conformément aux actions prioritaires identifiées par\r\n l’audit de la formation initiale pour résoudre les dysfonctionnements relevés : ces travaux ont déjà\r\n abouti à la prise de textes règlementant ce pan important du Ministère en charge de l’éducation\r\n nationale. Toutefois, il reste la phase expérimentale qui permettront d’apporter les derniers\r\n ajustements sanctionnés par l’édiction des deux derniers textes.\r\n ✓ L’élaboration d’un nouveau régime pédagogique, de programmes recadrés et d’un cadre\r\n curriculaire pour intégrer les faiblesses du système et aboutir à un enseignement de base de\r\n meilleure qualité.\r\n ✓ L’amélioration de la qualité avec la formations de 70 000 enseignants du primaire et 42 000\r\n enseignants du secondaire suivant l’approche de formation en cascade dont l’efficacité est mitigée.\r\n Cette méthode a permis d’atteindre un grand nombre d’enseignants en un temps relativement\r\n court, mais cela s’est fait au détriment de la qualité car il y a une déperdition au niveau du contenu\r\n des informations transmises ;\r\n ✓ L’acquisition et la distribution de 1 000 270 manuels scolaires au bénéfice de 3 816 écoles et 52 500\r\n livres pour coins de lecture ont certainement contribué au maintien des élèves dans le système car\r\n cela constitue une aide aux ménages dont le poids économique des intrants scolaires sur les\r\n budgets des familles, constitue parfois un facteur limitant au maintien des enfants à l’école ou à\r\n leur scolarisation. Par ailleurs, la création de coin de lecture dans chacune des classes devrait\r\n favoriser l’apprentissage en lecture et relever ainsi les niveaux en matière d’acquis de compétences\r\n des enfants.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 52 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n12. Au titre de cette composante, le Projet a également renforcé les capacités de la Direction ayant en\r\ncharge l’évaluation des acquis des élèves à travers :\r\n\r\n ✓ Le renforcement des capacités de 4 membres du DVSP/MEN sur le thème « analyse et planification\r\n au service du développement » à l’IIPE-Paris (formation courte), et au Centre International d’Etudes\r\n Pédagogiques à Sèvres en France ;\r\n ✓ Le financement de la logistique pour la réalisation de trois (3) évaluations portant sur le quantum\r\n horaire ; les apprentissages de la lecture au CP1 ; et l’apprentissage de la lecture et mathématiques\r\n au CE1.\r\n ✓ L’évaluation du quantum horaire a d’ailleurs été exploité pour justifier le retour du mercredi matin\r\n dans l’emploi du temps des élèves du primaire.\r\n ✓ Enfin, pour assurer une bonne santé des enfants pour mieux apprendre à l’école, le projet a financé\r\n des campagnes de sensibilisation et de campagnes de vaccination au profit de 60 000 élèves\r\n répartis dans 200 écoles par l’UNICEF en partenariat avec UNICEF dans le cadre de son programme\r\n « WASH ».\r\n\r\n13. Cette composante a également permis de réaliser des activités additionnelles et d’atteindre les\r\nrésultats suivants :\r\n ✓ L’impression de 36 000 planches pédagogiques pour les classes de CP mises à la disposition du\r\n MEN ;\r\n ✓ L’usage du numérique dans les activités pédagogiques par (i) la formation d’un pool de 6\r\n formateurs à l’ingénierie de production de ressources pédagogiques numériques en Suisse ; (ii) la\r\n formation de 80 formateurs régionaux relais pour démarrer le processus de formation des\r\n enseignants du primaire et du secondaire au numérique et à leur usage pédagogique ; et (iii) et\r\n l’acquisition de 2 00 tablettes pédagogiques QELASY.\r\n\r\n14. Ces réalisations contribuent certainement au renforcement des pratiques d’enseignements des\r\ninstituteurs et de là au renforcement de la qualité de l’enseignement susceptible d’améliorer les acquis des\r\nélèves.\r\n\r\n15. La composante 3 « Rétablissement et renforcement des capacités institutionnelles pour assurer une\r\néducation de base de qualité » a permis de réaliser les activités ci-après :\r\n\r\n ✓ Le renforcement de capacités des directions centrales et des services rattachés au Cabinet du MEN\r\n en matériels informatiques et de communication ainsi qu’il suit :\r\n\r\n ✓ 31 ordinateurs de bureau\r\n ✓ 10 ordinateurs portables\r\n ✓ 31 onduleurs 650VA\r\n IGEN ✓ 01 onduleur 1000VA\r\n ✓ 14 imprimantes Laser\r\n ✓ 01 Imprimante réseau\r\n ✓ 01 serveur\r\n DECO ✓ 196 ordinateurs portables\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 53 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ✓ 50 ordinateurs de bureau\r\n ✓ 40 ordinateurs portables\r\n ✓ 50 onduleurs 650VA\r\n DSPS ✓ 01 onduleur 1000VA\r\n ✓ 37 imprimantes Laser\r\n ✓ 13 serveurs\r\n ✓ 03 scanners\r\n ✓ 01 photocopieur HP PRO M4510DN\r\n ✓ 01 imprimante réseau laser couleur HP PRO\r\n ✓ 26 imprimantes HP P2055\r\n ✓ 25 ordinateurs de bureau\r\n ✓ 25 ordinateurs portables\r\n ✓ 25 onduleurs 650VA\r\n DIRECTIONS CENTRALES ET CABINET MEN ✓ 23 Vidéo projecteurs + écrans\r\n ✓ 02 camera professionnelle HVR 1000 SONY\r\n ✓ 02 Caméscopes\r\n ✓ 02 Dictaphone Phillips DVT1200\r\n ✓ 01 appareil photo numérique CANON A2300\r\n ✓ 21 photocopieurs Canon IR 1730i\r\n ✓ 21 Scanner HP 5590\r\n ✓ 20 Fax Canon L170\r\n\r\n\r\n ✓ L’appui aux grandes réformes de pilotage du Ministère qui sont :\r\n\r\nStructures Etat\r\n Projet Types d’interventions précises\r\nbénéficiaire d’avancement\r\n - Réalisation du diagnostic du secteur Education/Formation\r\n Définition de la\r\nSecteur (RESEN) et l’actualisation du modèle de simulation financière du\r\n nouvelle stratégie\r\nEducation- secteur avec l’appui du pôle de Dakar ; Achevé\r\n sectorielle 2016-\r\nFormation - Recrutement de consultant pour l’appui à la définition de la\r\n 2025\r\n politique sectorielle\r\n Modernisation de - Acquisition d’équipements informatiques et bureautiques\r\n Achevé\r\n l’IGEN - Acquisition de matériel roulant\r\n - Financement du plan de déconcentration de la gestion et\r\n pilotage du système éducatif (stratégie pour le développement\r\n progressif des Coordinations de l’IGEN en Région ainsi qu’un\r\n manuel de procédures des missions de l’IGEN et des indicateurs\r\n pour la mise en œuvre d’une Coordination de l’IGEN en Région)\r\nInspection - Mise en place du plan pluriannuel de renforcement des capacités\r\ngénérale des IGEN avec la Chaire UNESCO en développement curriculaire\r\n Déconcentration de\r\n(IGEN) de l’UQAM Achevé\r\n l’IGEN\r\n - Renforcement des capacités de l’IGEN à travers des voyages\r\n d’études et des formations :\r\n • 4 voyages d’études (2 au Canada en faveur de 7 IGEN. 2 en\r\n France (CIEP et IIPE) °\r\n • 1 formation en France sur le contrôle de gestion\r\n • 2 sessions de formation en faveur de 82 IGEN-formateurs\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 54 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n - Financement de la mise en place d’un système de pilotage et\r\n d’aide à la décision de l’inspection générale du MENET-FP\r\n - Acquisition de trois (3) véhicules pour les coordinations\r\n déconcentrées et l’antenne de Yamoussoukro\r\n - Elaboration d’une note conceptuelle de la politique de réduction\r\n du taux de redoublement dans le système éducatif intégrant\r\n deux options stratégiques : l’adoption de textes réglementaires\r\n Achevées en\r\n et l’adoption d’un plan national d’implantation du projet de\r\n termes d’appui\r\n réduction du taux de redoublement dans le système éducatif ;\r\n Réforme du en 2016. Il reste\r\n redoublement - Elaboration de projets de textes (validation et adoption cependant la\r\n (réduction de la attendues) ; traduction dans\r\n fréquence du - Création de la cellule opérationnelle de coordination par arrêté la pratique après\r\n redoublement dans ministériel, et appui à la phase expérimentale de la stratégie par la prise d’un\r\n le système éducatif) la formation des formateurs nationaux ; texte instituant\r\n - Acquisition et distribution de 1.000.270 manuels scolaires pour les sous-cycles au\r\n 3.816 écoles ; primaire\r\n\r\n - Acquisition et distribution de 52.500 livres pour les coins de\r\n lecture pour les écoles construites (DDP).\r\n - Acquisition d’équipement informatiques et\r\n bureautiques (ordinateurs Laptop et imprimantes) ayant permis\r\n Mise en place du d’équiper toutes les équipes et d’y installer l’applicatif de\r\n délibération. Cet appui a permis à la DECO de passer à 100%\r\n système de Activité achevée\r\n d’application de la DAO en 3 ans. Les impacts de ce projet sont :\r\n délibération assistée en mars 2015\r\n par ordinateur (DAO) • Rapidité au niveau des délibérations\r\nDirection des • Equité entre tous les candidats sur le territoire nationale\r\nExamens et • Transparence\r\nConcours et de Activités\r\nl’Orientation Mobilité des équipes - Acquisition d’un car de transport des équipes achevées en\r\n(DECO) 2016\r\n Dématérialisation\r\n des procès-verbaux - Equipements informatiques et bureautiques de la DECO pour la\r\n numérisation Activités\r\n de délibération et de\r\n achevées en\r\n la gestion - Numérisation des archives ;\r\n 2016\r\n électronique des - Mise en place qu’un système de gestion des données\r\n documents (GED)\r\n - Renforcement de capacités de 42 correspondants en région ;\r\n - Renforcement des capacités de 10 chargés d’études de la DSPS\r\nDirection des au niveau Central ;\r\n Mise en place du\r\nStratégies, de\r\n plan d’action intégré - Financement du volet équipement non compris le matériel\r\nla Planification roulant du plan stratégique de production des statistiques\r\n de production des\r\net des scolaires ;\r\n statistiques de la\r\nStatistiques\r\n DSPS - Acquisition d’un véhicule ;\r\n(DSPS)\r\n - Statistiques scolaires disponibles à temps depuis 2012.\r\n - Statistiques 2016-2017 restituées le 31mars 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 55 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n - Campagne de sensibilisation à la scolarisation et au maintien des\r\n jeunes filles à l’école réalisée par 5 ONG dans 67 localités de\r\n sous scolarisation des filles en 2013\r\nDirection de la\r\n - Célébration et récompense de 463 filles ayant obtenu les\r\nMutualités des\r\n Stratégie de lutte meilleurs résultats aux examens à grand tirage\r\nœuvres\r\n contre les grossesses - Financement d’une étude sur les déterminants des grossesses en Appui achevé\r\nsociales en\r\n en milieu scolaire milieu scolaire dans les DREN de Bondoukou, Daloa,\r\nmilieu scolaire Yamoussoukro et Abidjan 4, réalisée par la Chaire Unesco de\r\n(DMOSS) Bioéthique de l’Université Alassane Ouattara de Bouaké.\r\n - Diffusion des résultats à travers une cérémonie de restitution\r\n des résultats\r\n - Acquisition de matériel roulant pour les structures\r\nDirection des Equipement des décentralisées du MENET-FP : 10 Inspection d’Enseignement\r\nAffaires directions centrales Primaire (10) pour renforcer la capacité de, l’encadrement des\r\n enseignants. Achevée en 2016\r\nFinancières et autres structures\r\n(DAF) du MEN - Fournitures d’équipement informatiques et bureautiques aux\r\n structures du MENET-FP\r\n\r\n\r\n ✓ La formation approfondie de 3 agents du MEN et du MESRS à l’IIPE-Paris en planification de\r\n l’éducation.\r\n\r\nEvaluation du Projet\r\n\r\n16. L’efficacité globale du PUAEB a été très partielle. Plusieurs actions importantes ont été abandonnées\r\npour des raisons de procédures, de compétences limitées des acteurs, et de prise des décisions au niveau\r\nde la tutelle et du Gouvernement ramenant à revoir les objectifs du projet à la baisse, et notamment la\r\nréhabilitation des classes du primaire (de 500 à 267 classes) ; des CAFOP (de 8 à 7 CAFOP) et l’abandon de\r\nl’appui aux cantines scolaires en faveur de 60 000 enfants. A cela s’ajoute la faible performance des\r\nentreprises chargées de construire les CAFOP de San Pedro et de Bondoukou. Malgré un démarrage lent,\r\nl’efficacité de la mise en œuvre s’est considérablement améliorée dans la phase de prolongation du projet.\r\n\r\n17. L’efficience globale est satisfaisante si l’on tient compte des résultats obtenus à la date de clôture du\r\nPUAEB du fait de la restructuration du projet et de la mise en place d’une nouvelle équipe au cours de la\r\nphase de prolongation. Il faut cependant dire que la mise en œuvre du projet a révélé plusieurs insuffisances\r\ndans son montage: (i) absence de fonctionnement du Comité Interministériel de Coordination du Secteur\r\nde l’Education et de la Formation (CICSEF) dont l’un des rôles fondamental était de procéder à un suivi pour\r\ns’assurer du respect des objectifs de performance et de calendriers convenus ; (ii) les indicateurs de gestion\r\nà atteindre par périodes successives sur la durée du projet prévus dans le cadre des résultats n’ont pas été\r\nrespectés ; (iii) l’absence de maitrise de l’approche communautaire utilisée ; (iv) le cloisonnement des\r\ncomposantes, et une absence de coordination des activités du Projet. Par ailleurs, l’articulation des\r\nstructures partenaires impliquées dans la mise en œuvre du projet n’a véritablement pas fonctionné. En\r\neffet le fonctionnement de la DMP et des BET recrutés n’a pas facilité la mise en œuvre des activités du\r\nprojet. D’autre part, la mauvaise organisation et la faible capacité technique de certaines entreprises ont\r\nretardé considérablement l’exécution des activités du projet. L’organigramme du PUAEB avec la création\r\nd’une structure de coordination du pole infrastructure non prévue dans la conception de la structure de\r\nbase a présenté d’énormes insuffisances et a favorisé l’absence d’un suivi efficient. On a également noté\r\n\r\n Page 56 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nd’importantes défaillances dans le suivi évaluation, la gestion administrative, le suivi du personnel,\r\nl’enregistrement comptable et un classement des archives mal organisé.\r\n\r\n 18. Les objectifs réajustés du projet ont été formalisés. En effet, certains indicateurs ont été redéfinis\r\n avec la réallocation qui a entrainé des modifications des catégories des dépenses. Il s’agit particulièrement\r\n de la suppression dans le cadre de résultats de l’indicateur relatif aux cantines scolaires, et de l’indicateur\r\n relatif à la mise en place d’un SIGE. La construction des classes et des collèges a été réalisée à 100%. Les\r\n indicateurs de scolarisation ainsi que les résultats des élèves dans l’ensemble se sont considérablement\r\n améliorés. La disponibilité en manuel scolaire s’est accrue. On note cependant une dégradation des ratios\r\n d’encadrement par rapport à 2011/2012. Le ratio élèves/maîtres est passé de 39 en 1998/1999 ; 46 en\r\n 2011/2012 et 43,5 en 2015/2016 dépassant la norme nationale qui est de 40 élèves par maître.\r\n\r\n 19. Au niveau de l’impact, le PUAEB a contribué d’une part au développement de l’enseignement par\r\n l’accroissement des effectifs aux différents niveaux du sous-secteur éducation nationale, et d’autre part\r\n à l’amélioration de la capacité d’accueil à chaque niveau du sous-secteur et du taux brut de scolarisation.\r\n La gratuité des manuels scolaires dans le primaire a permis de soulager certains parents d’élèves.\r\n Cependant des efforts restent encore à faire puisque près de 2 enfants sur 10 en âge d’aller à l’école n’y\r\n vont pas. Le Projet a également eu un impact positif sur le renforcement et la consolidation des relations\r\n de travail entre le Gouvernement, les établissements / administrations et les communautés. Nombre des\r\n activités soutenues par le projet ont accru et renforcé l’interaction des pouvoirs publics et des\r\n communautés locales au sein desquelles lÉtat a réussi à susciter la confiance. Les pouvoirs publics,\r\n soutenus par le projet, ont pu y parvenir en : (i) faisant une offre de services efficaces et transparents (au\r\n moyen de l’utilisation de comités d’établissement comprenant les parents, responsables des frais de\r\n fonctionnement de l’établissement) ; (ii) fournissant un financement pour couvrir les frais de\r\n fonctionnement des établissements et le salaire des enseignants ; (iii) permettant aux parties prenantes\r\n de participer au processus de prise de décision et de suivre lutilisation des fonds ; et (iv) modernisant le\r\n cadre juridique du secteur éducatif.\r\n\r\n 20. L’évaluation économique et financière du PUAEB s’est faite à partir du coût de base du projet, des\r\n demandes de remboursement des fonds (DRF), et surtout du suivi à partir des documents de la Banque\r\n tirés dans « World Bank Client Connection ». Le PUAEB a été très lent à s’exécuter. Le rapport de\r\n septembre 2014 (revue à mi-parcours) donne un très faible taux de décaissement (25%) et l’on peut dire\r\n que l’activité n’a vraiment démarré qu’en septembre 2015 et a atteint un taux de décaissement de 82,73%\r\n en fin septembre 2016. Le niveau de décaissement s’est accéléré avec la restructuration intervenue le 30\r\n septembre 2016 pour atteindre un taux de décaissement de 98,82% le 25/07/2017, soit un montant global\r\n décaissé de $ US 40,9 millions.\r\n\r\n 21. Le financement du PUAEB dans sa formulation n’a pas prévu de contrepartie ivoirienne. Toutefois\r\n et malgré les difficultés de trésorerie, la partie ivoirienne a pu soutenir les actions du projet en injectant\r\n 986,940 millions de FCFA. Ces fonds ont servi au paiement des indemnités du Contrôleur Financier et de\r\n ses agents ; de l’Agent comptable ; et du personnel du PUAEB non pris en charge par l’IDA ; la période de\r\n grâce et la purge des droits coutumiers (indemnités d’éviction des exploitants agricoles).\r\n\r\n 22. Le PUAEB a connu d’énormes difficultés dans sa gestion financière et technique. Les principales\r\n insuffisances portent sur : (i) la qualité du personnel recruté, qui pour la plupart n’avait pas une\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 57 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n expérience suffisante en matière de gestion des projets ; (ii) des partenaires qui n’avaient pas la même\r\n compréhension de la gestion du projet ; (iii) l’absence de programmation des activités et d’un suivi\r\n technique insuffisant ; et (iv) l’absence d’une véritable programmation budgétaire et d’un suivi financier\r\n efficient. Ces difficultés rencontrées au cours de la mise en œuvre du PUAEB devraient aider à mieux\r\n adapter les moyens aux différentes actions à engager dans le futur.\r\n\r\nEn guise de conclusion\r\n\r\n 23. Le PUAEB, au moment où il s’achève, laisse au système éducatif ivoirien, des équipements, du\r\n matériel roulant, des salles de classes, du matériel de qualité (programmes APC, manuels et guides\r\n pédagogiques et une structure d’évaluation). La fin du projet laisse entrevoir des risques de détérioration\r\n des acquis, essentiellement liés aux difficultés de suivi et d’entretien de ces immobilisations (véhicules ;\r\n matériel informatique et matériel de bureau ; matériel didactique des CAFOP ; et réalisations). La stratégie\r\n pour la rénovation et la construction d’écoles de qualité à moindre coût et les directives associées\r\n développées et adoptées pour ce projet constitue une réalisation importante. Le soutien à ce type de\r\n stratégies, associées à des normes et des directives, peut être un instrument utile pour une construction\r\n scolaire économique. Certes les coûts de construction ont diminué tout au long du projet, parfois au\r\n détriment de la qualité. Des réflexions du genre faut-il construire le même type d’école avec des modes\r\n différents et les mêmes couts comme c’est le cas, ou alors adapter un plan type par mode avec des couts\r\n réalistes ?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 58 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\r\n\r\nCountry Partnership Framework for the Republic of Cote d’Ivoire, for the period FY16-19, August 17, 2015.\r\n\r\nEmergency Project Paper on a Proposed Global Partnership for Education Fund Grant in the Amount of US$41.4\r\nMillion to the Republic of Cote D’Ivoire for an Emergency Basic Education Support Project, April 2, 2012.\r\n\r\nGlobal Partnership for Education Fund Grant Agreement, Emergency Basic Education Support Project between\r\nRepublic of Cote d’Ivoire and International Development Association acting as Administrator of the Global\r\npartnership for Education Fund, June 16, 2012.\r\n\r\nPlan Sectoriel Education/Formation 2016 – 2025, April 2017.\r\n\r\nRapport d’achèvement de la mise en œuvre et des résultats sur un don d’un montant de 41,4 millions $US à la\r\nRépublique de la Côte d’Ivoire pour un Projet d’Urgence d’Appui à l’éducation de base (TF 12500) document\r\ndéfinitif 31 juillet 2017. (Full Borrower’s ICR).\r\n\r\nRapport a Mi-Parcours du PUAEB, August 2014. (Mid-term Review)\r\n\r\nRapport Trimestriel (01 avril-30 juin 2017), Don IDA No.TF12500, Juillet 2017 (and other Quarterly Reports)\r\n\r\nRestructuring Papers 1 (August 2015), 2 (October 2016) and 3 (May 2017).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 59 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 7. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND OFFICIAL REVISION\r\n\r\n Project Appraisal Restructuring Paper 1 Restructuring Paper 2 Restructuring Paper 3\r\n Document 08/05/2015 10/17/2016 04/06/2017\r\n 04/2011\r\n PDO Indicators and targets\r\n 1. Number of additional No change Target increased to No change\r\n qualified primary 15,200\r\n teachers resulting from\r\n project intervention-\r\n 7,500\r\n 2. Number of additional Change target from 500 No change No change\r\n classrooms at the primary to 267\r\n level resulting from\r\n project intervention, (i)\r\n built-1000 (ii)\r\n rehabilitated 500\r\n 3. Direct project RP states 235,000-no 62,400 (same as original) Total-53,080\r\n beneficiaries (number) (i) change, but appears to Primary-50,680\r\n students enrolled in add detail and raise\r\n primary schools built by targets.\r\n the project-60,000; (ii) Colleges-72,000\r\n students enrolled in Primary-135,000\r\n “collèges de\r\n proximité”constructed by\r\n the project-2,400; (iii) of\r\n which % of female-45%\r\n 4. System for learning No change No change No change\r\n assessment at the\r\n primary level-rating scale-\r\n 3\r\n 5. Timely annual No change No change No change\r\n production of reliable\r\n school statistics (yes/no)\r\n Utility of the learning No change No change\r\n system-rating of 3 out of\r\n 4. Triggered because of\r\n “Yes” answer to creation\r\n of learning assessment.\r\n Intermediate Indicators and Targets\r\n Component 1: Restoring and Increasing Access to Basic Education Services\r\n Number of girls receiving No change No change No change\r\n incentives-450\r\n Component 2: Rehabilitating and improving the quality of teaching and learning\r\n Teachers trained in No change Target increased to No change\r\n service-15,000 16,500\r\n Number of textbooks No change No change No change\r\n purchased and\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 60 of 62\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nCOTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n distributed-1,000,000\r\n (cumulative)\r\n Student-teacher ratio in No change Target changed to 43:1, No change\r\n publicly financed schools mainly because of decree\r\n (disaggregated by of mandatory universal\r\n region)-40:1 primary and lower\r\n secondary education.\r\n Number of children No change Dropped food, but not No change\r\n receiving food supplies as health portion\r\n a result of project\r\n intervention-60,000\r\n Component 3: Restoring and strengthening institutional capacity to deliver quality basic education\r\n EMIS in place and No change No change-proposed Dropped (formally)\r\n functioning-yes/no though decision made to\r\n drop was formalized in\r\n RP3\r\n Number of heads of No change Target increased to 8,500 No change\r\n DREN, school directors,\r\n inspectors and\r\n pedagogical advisors\r\n trained-3,000\r\n Number of COGES (SMCs) No change No change No change\r\n trained-3,000\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring Paper 1-US$22.36 disbursed of US$41.40\r\n\r\n Restructuring Paper 2-US$34.25 disbursed of US$41.40\r\n\r\n Restructuring paper 3-US$39.48 disbursed of US$41.40\r\n\r\n In several instances, the PIU increased the target though it did not have to. This was to signal that\r\n project efforts need not stop at the original target level. In other words, the results framework was\r\n communicating to the project that it could and should attain higher targets.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 61 of 62\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n COTE DIVOIRE - Emergency Basic Education Support Project - GPEF Grant (P119328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ANNEX 8. L’APPUI A LA SCOLARISATION DES FILLES\r\n\r\nTrois activités :\r\n (i) la réalisation de campagne de sensibilisation à la scolarisation et au maintien des jeunes filles\r\n à l’école dans 67 localités de sous-scolarisation des filles ayant permis la création de 67 Club\r\n de Mères d’Elèves Filles (CMEF) pour assurer la veille et la continuité de la sensibilisation.\r\nLes effets sont captés à travers les témoignages des directeurs d’établissements. Ainsi, à l’EPP Konan Cocotikro\r\n(IEP Bobokro), le directeur a indiqué que suite à la campagne, l’effectif du CP1 est passé de 27 enfants inscri ts à\r\n77 dans le courant du 1er trimestre dont 24 filles.\r\n\r\n (ii) l’organisation de deux sessions de récompenses des filles les plus méritantes (463 filles) aux\r\n trois examens de grands tirages (CEPE ; BEPC, BAC) sur toute l’étendue du territoire. Les prix\r\n étaient constitués de manuels scolaires pour les filles du CEPE et du BEPC et d’ordinateurs\r\n Laptop pour le niveau BAC. A ces présents, les lauréats recevaient des diplômes d’honneur et\r\n recevaient les félicitations de hautes personnalités (ministres, premiers responsables\r\n d’organisations internationales).\r\n\r\nCritères de sélection des filles excellentes :\r\n\r\n • CEPE\r\nCritère éligibilité\r\n - Avoir une moyenne à l’examen supérieure à 16/20\r\nNombre de bénéficiaires :\r\n - 1ere édition : 150 meilleures\r\n - 2e édition : 82 meilleures\r\n\r\n • BEPC\r\nCritère éligibilité\r\n - Avoir une moyenne à l’examen supérieure à 16/20\r\nNombre de bénéficiaires :\r\n - 1ere édition : 100 meilleures\r\n - 2e édition : 41 meilleures\r\n\r\n • BAC\r\nCritère éligibilité\r\n • Avoir une moyenne à l’examen supérieure à 14/20\r\nNombre de bénéficiaires :\r\n - 1ere édition : 50 meilleures\r\n - 1ere édition : 40 meilleures\r\n (iii) le financement d’une étude sur les déterminants des grossesses en milieu scolaire et le\r\n partage des résultats avec la communauté éducative.\r\nCette étude a eu le mérite de relancer les débats sur le phénomène et ainsi de poursuivre la sensibilisation.\r\nToujours est-il que les 2017-2018, indique une régression des cas de grossesse qui sont passé de 4 717 cas à 3 935\r\ncas de grossesse en, cours de scolarité entre 2015 et 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 62 of 62\r\n\f" }, "D29914828": { "id": "29914828", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Guinea", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Education for all,Gender,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development,Social dev/gender/inclusion", "docdt": "2018-05-22T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/314851527003105234/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/314851527003105234/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/314851527003105234/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900", "projectid": "P123900", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/314851527003105234/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Productive-Social-Safety-Net-Project-P123900", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES31708\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n PRODUCTIVE SOCIAL SAFETY NET PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON JUNE 19, 2012\r\n TO\r\n\r\n THE REPUBLIC OF GUINEA\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & LABOR\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Soukeyna Kane\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Jehan Arulpragasam\r\n Task Team Leader: Fanta Toure, Giuseppe Zampaglione\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP123900 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n19-Jun-2012 30-Sep-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nThe Republic of Guinea Cellule Filets Sociaux\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe Project Development Objective (PDO) is to provide income support to vulnerable groups and to lay the\r\nfoundations of a socialsafety net strategy by testing some of the building blocks necessary for a larger system.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-D1210 31-May-2016 27-Jun-2016 03-Aug-2016 30-Sep-2019 12.00 6.08 6.06\r\nIDA-H7820 19-Jun-2012 19-Jul-2012 14-Feb-2013 30-Sep-2019 25.00 22.71 .54\r\nTF-A2454 31-May-2016 27-Jun-2016 03-Aug-2016 30-Jun-2018 4.35 4.12 .23\r\nTF-18255 18-Nov-2014 18-Nov-2014 18-Nov-2014 31-Oct-2015 1.85 1.85 0\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nOverview: The Productive Social Safety Nets Project (PSSNP) was approved on June 19, 2012. Its objective is to provide\r\nincome support to vulnerable groups and to lay the foundations of a social safety nets strategy by laying some of the\r\nbuilding blocks necessary for a larger system. The project comprises four components: (i) a labor intensive public\r\nworks with a focus on women and youth and life skills development; (ii) a cash transfer to protect human capital; (iii)\r\nsupport to project coordination and institutional capacity building; and (iv) prevention and response to the Ebola\r\nEpidemic.\r\n\r\nSince the initial grant became effective on June 26, 2012, the project has undergone three restructurings and\r\nadditional financing:\r\n• Component IV on Ebola response was added and implementation arrangements were simplified in November\r\n2014 (Peacebuilding Fund TF Grant 18255);\r\n• Subcomponent 2.2. on non-conditional cash transfer with accompanying measures was added in May 2016, with\r\nfunding from the Ebola Recovery and Reconstruction Trust Fund (Grant A2454);\r\n• In October 2017, the project was restructured to (i) extend the closing date of the initial grant; (iii) update target\r\nvalues and clarify some indicators in the results framework; and (iv) amend the Grant/Financing Agreements to reflect\r\ninstitutional changes in the operating environment.\r\n\r\nProject status: The overall project performance towards meeting its Development Objective is rated Satisfactory\r\n(Implementation Support Report, December 5, 2017). With a disbursement rate of 78%, the project is well on its way\r\nto meeting key outcome indicators by closing date as detailed below:\r\n- Four key building blocks of a safety nets system are tested (value achieved: yes; end target: yes)\r\n- Social assistance beneficiaries receiving nutrition/parenting/early childhood simulation (value achieved: 11,896;\r\nend target: 10,000)\r\n- Proportion of poor households among targeted beneficiaries (currently estimated at 82%; end target: 80%)\r\n- Percentage of complaints registered in the grievance redress system that have been addressed in line with\r\nestablished procedures (value achieved: 100%; end target: 90%)\r\n- Beneficiaries of social safety net programs (value achieved 390,808; end target: 503,808)\r\no Number of beneficiaries (value achieved 34,500; end target 25,000)\r\no Number of households benefiting from cash transfers and LIPW (value achieved 54,557; end target 83,968)\r\n\r\nProposed changes and justification: The changes proposed focus on subcomponent 2.2 (EERTF-financed Cash\r\nTransfers with soft conditionalities in the amount of $4,350,000). Current disbursement rate is 83%. The grant is\r\nexpected to fully disbursed by its closing date of June 30, 2018.\r\n\r\nThe proposed restructuring seeks to reallocate proceeds from category 1 of the grant (regular cash transfers to 7,000\r\nhouseholds) to category 2 (accompanying measures). The allocation to category 1 exceeds the needs to cover the\r\nactivities planned under the category, and target results expected in terms of total number of beneficiaries have\r\nalready been achieved. On the other hand, category 2 has been under-budgeted. Under the proposed restructuring,\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Productive Social Safety Net Project (P123900)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n an estimated $650,000 will be reallocated to category 2, allowing the project to expand the scope of the\r\n accompanying measures and maximize the impact of the intervention on the beneficiaries beyond the transfers.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Current\r\n Current Actuals + Proposed Disbursement %\r\nLn/Cr/TF Expenditure\r\n Allocation Committed Allocation (Type Total)\r\n Category\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\n\r\n TF-A2454- UNCDTIONAL\r\n 001 CASH TRANSFER 3,565,000.00 2,214,830.16 2,915,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n Currency: PT B.4 (i)\r\n USD GD/WK/NCS/CS/\r\n TR/OC PART 785,000.00 902,411.88 1,435,000.00 100.00 100.00\r\n B.4(ii)\r\n Total 4,350,000.00 3,117,242.04 4,350,000.00\r\n\f" }, "D29886277": { "id": "29886277", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Mali", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Other human development,Nutrition and food security,Other social protection and risk management,Social Protection and Labor Policy & Systems,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-05-11T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/985301526058050008/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/985301526058050008/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/985301526058050008/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328", "projectid": "P127328", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/985301526058050008/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES32258\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n EMERGENCY SAFETY NETS PROJECT (JIGISÉMÉJIRI)\r\n APPROVED ON APRIL 30, 2013\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF MALI\r\n\r\n\r\nSOCIAL PROTECTION & LABOR\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Soukeyna Kane\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Michal J. Rutkowski\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Jehan Arulpragasam\r\n Task Team Leader: Phillippe George Pereira Guimaraes Leite\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP127328 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nNot Required (C) Not Required (C)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n30-Apr-2013 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Programme de Filets Sociaux,Unite Technique de Gestion\r\nRepublic of Mali\r\n des filets sociaux au Mali - JigisemeJiri\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe objectives of the Project are to provide targeted cash transfers to the poor and food insecure households and to\r\nestablishbuilding blocks for a national safety net system for the Recipient.\r\nCurrent PDO\r\nThe objectives of the project are to increase access to targeted cash transfers for poor and vulnerable households and\r\nbuild an adaptive national safety net system in Recipient s territory .\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-H8350 30-Apr-2013 27-May-2013 17-Aug-2013 31-Dec-2019 70.00 55.83 9.53\r\nTF-A2384 01-Sep-2016 01-Dec-2016 01-Dec-2016 30-Jun-2018 10.00 3.01 6.99\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n1. Project implementation has been under way for almost 4 years, and the World Bank has rated both the\r\nachievement of the PDO and implementation progress as Satisfactory. The disbursement rate reached 76 percent or\r\nabout US$57 million as of December 31st, 2017.\r\n\r\n2. A detailed summary of progress-to-date per component is as follows:\r\n\r\na. Component 1. To date, the project is: (a) providing quarterly cash transfers to 67,845 families (90 percent of\r\ntarget), reaching 390,465 individuals (80,975 children aged 0-5 years; 103,874 children aged 6-14 years; and 31,092\r\nelderly people aged 60+), of which 49 percent are women, in Kaye, Sikasso, Koulikoro, Segou, Mopti, Gao and Bamako\r\nwith accompanying measures that provide information sessions on nutrition, health, education and family economy\r\nfor the participants and other members or the community; (b) provision of nutritional supplements to 105,000\r\nbeneficiaries (70 percent are children under 5 years old, and 30 percent pregnant women); (c) provision of Income\r\nGenerating Activities (IGA) to 5,127 households in Sikasso et Bamako, where 40 percent of IGAs are small activities\r\ntailored for women participation, and 60 percent are mostly dominated by men; and (d) provision of access to free\r\nhealth care through the Régime d’Assistance Médicale (RAMED)[1] to 56,698 heads of households and direct family\r\nmembers offered by the National Agency for Medical Assistance (Agence Nationale d’Assistance Medicale).\r\n\r\nb. Component 2. The project supports the establishment of a social safety net system by supporting the creation of\r\nUnified Social Registry (henceforth RSU). The RSU has already enrolled 74,845 households in Kaye, Sikasso, Koulikoro,\r\nSegou, Mopti, Gao and Bamako. RSU enrolment does not translate automatically into benefits, but a significant share\r\nof those registered are actual beneficiaries of cash transfers and/or of free health care.\r\n\r\nc. Component 3. The project continues to support institutional strengthening, coordination, and capacity building.\r\nSpecifically, the project (a) has a fully staffed implementation unit (the UTGFS); (b) is effectively providing capacity\r\nbuilding for staff of the UTGFS and the National Directorate for Social Protection and Economic Solidarity; and (c) has\r\ndeveloped a monitoring and evaluation strategy to track the project’s operational, financial, and procurement\r\nactivities.\r\n\r\n3. The proposed restructuring aims solely to change the closing date of TF0A2384 from June 30, 2018 to\r\nSeptember 30, 2019.\r\nThe rationale for the change is that recently, an Administration Agreement between the Agence Française de\r\nDéveloppement (AFD), the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International\r\nDevelopment Association concerning the Multi-Donor Trust Fund for the Sahel Adaptive Social Protection Program\r\nTrust Fund (MDTF-ASP) No. TF072741 parallel to the original Trust Fund No. TF072151 was signed to increase the Trust\r\nFunds budget amount and extend the End Disbursement Date. The AFD agreed to provide the sum of six million Euros\r\n(6,000,000 EUR) for the MDTF-ASP (Trust Fund No. TF072741) in accordance with the terms of the signed\r\nAdministration Agreement to finance the activities set forth in the “Multi-Donor Trust Fund for the Sahel Adaptive\r\nSocial Protection Program Description”. In addition, the Administration Agreement indicates that it is expected for the\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n funds deposited in the Trust Fund to be fully disbursed by the Bank by March 30, 2020. Therefore, given that the Bank\r\n must provide to the Donors a final report on the activities financed by the Trust Fund within six (6) months of the End\r\n Disbursement Date, the current closing date of TF0A2384 should then be extended to September 30, 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\nLOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\nIDA-H8350 Effective 30-Jun-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\nTF-A2384 Effective 30-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2019 30-Jan-2020\r\n\f" }, "D29792092": { "id": "29792092", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Cameroon", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Nutrition and food security,Population and reproductive health,Health system performance,Child health,Other communicable diseases", "docdt": "2018-03-30T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/779611525399317134/pdf/CAMEROON-HEALTH-NEW-PAD-04052018.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/779611525399317134/text/CAMEROON-HEALTH-NEW-PAD-04052018.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/779611525399317134/Cameroon-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-additional-financing", "projectid": "P156679,P164954", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/779611525399317134/Cameroon-Health-System-Performance-Reinforcement-Project-additional-financing", "doc-text": " Document of \r\n The World Bank \r\n  \r\n FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY \r\n Report No: PAD2735  \r\n  \r\n\r\n INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION \r\n\r\n PROJECT PAPER \r\n\r\n ON A \r\n\r\n PROPOSED ADDITIONAL CREDIT \r\n\r\n IN THE AMOUNT OF €5 MILLION \r\n (US$6 MILLION EQUIVALENT) \r\n\r\n AND A \r\n\r\n PROPOSED ADDITIONAL GRANT FROM THE IDA18 REFUGEE SUB‐WINDOW  \r\n IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 20.8 MILLION \r\n (US$30 MILLION EQUIVALENT) \r\n\r\n TO THE \r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON \r\n\r\n FOR THE \r\n\r\n HEALTH SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REINFORCEMENT PROJECT  \r\n\r\n MARCH 30, 2018 \r\n\r\n  \r\n  \r\n  \r\n Health, Nutrition, and Population Global Practice \r\n Africa Region \r\n    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThis document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their \r\nofficial duties.  Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. \r\n\f CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS \r\n (Exchange Rate Effective February 28, 2018) \r\n  \r\n Currency Unit =  CFA Franc (FCFA) \r\n FCFA 537.8768 =  US$ 1 \r\n US$ 0.6916 =   SDR 1 \r\n US$ 0.8184 =    EUR 1 \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n FISCAL YEAR \r\n January 1 ‐ December 31 \r\n \r\n ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS \r\n \r\n AIDS  Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome  \r\n AF  Additional Financing \r\n ANC  Antenatal Care \r\n BUNEC  National Office of Civil Registration (Bureau National de l’Etat Civil) \r\n CAR  Central African Republic \r\n CBO  Community‐based Organization \r\n CDP  Communal Development Plans \r\n CDPSP  Community Development Program Support Project \r\n CDVA  Contract Development and Verification Agency \r\n CERC  Contingent Emergency Response Component \r\n CHW  Community Health Worker \r\n CIS  Heath Information Unit (Cellule d’information Sanitaire)  \r\n CRVS  Civil Registration and Vital Statistics \r\n DA  Designated Account \r\n DALY  Disability Adjusted Life Year \r\n DHIS2  District Health Information Software 2 \r\n DPF  Development Policy Financing \r\n ERSP  Education Reform Support Project \r\n FGM  Female Genital Mutilation \r\n FGM/C  Female Genital Mutilation or Cutting \r\n FM  Financial Management \r\n FCV  Fragility, Conflict, and Violence \r\n GBV  Gender‐based Violence \r\n GDP  Gross Domestic Product \r\n GFF  Global Financing Facility  \r\n GoC  Government of Cameroon \r\n GRM  Grievance Redress Mechanism \r\n GRS  Grievance Redress Service \r\n HD  Human Development \r\n HIV  Human Immunodeficiency Virus \r\n HSPRP  Health System Performance Reinforcement Project \r\n HSS  Health Sector Strategy (Stratégie Sectorielle de la Santé) \r\n\f HSSIP  Health Sector Support Investment Project \r\n HWMP  Hygiene and Waste Management Plan \r\n HWTS  Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage \r\n IC  Investment Case \r\n IDP  Internally Displaced Person \r\n IE  Impact Evaluation \r\n IFR  Interim Financial Report \r\n IPP  Indigenous Peoples Plan \r\n IPF  Investment Project Financing \r\n IPPF  Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework \r\n ISR  Implementation Status and Results Report \r\n LDP  Letter of Development Policy \r\n M&E  Monitoring and Evaluation \r\n MHM  Menstrual Hygiene Management \r\n MINMAP  Ministry of Public Procurement (Ministère de Marchés Publics) \r\n MoPH  Ministry of Public Health \r\n MWMP  Medical Waste Management Plan \r\n NGO  Nongovernmental Organization \r\n NPF  New Procurement Framework \r\n NTD  Neglected Topical Disease \r\n OP  Operational Policy \r\n PBF  Performance‐Based Financing \r\n PDO  Project Development Objective \r\n PHEOC  Public Health Emergency Operation Center \r\n PIU  Project Implementation Unit \r\n PPP  Purchasing Power Parity \r\n PPSD  Procurement Strategy for Development \r\n PTSD  Post‐Traumatic Stress Disorder \r\n RMNCAH  Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn, Child, and Adolescent Health \r\n RPBA  Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment \r\n RSW  Refugee Sub‐Window \r\n SDI  Service Delivery Indicator \r\n SSNP  Social Safety Nets Project \r\n ToR  Terms of Reference \r\n UHC  Universal Health Coverage \r\n UN  United Nations \r\n UNHCR  United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees \r\n UNICEF  United Nations Children’s Fund \r\n WASH  Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene \r\n  WFP  World Food Programme \r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n  \r\n   \r\n  \r\n BASIC INFORMATION – PARENT (Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ P156679)\r\n      \r\n Country  Product Line  Team Leader(s) \r\n Cameroon  IBRD/IDA  Ibrahim Magazi \r\n\r\n Project ID  Financing Instrument  Resp CC  Req CC  Practice Area (Lead) \r\n P156679  Investment Project  GHN13 (9542)  AFCC1 (6544)  Health, Nutrition & \r\n Financing  Population \r\n  \r\n  \r\n Implementing Agency: Ministry of Public Health \r\n  \r\n  \r\n ADD FIN TBL1 \r\n Is this a regionally tagged project? \r\n\r\n No \r\n [  ]  Situations of Urgent Need or  Bank/IFC Collaboration    \r\n Capacity Constraints  No \r\n [  ]  Financial Intermediaries \r\n [  ]  Series of Projects \r\n Original Environmental \r\n Approval Date  Closing Date  Current EA Category \r\n Assessment Category \r\n 03‐May‐2016  31‐May‐2021  Partial Assessment (B)  Partial Assessment (B) \r\n\r\n\r\n Development Objective(s) \r\n  \r\n The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase utilization and improve the quality of health \r\n services with a particular focus on reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health and nutrition services.  \r\n  \r\n  \r\n\r\n Ratings (from Parent ISR) \r\n   RATING_DRAFT_NO         \r\n  \r\n Implementation  Latest ISR \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 1 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n   29‐Jun‐2016  29‐Nov‐2016  14‐Apr‐2017  23‐Oct‐2017 \r\n\r\n Progress towards \r\n achievement of PDO  S \r\n  \r\n S \r\n  \r\n MS \r\n  \r\n MS \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Implementation \r\n Progress (IP)  S \r\n  \r\n MS \r\n  \r\n MS \r\n  \r\n MS \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Safeguards \r\n Rating  S \r\n  \r\n S \r\n  \r\n S \r\n  \r\n S \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Risk  S  S  S  S \r\n          \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n BASIC INFORMATION – ADDITIONAL FINANCING (Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ Additional \r\n  Financing ‐ P164954)\r\n ADDFIN_TABLE \r\n Additional Financing  Urgent Need or Capacity \r\n Project ID  Project Name \r\n Type  Constraints \r\n P164954  Health System Performance  Restructuring, Scale Up  Yes \r\n Reinforcement Project ‐ \r\n Additional Financing \r\n Financing instrument  Product line  Approval Date \r\n Investment Project  IBRD/IDA  12‐Apr‐2018 \r\n Financing \r\n Projected Date of Full  Bank/IFC Collaboration   \r\n Disbursement \r\n 31‐Dec‐2022  No \r\n\r\n Is this a regionally tagged project? \r\n No \r\n \r\n [✔]  Situations of Urgent Need or Capacity Constraints \r\n [  ]  Financial Intermediaries \r\n [  ]  Series of Projects \r\n \r\n PROJECT FINANCING DATA – PARENT (Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ P156679)\r\n  \r\n Disbursement Summary (from Parent ISR) \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n Page 2 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Net  \r\n Source of Funds  Total Disbursed  Remaining Balance  Disbursed \r\n Commitments \r\n\r\n IBRD         % \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n IDA   100.00     9.28    95.72  8.8 % \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Grants    27.00     4.06    22.94  15 % \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n PROJECT FINANCING DATA – ADDITIONAL FINANCING (Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ \r\n \r\n Additional Financing ‐ P164954)\r\n  \r\n FINANCING DATA (US$, Millions) \r\n  \r\n  \r\n  \r\n   FIN_SUMM_NEW   \r\n SUMMARY \r\n  \r\n Total Project Cost  163.00 \r\n Total Financing  163.00 \r\n Financing Gap  0.00 \r\n    \r\n  \r\n DETAILS   PUB_FIN_DETAIL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n        International Development Association (IDA)  136.00 \r\n\r\n             IDA Credit  106.00 \r\n\r\n             IDA Grant  30.00 \r\n\r\n        Trust Funds  27.00 \r\n\r\n             Global Financing Facility  27.00 \r\n  \r\n  \r\n  \r\n  \r\n COMPLIANCE \r\n  \r\n Policy \r\n\r\n Does the project depart from the CPF in content or in other significant respects? \r\n [    ] Yes   [ ✔ ] No \r\n\r\n Does the project require any other Policy waiver(s)? \r\n [    ] Yes   [ ✔ ] No \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 3 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n INSTITUTIONAL DATA\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n Practice Area (Lead) \r\n Health, Nutrition & Population \r\n  \r\n Contributing Practice Areas \r\n  \r\n  \r\n Climate Change and Disaster Screening \r\n This operation has been screened for short and long‐term climate change and disaster risks \r\n  \r\n Gender Tag \r\n  \r\n Does the project plan to undertake any of the following? \r\n  \r\n a. Analysis to identify Project‐relevant gaps between males and females, especially in light of country gaps identified \r\n through SCD and CPF \r\n  \r\n Yes \r\n  \r\n b. Specific action(s) to address the gender gaps identified in (a) and/or to improve women or mens empowerment \r\n  \r\n Yes \r\n  \r\n c. Include Indicators in results framework to monitor outcomes from actions identified in (b) \r\n  \r\n Yes \r\n  \r\n  \r\n PROJECT TEAM\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n Bank Staff \r\n Name  Role  Specialization  Unit \r\n Team Leader (ADM \r\n Jean Claude Taptue Fotso  Public Health  GHN13 \r\n Responsible) \r\n Ibrahim Magazi  Team Leader  Public Health  GHN13 \r\n Procurement Specialist (ADM \r\n Ibrah Rahamane Sanoussi  Procurement  GGOPF \r\n Responsible) \r\n Financial Management \r\n Celestin Adjalou Niamien  Financial Management  GGOAC \r\n Specialist \r\n Aissatou Chipkaou  Team Member  Operations & Quality control  GHN13 \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 4 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Benjamin Burckhart  Team Member  Social Protection  GSU01 \r\n Bertille Gerardine Ngameni \r\n Team Member  Financial management  GGOAC \r\n Wepanjue \r\n Carole Ndjitcheu  Team Member  Administrative support  AFCC1 \r\n Charlotte Noudjieu \r\n Social Safeguards Specialist  Social safeguards  GSU01 \r\n Cheumani \r\n Chrystelle Isabelle Mfout \r\n Team Member  Operations support  AFCC1 \r\n Tapouh \r\n Cyrille Valence Ngouana  Environmental Safeguards \r\n Environmental safguards  GEN07 \r\n Kengne  Specialist \r\n Edith Ruguru Mwenda  Team Member  Legal counsel  LEGAM \r\n FNU Owono Owono  Team Member  Social Safeguards  GSU01 \r\n Faly Diallo  Team Member  Financial management  WFACS \r\n Hamadou Saidou  Team Member  Impact Evaluation  GHNDR \r\n Helene Simonne Ndjebet \r\n Team Member  Operations  AFCC1 \r\n Yaka \r\n Karamath Djivede Sybille \r\n Team Member  Public Health  GHNGE \r\n Adamon \r\n Kazumi Inden  Team Member  Community based health  GHNGE \r\n Kristyna Bishop  Social Safeguards Specialist  social safeguards  GSU01 \r\n Maud Juquois  Team Member  Health Economics  GHN13 \r\n Monique Ndome Didiba \r\n Team Member  Procurement  GGOPF \r\n Epse Azonfack \r\n Moulay Driss Zine Eddine \r\n Team Member  Health Financing  GHN07 \r\n El Idrissi \r\n Odilia Renata Hebga  Team Member  Communication  AFREC \r\n Opope Oyaka Tshivuila \r\n Team Member  Reproductive health  GHN13 \r\n Matala \r\n Paul Jacob Robyn  Team Member  Public Health  GHN07 \r\n Robert Anthony Soeters  Team Member  Performance‐Based Financing  GHN07 \r\n Sariette Jene M. C. Jippe  Team Member  Operations support  GHN13 \r\n  \r\n Extended Team \r\n Name  Title  Organization  Location \r\n  \r\n \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 5 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ Additional Financing (P164954) \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 6 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ Additional Financing (P164954) \r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n CAMEROON \r\n  \r\n HEALTH SYSTEM PERFORMANCE REINFORCEMENT PROJECT ‐ ADDITIONAL FINANCING \r\n  \r\n TABLE OF CONTENTS \r\n\r\n  \r\n  \r\n I.  BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCING ..................................................... 8 \r\n II.  DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL FINANCING ................................................................................. 23 \r\n III.  KEY RISKS ................................................................................................................................... 37 \r\n IV.  APPRAISAL SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 41 \r\n V.  WORLD BANK GRIEVANCE REDRESS ........................................................................................... 50 \r\n VI.  SUMMARY OF CHANGES ............................................................................................................ 51 \r\n VII.  RESULTS FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................... 60 \r\n ANNEX 1. THE GOVERNMENT’S APPROACH TO THE REFUGEE CRISIS .................................................. 69 \r\n ANNEX 2. COMMITMENTS OF THE GOVERNMENT IN SUPPORT OF REFUGEES, INTERNALLY DISPLACED \r\n POPULATIONS, AND HOST COMMUNITIES ......................................................................................... 71 \r\n ANNEX 3. WORLD BANK INTEGRATED APPROACH THROUGH IDA18 REFUGEE SUB‐WINDOW IN \r\n CAMEROON ....................................................................................................................................... 76 \r\n ANNEX 4. RESULTS MONITORING AND EVALUATION ......................................................................... 78 \r\n ANNEX 5. CAMEROON MAP OF REFUGEES AND HOST COMMUNITIES ................................................ 80 \r\n\r\n  \r\n  \r\n   \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 7 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n I. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCING \r\n\r\n A. Introduction \r\n\r\n 1. This  Project  Paper  seeks  the  approval  of  the  Executive  Directors  to  provide  an  additional \r\n financing  (AF)  to  the  Republic  of  Cameroon’s  Health  System  Performance  Reinforcement  Project \r\n (HSPRP) (P156679) in an amount of US$36 million (comprised of a US$6 million Credit from IDA national \r\n allocation and US$30 million grant from the IDA18 Refugee Sub‐Window [RSW]). The proposed AF aims \r\n to mitigate the health and economic impact of the conflict in the Far North region and the refugee crisis \r\n in the northern (Far North, North, Adamawa) and East regions of Cameroon by providing essential health, \r\n nutrition, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) services to refugees and refugee‐host communities. \r\n The  proposed  AF  would  (a)  revise  the  Project  Development  Objective  (PDO)  to  reflect  the  addition  of \r\n refugees  as  program  beneficiaries  and  a  Contingent  Emergency  Response  Component  (CERC),  (b) \r\n reinforce  select  activities  under  the  original  program  Components  1  and  2  and  include  new  activities \r\n targeting refugees, (c) restructure the parent project to include two new components (3 and 4), (d) revise \r\n the Results Framework to include one new PDO level indicator and two intermediate level indicators to \r\n reflect the AF activities, and (e) extend the project closure date. The targets of the original indicators will \r\n be revised to reflect the increase in beneficiaries. \r\n\r\n 2. The Government of Cameroon (GoC) requested the AF on August 11, 2017 by sending a Letter \r\n of Development Policy (LDP). The GoC meets all three criteria to access financing through the regional \r\n sub‐window on refugees and host communities1: (a) Cameroon hosts 375,415 refugees as of end‐2016,2 \r\n (b)  the  World  Bank  Group  in  consultation  with  the  United  Nations  High  Commissioner  for  Refugees \r\n (UNHCR) has determined that Cameroon adheres to a framework for the protection of refugees that is \r\n adequate for the purpose of the IDA18 RSW,3 and (c) the GoC has articulated a strategic approach to move \r\n toward  long‐term  solutions  that  benefit  refugees  and  host  communities.  The  access  to  the  RSW  for \r\n Cameroon was approved by the Board on September 29, 2017. The AF will support the implementation \r\n of Cameroon’s policy commitments related to the refugee issues outlined in the LDP. The proposed AF \r\n package is scheduled to be presented to the Board in April 2018, to be effective in June 2018, and the \r\n current closing date of May 21, 2021, will be extended to December 31, 2022.  \r\n\r\n 3. The  proposed  AF  will  be  implemented  as  part  of  an  integrated  multisectoral  approach  in \r\n partnership  with  the  Education,  Social  Protection  and  Labor,  and  Social,  Urban,  Rural,  and  Resilience \r\n Global Practices. \r\n\r\n 4. Since  2012,  performance‐based  financing  (PBF)  has  successfully  been  implemented  in \r\n Cameroon as a mechanism to improve the quality and accessibility of health services in regions already \r\n\r\n 1 A country is eligible if (a) the number of UNHCR‐registered refugees, including persons in refugee‐like situations, it hosts is at \r\n\r\n least 25,000 or 0.1 percent of the country population; (b) the country adheres to an adequate framework for the protection of \r\n refugees; (c) the country has an action plan, strategy, or similar document that describes concrete steps, including possible \r\n policy reforms that the country will undertake toward long‐term solutions that benefit refugees and host communities, \r\n consistent with the overall purpose of the window. \r\n 2 UNHCR. 2016. “Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2016.” \r\n 3Adequacy is determined based on adherence of national policies and/or practices consistent with international refugee \r\n\r\n protection standards. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 8 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n affected  by  the  refugee  crisis.  The  Cameroon  Health  Sector  Support  Investment  Project  (P104525) \r\n implemented PBF in the East regions (100 percent coverage) in 2012. The impact evaluation of this project, \r\n (IE) conducted in 2015, showed significant improvements in the quality of health services, reduction of \r\n user  fees,  reduction  of  corruption,  and  improved  utilization  of  health  services  (for  example,  family \r\n planning and vaccinations)4. This success led to the GoC’s decision to scale‐up PBF nationally with the \r\n support of the Health System Performance Reinforcement Project (P156679), which was approved by the \r\n Board in 2016. The national scale up of PBF commenced in the Far North, North, and Adamawa regions in \r\n 2016. Routine data have already shown some improvements in the quality, accessibility, and utilization of \r\n health services. Similar to observations in other fragile states such as the Central African Republic (CAR), \r\n Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, PBF has been shown to improve the resilience of health \r\n facilities during a humanitarian crisis and improve their capacity to provide health services for the affected \r\n population.  \r\n\r\n 5. Building on the success of the parent project, and the PBF program in Cameroon, the AF will \r\n finance PBF payments to (a) establish health facilities in refugee‐hosting regions to reinforce the equitable \r\n coverage of the current primary health care, maternal and child health and nutrition package; (b) scale up \r\n civil  registration  and  vital  statistics  (CRVS)  activities;  (c)  reinforce  monitoring  and  evaluation  (M&E) \r\n systems; and (d) strengthen communicable disease surveillance systems and epidemic preparedness and \r\n response in refugee‐host communities and refugee camps.  \r\n\r\n 6. In  addition,  the  AF  will  support  new  activities  specific  to  the  health  needs  of  refugees  not \r\n covered  by  the  parent  project,  including  (a)  provision  of  emergency,  sexual,  and  reproductive  health \r\n services, including those related to the management of gender‐based violence (GBV) including physical, \r\n sexual, and psychological violence and female genital mutilation (FGM); (b) nutrition, deworming, and soft \r\n WASH  service  delivery  and  activities  related  to  the  Early  Years  Package;  (c)  implementation  of  a \r\n comprehensive  mental  health  and  psychosocial  support  program;  and  (d)  support  for  institutional \r\n capacity  building,  including,  but  not  limited  to,  (i)  sensitivity  training  of  frontline  health  professionals, \r\n community health workers (CHWs), community‐based organizations (CBOs), and civil registration officers; \r\n (ii) skills training of health professionals on basic and comprehensive emergency obstetric and newborn \r\n care; (iii) training of health professionals and CHWs on the management of GBV, FGM, mental health, \r\n psychosocial conditions, nutrition, neglected topical diseases (NTDs), and WASH. \r\n\r\n 7. Considering the inherent security and health risks associated with a humanitarian crisis, as well \r\n as the ongoing political risks, a CERC has been included in accordance with Bank Policy, IPF, Section III \r\n paragraphs 12 and 13 for projects in Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints. \r\n This will allow for rapid reallocation of project proceeds in the event of a natural or artificial disaster or \r\n crisis that has caused, or is likely to imminently cause, a major adverse economic and/or social impact. \r\n\r\n B. Country, Economic, and Social Context \r\n\r\n 8. Cameroon  is  a  lower‐middle‐income,  central  African  country  that  shares  borders  with  six \r\n countries5 including Nigeria and Chad in the north and CAR in the east. Cameroon’s population is large \r\n\r\n\r\n 4 De Walque, D; Robyn, RJ; Saidou, H; Sorgho, G, Steenland, M. 2017. “Looking into the Performance‐Based Financing Black Box. \r\n\r\n Evidence from an Impact Evaluation in the Health Sector in Cameroon.”  \r\n 5 Nigeria, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Chad, and CAR. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 9 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n (22.8 million), young (41 percent under 15 years), and diverse, with 250 ethnic groups spread across its \r\n 10 regions.6 \r\n\r\n 9. Despite  Cameroon’s  resilient  and  diversified  economy,  the  global  oil  shock  and  security \r\n challenges have had an impact on economic growth. Cameroon is well endowed with natural resources, \r\n (oil, timber, fertile land, agricultural production including coffee, cotton, and cocoa) and in 2016, the gross \r\n domestic product (GDP) per capita per year (purchasing power parity [PPP]) was estimated at US$3,285. \r\n Following a recession during the mid‐90s, growth accelerated to almost 6 percent (2014–2015), reflecting \r\n strong  public  infrastructure  investments,  coupled  with  favorable  commodity  prices  and  financial \r\n deepening.  Growth  declined  to  an  estimated  3.7  percent  in  2017,  driven  by  the  continued  decline  in \r\n rubber, coffee, and oil production, precipitated by the sharp decline in oil prices (from US$110 per barrel \r\n in  2014  to  US$55  per  barrel  in  2017),  and  aging  plantations.  Cameroon’s  growth  slowdown,  in  the \r\n presence of a relatively diversified and resilient economy, reflects a narrowing of its fiscal and external \r\n margins  of  maneuver  and  an  increase  in  its  public  debt.  Cameroon  remains  unable  to  realize  its  full \r\n development potential mostly because of its poor infrastructure, unfavorable business environment, and \r\n weak governance of the private and public sectors. \r\n\r\n 10. Despite more than a decade of consistent economic growth, 37.5 percent of Cameroonians live \r\n below the poverty line, chronic poverty stands at an estimated 26 percent and the number of absolute \r\n poor  increased  by  12  percent  between  2007  and  2014  to  8.1  million  people.7  Poverty  is  increasingly \r\n concentrated in rural areas and the northern8 regions. A total of 56.8 percent of people in rural areas and \r\n the majority of people in the Far North (74.3 percent), the North (67.9 percent), the North‐West (55.3 \r\n percent) and, to a lesser extent, Adamawa (47.1 percent) live on less than US$1.95 a day. Inequality has \r\n increased, per capita income has stagnated, and the Gini coefficient is high at 44.0 (2014), implying that \r\n the bottom 20 percent consume less than 5 percent of all consumption, whereas the richest 20 percent \r\n consume almost half of all consumption. Poverty is gender biased. In comparison to men, women have \r\n fewer  completed  years  of  education  (8.2  years  versus  6.7  years)  and  lower  literacy  rates  (87  percent \r\n versus  74  percent),  with  negative  impact  on  economic  welfare,  fertility,  child  survival,  and  access  to \r\n reproductive  and  health  services.  Entrenched  patriarchal  norms  dictate  that  girls  and  women  in  these \r\n communities are married early,9 have limited access to land, and are prohibited from inheriting on the \r\n death of their husband.  \r\n\r\n Refugee Crisis in the Northern and East regions \r\n\r\n 11. Four  of  Cameroon’s  poorest  regions  (Far  North,  North,  Adamawa,  and  East)  experience \r\n persisting fragility due to security threats in its borders with CAR (East, Adamawa, and North regions) \r\n and  Nigeria  (Far  North).  These  regions  collectively  host  an  estimated  338,505  refugees  and  asylum‐\r\n seekers10 fleeing the conflict in CAR and Boko Haram insurgents on Cameroon’s borders with Nigeria and \r\n\r\n\r\n 6 Cameroon is administratively divided into 10 regions: Far North, North, Adamawa, West, North‐West, Littoral, South‐West, \r\n\r\n South, Central, and East.  \r\n 7 Cameroon’s fourth household survey. \r\n 8 Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region. \r\n 9 The legal age of marriage for girls in Cameroon is 15 years, versus 18 years for boys, and in Adamawa, Far North, and North‐\r\n\r\n West regions, girls are married between 8 and 9 years. UNHCR. “Cameroon: Information on Forced or Arranged Marriage.” \r\n Accessed November 28, 2017, http://www.refworld.org/docid/3f51ec864.html.  \r\n 10 As of end November 2017. Data source from UNHCR. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 10 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Chad. Cameroon currently hosts the 11th largest number of refugees in the world and 6th largest in Africa, \r\n and refugees constitute over 2 percent of Cameroon’s population. \r\n\r\n 12. Even before the massive influx of displaced populations, refugee‐hosting regions (northern11 \r\n and East regions) experienced the highest and deepest levels of poverty, highest inequality rates, and \r\n lowest human development (HD) indicators in Cameroon. Hosting regions are subject to multiple poverty \r\n traps, including low agriculture productivity, poor infrastructure, high fertility, and limited access to basic \r\n social services (health, education, water, and sanitation), and livelihood. They account for 66 percent of \r\n poor households in the country, even though they are home to only 38 percent of Cameroon’s population. \r\n Forced displacements have greatly increased humanitarian needs, exacerbated poverty levels, and put \r\n significant pressure on already overstretched social, economic, and governance structures and natural \r\n resources. The increased fragility, insecurity, and violence in the border countries and northern regions \r\n have resulted in the loss of livestock, interruption of agricultural activities, trade decreases, and closed \r\n markets, roads, and borders. \r\n\r\n 13. There  are  two  distinct  refugee  situations  in  Cameroon—with  marked  differences  in  the \r\n challenges faced by refugees and host communities.  \r\n\r\n 14. Approximately 248,000 refugees from CAR live along the eastern border (the majority of them \r\n in the East region and the rest in the Adamawa and North regions). These refugees fled the violence in \r\n CAR in two waves. The first occurred between 2003 to 2006 and saw an estimated 100,000 CAR refugees \r\n settling in Cameroon, while the second wave (after 2013) led to an influx of an additional 160,000 CAR \r\n refugees. Overall, 69 percent of CAR refugees have achieved a degree of socioeconomic inclusion, are \r\n integrated  in  villages  among  the  host  communities,  and  sometimes  live  in  households  headed  by \r\n Cameroonians; however, 31 percent of CAR refugees live in one of seven dedicated refugee sites. CAR \r\n refugees represent about 5 percent of the total population in Adamawa and 18 percent in the East region. \r\n In  some  municipalities,  CAR  refugees  represent  more  than  half  of  the  overall  population  (that  is,  in \r\n Kenzou—East region—CAR refugees account for 70 percent of total population). In some areas, post‐2013 \r\n refugee arrivals have put a strain on host‐refugee relationships, which were largely positive, and have led \r\n to conflict over resources and land use. Humanitarian assistance, often primarily directed to refugees, has \r\n also  caused  resentment  among  host  communities  who  do  not  benefit  from  humanitarian  aid.  Despite \r\n humanitarian efforts directed toward refugees, the majority remain fully dependent on aid and live in \r\n extreme  poverty.12  The  situation  may  further  deteriorate  as  a  result  of  the  gradual  reduction  of \r\n humanitarian  assistance,  for  example,  between  2017  and  2018,  the  World  Food  Programme  (WFP) \r\n reduced the number of refugees receiving monthly food rations by 50 percent. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 11\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n 12 According to a Food Security and Poverty Vulnerability Analysis of CAR refugees in Cameroon, conducted by the American \r\n\r\n University of Beirut in collaboration with UNHCR and WFP, poverty is alarmingly widespread among the CAR refugee \r\n population, with the vast majority living far below the extreme poverty line. Based on the Republic of Cameroon’s national \r\n poverty lines, 98.5percent of CAR refugees fall below the poverty line (CFAF22,500 per person per month) and 97.7percent fall \r\n below the extreme poverty line (CFAF 17,962 per person per month). This is equally true for the old (arrival between 2004 and \r\n 2006) and new caseload (arrival between 2013 and 2017). Even when applying the Minimum Food Basket, as determined by \r\n WFP, which established that a person needs a minimum of CFAF 8,800 per month to reach minimum food requirements of \r\n 2,100 kcal per day, 70.1 percent of the total CAR refugee population do not have sufficient means to consume sufficient levels \r\n of food even with current levels of assistance provided. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 11 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 15. Approximately  91,000  refugees  from  Nigeria  live  in  the  Far  North  region.  The  destabilizing \r\n impact  of  the  refugee  population  in  this  region  is  compounded  by  the  presence  of  242,000  internally \r\n displaced persons (IDPs). These refugees fled the Boko Haram attacks and most have been in exile for \r\n three to four years. The majority of Nigerian refugees (± 62,500 refugees as of January 31, 2018) live in \r\n the Minawao refugee camp, where living conditions are poor and the population remains fully dependent \r\n on  humanitarian  assistance.  The  remaining  25,000  to  30,000  Nigerian  refugees  live  outside  the  camp, \r\n side‐by‐side  with  IDPs,  and  host  populations  in  villages.  UNHCR  has  registered  all  Nigerian  refugees \r\n residing  in  the  Minawao  camp  using  a  biometric  registration  system  and  have  distributed  refugee‐ID‐\r\n cards; however, refugees who reside outside of the camp are yet to receive refugee‐ID cards to facilitate \r\n their identification and protection. The limited social and economic inclusion of Nigerian refugees into \r\n host  communities  has  been  attributed  to  the  fact  that  (a)  Nigerian  refugees  are  mobile  and  about  25 \r\n percent have experienced multiple displacements; (b) the Far North region has been a breeding ground \r\n for members of Boko Haram, who have led indiscriminate violent attacks and suicide bombings against \r\n civilian  and  armed  forces  and  raid  villages  on  Cameroonian  territory;  and  (c)  the  lack  of  identification \r\n documents of out‐of‐camp refugees makes it difficult to distinguish between refugees, IDPs, and hosts. \r\n Overall, the situation remains very fluid, with ongoing movements of people that follow the ebb and flow \r\n of the conflict. Inflows of refugees and IDPs, continued insecurity, violent attacks, and cross‐border traffic \r\n restrictions  have  destabilized  the  economy  of  a  region  that  was  already  very  poor,  underserved,  and \r\n largely  dependent  on  trade  with  Nigeria.  The  continued  volatility  in  CAR  and  increasing  frequency  of \r\n attacks  by  Boko  Haram,  reduces  the  likelihood  of  refugees  returning  home;  if  anything,  increasing \r\n numbers are expected in the northern and East regions \r\n\r\n 16. The majority of refugee children do not have birth certificates. According to a Food Security and \r\n Poverty Vulnerability Analysis of CAR refugees in Cameroon, an estimated 70 percent of refugee children \r\n under five years, in the North, do not have a birth certificate. Moreover, 87 percent of refugees in the East \r\n region have not registered all their children, compared to less than 30 percent of host community families. \r\n These estimates are expected to be worse among Nigerian refugee children in the Far North regions. \r\n\r\n 17. GBV,  including  sexual  violence,13  against  women  is  widespread  in  Cameroon,  and  more \r\n specifically  in  refugee‐hosting  communities,  and  prostitution  has  become  a  survival  mechanism \r\n consequent to the limited access to livelihoods for refugees. The Demographic and Health Survey (2011) \r\n showed that 55 percent of women over 15 years of age experienced physical violence, mostly by their \r\n current or recent partner and also by biological and stepparents or siblings. About 20 percent of sexually \r\n active women report their first sexual experience (that is, first time) as being forced, especially for those \r\n under the age of 15 (30 percent). Among ever‐married women, 60 percent have suffered physical, sexual, \r\n or emotional violence at the hands of their current or former husband. Women are particularly vulnerable \r\n to sexual violence when collecting firewood, drawing water, using latrines at night, and moving outside \r\n their camp. Harmful traditional practices, including breast ironing and female genital mutilation or cutting \r\n (FGM/C), are prevalent in Cameroon (1 percent of girls and women ages 15–49 years have undergone \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 13 GBV refers to physical, sexual, emotional, and psychological abuse, and financial control by a person (or a group of people) \r\n\r\n that cause harm to another person.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 12 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n FGM/C, 2004–2015)14 and in female refugees from Chad (44 percent)15, Nigeria (25 percent),16 and CAR \r\n (24.2 percent).17 While FGM/C was criminalized in Cameroon in 2016, concrete measures have not been \r\n implemented to enforce this law, which reduces the likelihood that these practices will stop, particularly \r\n in refugee communities. \r\n\r\n 18. The GoC is committed to addressing the crises and has adopted an emergency plan to respond \r\n to  the  impact  of  the  crises  in  the  four  regions.  An  interministerial  ad  hoc  committee  to  manage  the \r\n refugee crisis was created by the GoC by Presidential Order 269 on March 13, 2014. The Government \r\n relies  heavily  on  humanitarian  partners,  including  UNHCR,  and  development  partners  to  provide \r\n assistance to refugees (Box 1). This largely reflects the lack of fiscal resources and limited administrative \r\n and technical capacity available in remote border regions. Part of the commitment by humanitarian and \r\n development partners is through budget support and multiannual cooperation programs. In addition, the \r\n Government  is  strongly  committed  to  the  ongoing  Recovery  and  Peacebuilding  Assessment  (RPBA) \r\n process, which was launched in 2017 and has a dedicated pillar: that is, ‘security, forced displacement and \r\n protection’. Finally, the LDP clearly outlines the engagement of the GoC to improve the living conditions \r\n of displaced persons and refugees.18 Box 1 illustrates the key stakeholder agreements that the GoC has \r\n taken to address the refugee crisis. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 14 OHCHR. “Committee on the Rights of the Child Examines the Report of Cameroon.” Accessed November 28, 2017, \r\n\r\n http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21675&LangID=E  \r\n 15 Percentage represents the prevalence of girls and women ages 15–49 years who have undergone FGM/C between 2004 and \r\n\r\n 2015. \r\n 16\r\n Percentage represents the prevalence of girls and women ages 15–49 years who have undergone FGM/C between 2004 and \r\n 2015.\r\n 17\r\n Percentage represents the prevalence of girls and women ages 15–49 years who have undergone FGM/C between 2004 and \r\n 2015.\r\n 18 Cameroon is a party to most major international agreements relevant to refugees. These include the 1951 Convention and \r\n\r\n the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the 1969 Organisation of African Unity Convention Governing the \r\n Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa. The status and treatment of refugees in Cameroon is governed by Law No. \r\n 2005/006 of July 2005 and implementing Decree No. 2011/389 of November 2011. Under these statutes, registered refugees \r\n and IDPs can access health and education services without paying significant fees. Documentation, however, remains a critical \r\n issue. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 13 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Box 1. Stakeholder Agreements for Long‐Term Solutions That Benefit Refugees and Host Communities \r\n Agreement 1: The Ministry of Economy, Planning and Regional Development (Ministère de l’Economie, de la \r\n Planification et de l’Aménagement du Territoire [MINEPAT]), European Union, United Nations (UN), and World \r\n Bank; July 2016 \r\n The RPBA (2018–2022), targeting the four regions, was launched in 2017. It (a) assessed economic, social, and \r\n physical impact of the conflict in the Far North region; (b) identified immediate and medium‐term recovery and \r\n peacebuilding requirements; (c) laid the foundations for elaboration of a longer‐term recovery and peacebuilding \r\n strategy; and (d) aimed at strengthening the link between humanitarian, development, and peacebuilding. \r\n Agreement 2: MINESANTE and UNHCR; August 2016 \r\n UNHCR  committed  to  financing  70  percent  of  fees  for  health  services  in  public  health  facilities  for  CAR  and \r\n Nigerian refugees in the Far North, North, Adamawa, and East regions for 2018–2020.19 The convention is valid \r\n for two years (renewable), with an estimated allocation of US$19 million for 2018–2020.20 \r\n Agreement 3: UNHCR, Government of Cameroon, and Government of Nigeria; March 2017 \r\n Tripartite  agreement  for  the  voluntary  repatriation  of  Nigerian  refugees  living  in  Cameroon.  A  Tripartite \r\n Commission was established to oversee the implementation phase of the agreement and ensure that practical \r\n modalities are developed to carry out the terms of the agreement.21 \r\n Agreement 4: MINEPAT, UNHCR (October 2016), and World Bank (from June 2018) \r\n The objective of this agreement is to improve the living conditions of the populations in the East, North, and \r\n Adamawa regions that host the refugees from CAR. Under this agreement, the following activities are included: \r\n (a) elaborate a support plan for the local councils that host refugees and mobilize funds for its implementation, \r\n (b) facilitate inclusion of the needs of refugees and hosting populations in plans and budgets of the Government \r\n and  development  partners,  and  (c)  coordinate  socioeconomic  interventions  related  to  improving  the  living \r\n conditions of refugees and host populations. A Steering Committee and a Technical Secretariat were established. \r\n Functioning of the Technical Secretariat is financed by UNHCR until June 2018; thereafter, the functioning of the \r\n Technical Secretariat will be financed by the four projects benefiting from the IDA18 RSW. These include the three \r\n AFs (HSPRP ‐ P164954; the Social Safety Nets for Crisis Response Project ‐ P164830 [SSNP], and the Community \r\n Development Program Support Project Response to Forced Displacement ‐ P164803 [CDPSP]), and the Education \r\n Reform Support Project ‐ P160926 [ERSP]). \r\n Agreement 5: Letter of Development Policy (August 11, 2017) \r\n The LDP on the support program for refugees and their host communities is the Cameroonian Government’s \r\n statement of commitment to displaced persons and refugees, outlining the measures that have been \r\n implemented to improve their living conditions.\r\n C. Sector and Institutional Context \r\n\r\n 19. Poor maternal, reproductive, and child health and nutrition outcomes in Cameroon continue to \r\n be profound and a pervasive problem. Cameroon ranks 145 out of 179 countries on the mother’s index, \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 19 Convention Cadre entre Le Ministère de la Santé Publique et Le Haut‐commissariat des Nations Unies pour les Réfugiés au \r\n\r\n Cameroun (2016). Accessed January 20,2018. \r\n https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/convention_hcr_minsante.pdf  \r\n 20 Republic of Cameroon, Development Policy Letter, August 14, 2017. \r\n 21 Relief web (2017). Tripartite Agreement for the Voluntary Repatriation of Nigerian Refugees Living between the Government \r\n\r\n of the Republic of Cameroon, the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. \r\n Accessed January 20, 2018. https://reliefweb.int/report/cameroon/tripartite‐agreement‐voluntary‐repatriation‐nigerian‐\r\n refugees‐living‐cameroon  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 14 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n lagging  behind  poorer  countries,  such  as  Mozambique,  Uganda,  and  Zimbabwe.22  Maternal  mortality \r\n increased  between  1990  to  2014  (from  430  to  782  maternal  deaths  per  100,000  live  births).23  Child \r\n mortality remains extremely high (national average: 103 deaths per 1,000 live births), particularly in the \r\n poorest parts of the country such as the North (173 deaths per 1,000 live births) and Far North (154 death \r\n per 1,000 live births), where close to 20 percent of children die before their fifth birthday. Almost one‐\r\n third  of  children  under  five  years  test  positive  for  malaria  (30  percent)  and  suffer  from  diarrhea  (20 \r\n percent) and 35 percent of children under two years are not fully immunized.24.  \r\n\r\n 20. Malnutrition affects a large proportion of children in Cameroon, and the overall percentage of \r\n wasting  among  children  under  five  years  doubled  between  2004  and  2011.  In  2014,  one‐third  (32 \r\n percent)  of  children  in  Cameroon  were  stunted,  which  is  four  times  that  of  the  upper‐middle‐income \r\n country average.25 In comparison to urban areas (22 percent), stunting in the rural areas (41 percent) was \r\n significantly  higher,  particularly  in  the  poorest  regions;  Far  North  (44  percent),  North  (40  percent), \r\n Adamawa (40 percent), and East (38 percent).26 Malnutrition is the contributing cause of almost half (48 \r\n percent) of under‐five deaths.27 Undernutrition is a major cause of lost human capital in the Cameroonian \r\n population, through direct losses in productivity linked to poor physical status, indirect losses due to poor \r\n cognitive function, learning deficits, and losses resulting from increased medical costs. \r\n\r\n 21. Infectious  diseases,  including  malaria  and  human  immunodeficiency  virus  (HIV)  infection, \r\n remain the leading causes of death in Cameroon. In 2016, an estimated 560,000 people were living with \r\n HIV  in  Cameroon  and  29,000  people  died  from  acquired  immunodeficiency  syndrome  (AIDS)‐related \r\n complications, accounting for 13.4 percent of all deaths in Cameroon.28 Malaria contributes to the largest \r\n disease burden in Cameroon (absolute Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs): 2,035,765.5029). It accounts \r\n for 40–50 percent of medical consultations, 40 percent of deaths among children less than five years, and \r\n 23 percent of hospitalizations. Malaria is the leading cause of death among children under five years and \r\n pregnant women. \r\n\r\n 22. Refugees, particularly women and children, have a disproportionately higher burden of disease \r\n compared  to  the  host  population.  The  most  prevalent  diseases  in  refugees  in  Cameroon  are  upper \r\n respiratory  tract  infections  (20.8  percent),  malaria  (7.6  percent),  intestinal  worms  (7.4  percent),  and \r\n watery  diarrhea  (6.8  percent).  Furthermore,  refugees  in  Cameroon  have  a  high  burden  of  non‐\r\n communicable  diseases  such  as  musculoskeletal  disorders  (31.8  percent)  and  cardiovascular  diseases \r\n (26.3  percent).  WASH  services  are  a  critical  need  in  refugee‐affected  areas.30  Only  28  percent  of  the \r\n\r\n\r\n 22 “State of the World’s Mothers. 2015. Save the Children.” Indicators of the 2013 mother’s index include (a) lifetime risk of \r\n\r\n maternal death, (b) under‐5 mortality rate, (c) expected years of formal education, (d) gross national income per capita, and (e) \r\n participation of women in national government.  \r\n 23 Source: MICS 2014. \r\n 24 Source: MICS 2014. \r\n 25 Stunting, defined as low height‐for‐age, is an indicator of chronic malnutrition. Source: MICS 2014. \r\n 26 Source: MICS 2014. \r\n 27 Source: MICS 2014. \r\n 28 WHO. “Cameroon: WHO Statistical Profile.” http://www.who.int/gho/countries/cmr.pdf?ua=1. Accessed November 21, 2017. \r\n 29 DALY is a measure of overall disease burden expressed as the number of years lost due to ill‐health, disability, or early death. \r\n\r\n It represents two categories, Years of life lost and years lived with disability.  \r\n 30 UNICEF. 2017. “Cameroon Humanitarian Situation Report.” https://reliefweb.int/report/unicef‐cameroon‐humanitarian‐\r\n\r\n situation‐report‐september‐2017. Accessed November 26, 2017.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 15 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n population in the North, East, and Adamawa regions have access to potable water31 and less to adequate \r\n sanitation.  This  increases  the  risk  of  diseases  directly  attributed  to  the  lack  of  water  and  sanitation \r\n facilities and hygiene, including diarrheal diseases, intestinal worms, and parasitic infestations, as well as \r\n preventable outbreaks such as cholera and hepatitis E. \r\n\r\n 23. Mental health problems have been identified as a critical challenge for refugees in Cameroon, \r\n and  in  2016,  epilepsy  (63  percent)  and  psychotic  disorders  (22.1  percent)  were  the  most  common \r\n mental  health  illness  in  refugees.  Refugees  often  have  acute  mental  health  conditions  and  trauma \r\n symptoms including depression and post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) consequent to atrocities faced \r\n before or during displacement, separation, GBV including sexual violence, resettlement, and the traumatic \r\n migration experience. This trauma is compounded by a generalized sense of hopelessness, absence of \r\n employment  opportunities,  and  social  dysfunction.  Children  and  adolescents  often  have  higher \r\n prevalence of mental illness with various investigations revealing rates of PTSD (50 to 90 percent) and \r\n major depression (6 to 40 percent).32 Those with mental disorders are more likely to engage in unhealthy \r\n lifestyle behaviors such as smoking, alcohol use, poor nutrition, and lack of physical activity and have a \r\n significantly increased risk of developing another chronic disorder.  \r\n\r\n 24. At  least  22  percent  of  refugees  in  Cameroon  are  women  of  reproductive  age  (2016)  and  20 \r\n percent are children under five years. Displacement complicates the delivery of maternal and obstetric \r\n care, increases the risk of illegal abortion and unsafe childbirth. In crisis settings, at least 15 percent of \r\n pregnant women need emergency obstetric care, 9–15 percent of newborns need lifesaving emergency \r\n care, young girls have less control over when they fall pregnant, and married adolescents have the lowest \r\n contraception use. Consequently, the majority (over 60 percent, 2015) of preventable maternal and child \r\n (53  percent,  2015)  deaths  occur  in  countries  affected  by  humanitarian  crisis  or  fragile  settings.  This \r\n translates to an estimated 500 women dying during childbirth every day from giving birth in humanitarian \r\n and fragile settings. \r\n\r\n Institutional Context \r\n\r\n 25. The GoC has identified PBF as a central strategy to address weaknesses in its health systems \r\n and aims to (a) improve the efficiency of the allocation and use of resources, (b) improve health worker \r\n performance through increased motivation, satisfaction, and autonomy for decision making at the point \r\n of service delivery; and (c) increase the population’s use of essential health services through improved \r\n quality of health services and cost reduction of these services. Cameroon has a rich experience in PBF, \r\n which has been implemented in the country for six years. The Health Sector Support Investment Project \r\n (HSSIP, P104525) supported the implementation of PBF in 44 of the 189 health districts  in Cameroon. \r\n Indeed, the scale‐up of PBF to a national program by the HSPRP (P156679), the parent project, builds on \r\n the results and lessons learned from HSSIP and the experiences of other countries implementing similar \r\n projects. Since the launch of PBF, the quality and utilization of maternal and child health services has been \r\n increased substantially. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 31 Source: Republic of Cameroon, Development Policy Letter, August 14, 2017. \r\n 32 The World Bank 2016. “Mental Health among Displaced People and Refugees: Making the Case for Action at the World Bank \r\n\r\n Group.” \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 16 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 26. UNHCR  in  partnership  with  other  local  and  international  humanitarian  (for  example, \r\n International Medical Corps)  and development partners  provide free health  care for  the  majority  of \r\n refugees in Cameroon; however, financing is diminishing. In the Far North, where the limited number of \r\n largely dilapidated health facilities are under resourced, UNHCR has established health facilities within \r\n the Minawao refugee camp, with dedicated health personnel and resources, to cater to the health needs \r\n of refugees. Refugees who reside outside of the camps in the northern regions and those residing in the \r\n East  regions—where  the  rollout  of  PBF  has  significantly  improved  the  quality  of  health  services  and \r\n capacity of health centers—receive health care services at health facilities and the costs are covered by \r\n UNHCR.  A  limited  number  of  ‘new  arrivals’,  yet  to  be  registered  with  UNHCR,  who  required  medical \r\n attention at health facilities (outside of the camp) were considered ’vulnerable’ using the PBF mechanism \r\n and received health  care  at no  charge. These health facilities received an average PBF subsidy for  the \r\n management of a limited number of vulnerable refugees and host populations.  \r\n\r\n D. Original Project Status and Performance \r\n\r\n 27. The parent HSPRP (P156679) is a five‐year project with two sources of financing: (a) US$100 \r\n million of IDA to scale up PBF from a pilot project to a national program and (b) US$27.00 million grant \r\n from  the  Multi‐Donor  Trust  Fund  for  the  Global  Financing  Facility  (GFF),  to  improve  reproductive, \r\n maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (RMNCAH). It received Board approval on May 3, 2016 \r\n and  became  effective  on  December  13,  2016,  with  a  closing  date  of  May  31,  2021.  According  to  the \r\n Implementation  Status  and  Results  Reports  (ISRs)  between  October  2016  and  2017,  progress  toward \r\n achievement of the PDO and overall implementation were both rated Moderately Satisfactory. The overall \r\n safeguards rating is rated Satisfactory. To date, approximately 9.43 percent of IDA credit (US$9.66 million) \r\n and  15.04  percent  of  the  GFF  grant  (US$4.06  million)  have  been  disbursed.  The  disbursement  level  is \r\n below projections because of a 12‐month overlap between the pilot PBF program (HSSIP) (approved in \r\n 2008) and the parent HSPRP. With the closure of HSSIP on December 31, 2017, disbursement levels are \r\n expected to increase rapidly over the next few months. This is the first AF of the HSPRP. \r\n\r\n 28. The  PDO  of  the  parent  project  is  to  ‘increase  utilization  and  improve  the  quality  of  health \r\n services with a particular focus on reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health and nutritional \r\n services’.  It  is  supply  oriented  and  involves  contracting  health  facilities  to  provide  maternal  and  child \r\n health services to target populations through PBF. The project was designed not only to strengthen the \r\n health system at all levels but also to ensure the availability of a minimum package of RMNCAH services \r\n for the population in the context of achieving Universal Health Coverage (UHC) for every women and every \r\n child in selected provinces. Health services targeted by the intervention include, but are not limited to, \r\n outpatient  consultations,  immunization  of  children,  antenatal  care  (ANC)  services,  assisted  deliveries, \r\n family planning services, prevention and treatment services for HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. In \r\n addition to improving access to and utilization of quality health services for the general population, the \r\n project maintains a specific focus on improving access to and utilization of essential health services for \r\n vulnerable populations. \r\n\r\n 29. The parent project has two components: \r\n\r\n (a) Component 1: Strengthening health service delivery (Total: US$109 million: US$89 million \r\n IDA, US$20 million GFF). It supports the scaling‐up of PBF from a pilot project to a national \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 17 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n program, initially focusing on the three northern regions (Far North, North, and Adamawa). \r\n This component has three subcomponents: \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  1.1:  Payment  of  performance  (US$70  million  IDA).  It  supports  the \r\n incremental  scale‐up  of  PBF  to  all  189  districts  in  Cameroon,  and  provides  PBF \r\n payments  to  (a)  health  facilities  conditional  on  the  quantity  and  quality  of  services \r\n delivered  through  in‐clinic  activities  and/or  through  health‐outreach  activities  (b) \r\n CHWs for providing select basic preventative and referral health services, as well as \r\n ensuring community organization to support positive health behavior. \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  1.2:  Support  the  implementation  and  supervision  of  PBF  (US$11 \r\n million  IDA,  US$8  million  GFF).  It  supports  PBF  implementation  and  supervision \r\n (capacity building, verification and counter verification, IT system, and so on). \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  1.3:  Additional  support  for  improving  access  to  a  key  package  of \r\n RMNCAH and nutrition services (US$8 million IDA, US$12 million GFF). It supports the \r\n implementation  of  the  GFF  investment  case  (IC)  for  Cameroon,  which  includes \r\n RMNCAH  activities,  health  systems  strengthening  approaches,  and  high  quality \r\n nutritional services in the northern33 and East regions. \r\n\r\n (b) Component 2: Institutional strengthening for improved health system performance (Total: \r\n US$18 million: US$11 million IDA, US$7 million GFF [US$5 million for RMNCAH and US$2 \r\n million for CRVS]). It supports the strengthening of national, regional, and district institutions \r\n to improve health system performance. It provides institutional support for moving PBF from \r\n a  pilot  project  to  a  national  program,  supports  analytical  work  and  policy  dialogue  to \r\n facilitate the development and implementation of health reforms that reduce bottlenecks \r\n in  the  health  systems,  and  improves  efficiency  and  health  outcomes.  Furthermore,  this \r\n component supports analytical work and institutional reforms needed to develop a national \r\n health  strategy  and  also  supports  Cameroon  toward  achieving  UHC.  This  component  has \r\n three subcomponents: \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  2.1:  Supports  institutional  strengthening  of  information  systems, \r\n monitoring  and  evaluation,  and  performance  measurement  mechanisms  for  the \r\n health system  (US$1 million IDA, US$1 million GFF Trust Fund). It contributes to the \r\n building  of  a  reliable  health  information  system  for  tracking  key  performance \r\n indicators. It provides resources to support the ongoing rollout of the District Health \r\n Information  Software  2  (DHIS2)  platform,  the  national  PBF  portal,  and  the  links \r\n between the two. \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  2.2:  Reinforcement  of  civil  registration  and  vital  statistics  systems \r\n (US$2  million  IDA,  US$2  million  GFF).  It  supports  the  building  of  the  national  CRVS \r\n systems.  The  National  Office  of  Civil  Registration  (Bureau  National  de  l’Etat  Civil, \r\n BUNEC) has recently been established, and its role is to coordinate interventions from \r\n different  ministries  related  to  civil  registration.  In  partnership  with  the  Ministry  of \r\n\r\n 33\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 18 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Public Health (MoPH), it supports investments to improve data collection and quality \r\n for mothers and children. \r\n\r\n  Subcomponent  2.3:  Program  coordination  (US$5  million  IDA,  US$2  million  GFF).  It \r\n supports operating costs for the PBF Technical Unit (Cellule Technique  Nationale  PBF) \r\n and  Project  Implementation  Unit  (PIU)  (housed  within  the  PBF  Technical  Unit)  for \r\n activities  directly  related  to  the  project  and  the  PBF  program,  including  internal \r\n performance contracts for the PBF Technical Unit and other central departments at the \r\n MoPH (Direction of Family Health, Direction of Health Promotion, Direction of Human \r\n Resources, Direction of Financial Resources and Planning, and so on) and the National \r\n Program  for  the  Reduction  of  Maternal  and  Child  Mortality,  which  is  playing  a \r\n coordination  role  in  GFF.  These  performance  contracts  are  tools  to  enhance \r\n governance and stewardship in the Central MoPH departments and are an essential \r\n part of the project. \r\n\r\n 30. Progress under Component 1 is satisfactory. The scaling‐up of PBF is ongoing and the first phase \r\n (2016–2018) targets 55 new districts. To date, 78 of the 189 districts and 47 percent of the Cameroonian \r\n population are covered by PBF, including 100 percent coverage in the East, Adamawa, and North regions. \r\n Far North (41 percent), Littoral (56 percent), North‐West (65 percent), and South‐West (62 percent) are \r\n partially  covered,  and  PBF  activities  will  commence  in  the  Center,  South,  and  West  regions  in  2018. \r\n Additional  ongoing  activities  include  the  training  of  personnel,  mapping  of  health  facilities  in  targeted \r\n districts, hiring of additional verification agents, and signing of performance contracts with new health \r\n facilities. Scaling‐up of PBF in the Far North region was delayed due to the ongoing insecurity and long \r\n process  to  establish  a  regional  Contract  Development  and  Verification  Agency  (CDVA).  The  security \r\n challenges in the Far North have also delayed GFF activities that support nutrition, adolescent health, and \r\n CRVS. \r\n\r\n 31. Progress under Component 2 is satisfactory. In 2018, the following surveys will be conducted in \r\n Cameroon  to  fill  information  gaps  of  other  data  collection  activities:  (a)  the  first  round  of  the  Service \r\n Delivery Indicator (SDI) survey for health and (b) the Health and Social Safety Net projects’ household \r\n survey, covering the four regions prioritized by the GFF‐supported RMNCAH IC (Adamawa, East, Far North, \r\n and North). Elaboration on the national health financing strategy is ongoing, with significant analytical \r\n work  being  carried  out  to  support  this.  The  GFF‐supported  IC  was  validated  at  the  national  level  on \r\n October  18,  2016  and  is  now  at  the  implementation  stage.  The  Government  is  currently  organizing \r\n regional workshops in the four priority regions to develop regional implementation plans. To date, the \r\n East and Adamawa regions have been completed and the remaining two regions will be completed in the \r\n coming months. BUNEC is currently designing the PBF civil registration program, which will be piloted in \r\n three regions (Adamawa, Littoral, and South‐West) in 2018. A workshop to design and develop indicators \r\n and tools for this pilot project took place in Douala in October 2017. \r\n\r\n E. Rationale for AF \r\n\r\n 32. Given the growing numbers of refugees and IDPs, the escalating humanitarian crisis, and rapidly \r\n increasing health needs of refugees and refugee‐host communities, the GoC seeks an AF to the HSPRP \r\n to  urgently  reinforce  select  activities  currently  being  implemented  as  part  of  the  parent  project  and \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 19 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n introduce a set of priority interventions that address the specific health, nutrition, and WASH needs of \r\n refugees and host populations. \r\n\r\n 33. The  proposed  changes  will  strengthen  the  parent  project’s  overall  development  impact  of \r\n improving the health of women, children, and adolescents, and the Health, Nutrition, and Population \r\n Global Practice goal of ending preventable deaths and disability through health systems strengthening for \r\n UHC. It builds on the achievements of the parent project while seeking to strengthen the existing program \r\n package  to  better  serve  the  needs  of  refugees.  Furthermore,  the  proposed  AF  will  contribute  to  the \r\n attainment of Sustainable Development Goals: 1 (No Poverty), 2 (Zero Hunger), 3 (Good Health and Well‐\r\n Being), and 5 (Gender Equality).  \r\n\r\n 34. The proposed investment is aligned with the new Country Partnership Framework of Cameroon \r\n (Report No. 107896‐CM, February 28, 2017), as well as the Government’s strategy to improve the living \r\n conditions of refugees, IDPs, and host populations. Lastly, the AF will facilitate the GoC’s commitment to \r\n move toward long‐term solutions that benefit refugees and host communities (Box 1). \r\n\r\n 35. The  proposed  AF  is  fully  consistent  with  the  original  PDO.  There  are  no  outstanding  or \r\n unresolved safeguards in the project. The additional investments would neither require any changes to \r\n the  environmental  category  B  of  the  project  nor  would  they  trigger  any  new  safeguard  policies.  The \r\n proposed package of interventions will also complement and reinforce those being introduced as part of \r\n the Governments National Action Plan for the Early Years, thus strengthening the development impact of \r\n both  projects.  The  Early  Years  Plan  for  Cameroon,  which  also  focuses  on  the  northern34  regions,  will \r\n address the multisectoral constraints to early childhood development by introducing activities related to \r\n (a) social protection (communication for behavior change through home visits and parental education), \r\n (b)  nutrition  (multisectoral  approach  at  the  decentralized/local  council  level),  (c)  education \r\n (comprehensive early childhood development education system), and (d) health. \r\n\r\n F. Rational for an Integrated Multisectoral Approach \r\n\r\n 36. The World Bank is adopting an integrated approach, with four projects targeting refugees and \r\n host  communities,  to  enhance  the  impact  on  the  refugee  population  and  host  communities.  These \r\n include three AFs (HSPRP ‐ P164954; the Social Safety Nets for Crisis Response Project ‐ P164830 [SSNP], \r\n and the Community Development Program Support Project Response to Forced Displacement ‐ P164803 \r\n [CDPSP]), and the Education Reform Support Project ‐ P160926 [ERSP]), all of which will benefit from the \r\n RSW  financing  and  aim  to  support  refugees  and  host  communities  (Box  2;  annex  3).  Integrated \r\n approaches, implemented in a coordinated and multisectoral fashion, are more effective and have greater \r\n impact than interventions that work in isolation. The proposed activities largely complement each other \r\n and will be implemented in parallel. It will address the multisectoral determinants of health resulting in a \r\n greater impact on health outcomes, and the sharing of resources, where possible, will make the overall \r\n project more cost‐effective.  \r\n\r\n 37. The  implementation  of  a  harmonized  approach  between  these  four  projects  will  provide  an \r\n integrated package of services to host communities. This would include (a) aligning HD interventions with \r\n local planning processes, (b) promoting synergies between the construction of basic infrastructure under \r\n\r\n 34\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 20 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the CDPSP and cash‐for‐work under the SSNP; (c) using community workers across all projects to provide \r\n HD, psychosocial, and social cohesion services. For example, as part of the integrated approach, under the \r\n HSPRP, ERSP, SSNP and CDPSP, teachers (education), CHW (health), and community workers (SSNP and \r\n CDPSP)  will  be  trained  and  sensitized  on  GBV  including  sexual  violence,  mental  health,  psychosocial \r\n problems, as well as early warning signs (for example, signs of psychological distress), for implementation \r\n at the community level. A confidential, coordinated referral mechanism will be established for referral to \r\n community‐level support mechanisms or health specialist at the health facility, as appropriate.35 \r\n\r\n 38. Integrated coordination  of  projects’ stakeholders  at  the local and  national levels  will ensure \r\n synergies  of  the  responses.  The  three  projects  (SSNP,  HSPRP  and  CDPSP  III)  will  harmonize  their \r\n methodology  for  the  implementation  of  activities  targeting  communities  and  at  local  council  level  to \r\n ensure  synergies,  information  sharing,  coordination  and  collaboration,  and  avoid  duplication  and \r\n fragmentation. All existing sectoral communal committees (CDPSP, ERSP and SSNP) will be integrated into \r\n one overall committee at the communal level. CHW representatives and members of the district health \r\n committee  will  participate  in  coordination  meetings  organized  at  the  local  council  level.  This  will  be \r\n achieved through CDPSP III‐supported Municipal Councils Extended to Sectors, which monitor elaboration \r\n and implementation of Communal Development Plans (CDPs). At the village level, the CHW will participate \r\n in the village development committees (Comités de Concertation) established by the CDPSP over the last \r\n decade. Refugees will be represented in the villages’ committees. At the regional level, regional delegation \r\n of  public  health  and  CDVA  representatives  will  participate  in  quarterly  coordination  meetings  held \r\n between different PIUs, local authorities, and humanitarian actors including UNHCR. At the national level, \r\n the national PBF unit in partnership with other respective PIUs will de facto collaborate and coordinate, \r\n as  they  will  consolidate  M&E  reporting  on  RSW‐financed  activities  and  regularly  report  to  an  ad  hoc \r\n interministerial committee comprising MINEPAT, the Ministry of Territorial Administration (Ministre de \r\n l’Administration  territorial  [MINAT]),  Ministry  of  Decentralization  and  Local  Development,  Ministry  of \r\n Public  Health  (Ministère  de  la  Santé  Publique  [MINSANTE]),  Ministry  of  Basic  Education  (Ministère  de \r\n l’Education de Base [MINEDUB]),36 the World Bank, and UNHCR on refugee‐related activities, in addition \r\n to their respective project’s Steering Committees. \r\n\r\n Box 2. Overview of Integrated Approach \r\n The  World  Bank  is  supporting  an  integrated  approach  to  address  key  challenges  facing  refugees  and  host \r\n communities, building on the work of ongoing projects (CDPSP, SSNP, and HSPRP) and complementing projects in \r\n the pipeline (ERSP).  \r\n Key features of the integrated approach include the following: \r\n  Adopting  common  targeting  mechanisms  (same  local  council/health  districts  and  harmonized \r\n vulnerability criteria); \r\n  Integrating interventions across four projects (as related to refugees and host communities); \r\n  Using consolidated reporting for the four projects on refugee‐related activities; \r\n  Aligning HD interventions with local planning processes;  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 35 Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Humanitarian Emergencies. 2017. \r\n\r\n https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/mental‐health‐and‐psychosocial‐support‐emergency‐settings/content/inter‐agency‐\r\n referral‐guidance.  \r\n 36 The four projects included in the integrated approach will be represented by their respective line ministries. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 21 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Promoting synergies between the construction of basic infrastructure under the CDPSP and interventions \r\n under the ERSP, SSNP, and HSPRP;  \r\n  Using community workers across all projects to provide HD, psychosocial, and social cohesion services;  \r\n  Using common grievance mechanisms; and \r\n  Developing a single beneficiary database using existing national‐, UNHCR‐, and project‐level data. \r\n Concrete examples of the integrated approach \r\n The  integrated  approach  proposed  in  the  Project  Paper  will  promote  synergies  between  the  CDPSP  and  HD \r\n projects (ERSP and HSPRP. Therefore, if the CDPSP is supporting infrastructure investments in the health sector \r\n for example, this will be done in collaboration with the health project (that also benefit from AF under IDA18 \r\n RSW) that will focus more on the provision of qualified service providers, thus improving the quality of service \r\n delivery. The same approach will be used with regard to education. \r\n The four projects will assess how to harmonize and integrate activities at different levels: \r\n  Central  level.  The  existing  coordination  mechanism  established  under  the  Partnership  Agreement \r\n between the GoC and UNHCR will be used and reinforced.  \r\n  Project  management  level.  The  PIUs  will  coordinate  at  the  national  and  regional  levels,  through  an \r\n overlapping  M&E  framework,  local  coordination  mechanisms  and  reporting  to  a  refugee‐specific \r\n Steering Committee. \r\n  Community level. All existing sectoral communal committees (CDPSP, ERSP and SSNP) will be integrated \r\n into one overall committee at the communal level. CHW representatives and members of the district \r\n health committee will participate in coordination meetings organized at the local council level. \r\n Building on the RPBA process, efforts will be made to engage with additional actors, including the UN Resident \r\n Humanitarian  Coordinator,  UN  agencies,  international  humanitarian  organizations,  key  bilateral  partners,  the \r\n private sector, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). \r\n\r\n\r\n 39. The coordinated projects will provide two entry points for policy dialogue: \r\n\r\n (a) Establishing an integrated approach to the medium‐term socioeconomic aspects of forced \r\n displacement  to  bridge  fragmentation  across  Government  entities  and  enhance \r\n Government  coordination  with  humanitarian  and  development  actors.  Over  time,  the \r\n objective  for  the  Government  is  to  build  capacity  to  lead  the  development  response  to \r\n forced  displacement  crises  by  factoring  forcibly  displaced  populations  systematically  into \r\n national  planning  and  resource  allocation  processes  and  to  prepare  for  possible  future \r\n shocks.  \r\n\r\n (b) The integrated approach will focus on lagging regions. To this end, the World Bank Group \r\n will  support  a  review  of  allocation  of  Government  resources  according  to  vulnerability \r\n criteria, across all affected populations. This effort is part of the broader World Bank Group \r\n policy dialogue on decentralization and public financial management. For CAR refugees in \r\n the East, Adamawa, and North regions, the objective is to manage a gradual transition from \r\n humanitarian  assistance  to  a  government‐led  development  approach,  inclusive  of  both \r\n displaced persons and host communities. For Nigerian refugees in the Far North, where the \r\n security  situation  remains  fluid,  the  focus  is  on  restoring  conditions  for  a  medium‐term \r\n intervention. Flexibility will be key to allow for needed adjustments as refugee situations \r\n evolve. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 22 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 40. The described approach will allow for quick implementation to address pressing needs and will \r\n also empower and strengthen the relevant sector agencies in addressing forced displacement under a \r\n common  framework.  The  proposed  integrated  approach  leverages  AF  of  existing  operations  to  help \r\n significantly  reduce  the  time  lag  between  preparation  and  implementation,  which  tends  to  be  long  in \r\n Cameroon (12–18 months). Moreover, a dedicated senior staff, already based in Yaoundé—in addition to \r\n the  respective  Task  Team  Leaders  and  technical  teams—will  ensure  the  effective  implementation  and \r\n coordination of the proposed program, as well as synergies between the four projects that will benefit \r\n from RSW financing. \r\n\r\n II. DESCRIPTION OF ADDITIONAL FINANCING \r\n\r\n A. Project Development Objectives \r\n\r\n 41. The  proposed  AF  would  entail  a  revision  of  the  PDO  to  reflect  the  addition  of  refugees  as \r\n program beneficiaries and inclusion of a CERC. The revised PDO is to “(i) increase utilization and improve \r\n the  quality  of  health  services  with  a  particular  focus  on  reproductive,  maternal,  child  and  adolescent \r\n health,  and  nutritional  services  for  the  population  of  Cameroon,  including  refugees  and  refugee  host \r\n communities, and (ii) in the event of an Eligible Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response \r\n to said Eligible Emergency.” One PDO level indicator and two intermediate indicators will be added to the \r\n Results  Framework  to  reflect  the  refugee  beneficiaries  and  new  project  activities.  Furthermore,  the \r\n targets of the original indicators will be revised to reflect the increase in beneficiaries. The closing date \r\n will be extended to December 31, 2022. \r\n\r\n B. PDO and Intermediate Level Indicators \r\n\r\n 42. The proposed AF has eight PDO level indicators and 13 intermediate level indicators that will \r\n be used to monitor progress in reaching the PDOs. \r\n\r\n PDO level indicators \r\n\r\n  Number of people who have received essential HNP services (Target 6,020,987) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of children 12–23 months fully immunized in the 3 northern regions (Far north, \r\n North and Adamawa) and the East (Target 80 percent) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of births attended by a skilled professional in the 3 northern regions (Far north, \r\n North and Adamawa) and the East (Target 55 percent) \r\n\r\n  Average score of the quality of care checklist (Target 50 percent) \r\n\r\n  Number  of  children  under  24  months  weighed  for  growth  monitoring  in  the  3  northern \r\n regions (Far north, North and Adamawa) and the East (Target 1,646,480)  \r\n\r\n  Number of direct project beneficiaries (Target 8,267,467) \r\n\r\n  Number of female beneficiaries (Target 4,216,408) \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 23 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of refugees who have received health care (curative and preventative) at  health \r\n facilities in the northern (Far north, North and Adamawa) and East regions (Target 600,000) \r\n\r\n Intermediate level indicators  \r\n\r\n  Percentage of pregnant women receiving at least 4 antenatal care visits in the 3 northern \r\n regions (Far north, North and Adamawa) and the East (Target 60 percent) \r\n\r\n  Number of adolescent girls 10–19 years benefiting from multisectoral services supported by \r\n the GFF Investment Case (Target: 150,000) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of women 15–49 using modern contraceptive methods in the 3 northern regions \r\n (Far north, North and Adamawa) and the East (Target: 22 percent) \r\n\r\n  Number of children aged 6–59 months who received a vitamin A supplement in the last six \r\n months (Target 504,286) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of facilities with 100 percent tracer drugs available in targeted health facilities \r\n on the day of the visit (Target: 40 percent) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of the national population covered by the PBF program (Target: 95 percent) \r\n\r\n  Percentage of the total budget for family planning needs funded by the Ministry of Public \r\n Health budget (Target: 50 percent) \r\n\r\n  Number  of  consultations  provided  to  the  poor  and  vulnerable  free  of  charge  (Target \r\n 1,502,057). \r\n\r\n  Number of patients/people referred to the health facilities by community health workers \r\n (Target 343,890). \r\n\r\n  Percentage of reported maternal deaths audited in PBF districts (Target: 25 percent). \r\n\r\n  Percentage  of  health  facilities  conducting  community  interface  meetings  (Target:  60 \r\n percent). \r\n\r\n  Number of children and pregnant women dewormed (Target 3,542,000). \r\n\r\n  Number of refugee children and pregnant women dewormed (Target 637,000). \r\n\r\n C. Project Beneficiaries \r\n\r\n 43. Project beneficiaries include refugees and refugee‐host communities in the Far North, North, \r\n Adamawa, and East regions.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 24 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n D. Project Components and Financing \r\n\r\n 44. The  requested  AF  of  US$36  million  will  support  the  following:  (a)  reinforcement  of  select \r\n activities  under  Components  1  and  2  in  refugee‐affected  areas  (Far  North,  North,  Adamawa,  and  East \r\n regions),  (b)  restructuring  of  the  parent  project  to  include  (i)  a  third  component  that  introduces \r\n interventions  tailored  to  the  health  needs  of  refugees  and  refugee‐host  communities  and  (ii)  a  fourth \r\n component with a zero‐dollar allocation, as a CERC. \r\n\r\n 45. The proposed components are described in the following paragraphs. \r\n\r\n 46. Component 1: Strengthening of health service delivery (Total costs under parent project: US$109 \r\n million: US$89 million IDA, US$20 million GFF. Total new costs under AF: US$130 million: US$89 million \r\n IDA, US$20 million GFF, US$6 million IDA AF credit, and US$15 million IDA18 RSW AF Grant). The parent \r\n project supports the national scale‐up of PBF, starting in the three northern37 regions. The AF will finance \r\n the reinforcement of equity mechanisms to ensure provision of primary health care, maternal and child \r\n health care, and nutrition services for refugees and vulnerable host populations. The AF will also finance \r\n new PBF indicators related to interventions targeted to specific needs of refugees, which will be added to \r\n the package of health care delivered at the community level, primary health centers, district and regional \r\n hospitals. These specific interventions include lifesaving sexual and reproductive health services, including \r\n those related to the management of rape, FGM, and GBV; deworming; soft WASH interventions; mental \r\n health; and psychosocial support programs.  \r\n\r\n 47. Under Component 1, the AF will support the following activities: \r\n\r\n (a) PBF payments to health facilities to \r\n\r\n  Waive fees for all refugees and vulnerable host populations for health care. Refugee \r\n and vulnerable host populations who pay out of pocket would be at increased risk of \r\n catastrophic  health  expenditure  and  be  driven  deeper  into  poverty.  Fee  waivers  at \r\n health facilities for all refugees and vulnerable host populations will ensure equitable \r\n access  to  comprehensive  and  quality  health  services  for  all  refugees,  while  still \r\n prioritizing  members  of  the  host  community  who  are  most  in  need.38  Household \r\n beneficiaries of the SSNP are also poor and vulnerable and will receive health care free \r\n of charge. Health facilities that waive fees will be reimbursed with high PBF subsidies, \r\n which is equivalent to between four to six times the PBF subsidy payment for a ‘normal’ \r\n patient. \r\n\r\n  Subcontract CHWs and CBOs from the host community and refugee camps to provide \r\n select basic preventative and referral services and support positive behavior. \r\n\r\n (b) PBF quality improvement bonuses will be given to health facilities in crisis areas to rapidly \r\n increase the quality of health care, including the reconstruction of health facilities destroyed \r\n due to conflict.  \r\n\r\n\r\n 37\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n 38 UNHCR. “Global Strategy for Public Health 2014–2018.” http://www.unhcr‐strategy‐2014‐2018.html. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 25 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 48. The  remaining  activities  supported  by  the  parent  project  under  Component  1  will  remain \r\n unchanged.  \r\n\r\n 49. Component 2: Institutional strengthening for improved health system performance  (Total cost \r\n under parent project: US$18 million:  US$11 million  IDA, US$7  million  GFF [US$5 million  RMNCAH and \r\n US$2 million for CRVS]. Total new cost under AF: US$23 million: US$11 million IDA, US$7 million GFF [US$5 \r\n million  RMNCAH,  US$2  million  for  CRVS]  and  US$5  million  IDA18  RSW  AF  Grant).  The  parent  project \r\n supports (a) activities that strengthen national‐, regional‐, and district‐level institutions to improve health \r\n system  performance;  (b)  analytical  work  and  policy  dialogue  to  facilitate  the  development  of  health \r\n reforms; (c) implementation support for health reforms that address bottlenecks in the health system and \r\n improve  efficiency  and  health  outcomes;  and  (d)  analytical  work  and  institutional  reforms  needed  to \r\n develop a national health strategy and support Cameroon toward achieving UHC.  \r\n\r\n 50. Under Component 2, the AF will support the following activities: \r\n\r\n  Scale‐up  activities  carried  out  by  BUNEC  under  the  parent  project  to  strengthen  CRVS \r\n activities  for  refugees  and  host  communities.  Birth  registrations  will  be  conducted  for  all \r\n deliveries and birth certificates will be provided to mothers irrespective of nationality. The \r\n identification of children in preschool and schools who do not have a birth certificate will be \r\n conducted in partnership with the education sector. Children who do not attend school and \r\n those  who  are  orphaned  or  separated  from  parents  and  communities  by  conflict  will  be \r\n identified by CHWs and CBOs, and will be provided with a birth certificate using the most \r\n accurate  information  available.  Refugees  and  IDPs,  as  well  as  host  population  living  in \r\n households  benefiting  from  the  SSNP  without  documentation  will  be  assisted  to  acquire \r\n official identification documents and birth certificates. Trained register officers will go into \r\n the  communities  and  villages  during  activities  organized  to  register  refugees  and  host \r\n populations  without  birth  certificates  and  documentations,  and  they  will  be  assisted  to \r\n acquire  official  identification  documents.  Civil  registration  centers  under  performance \r\n contracts  will  receive  subsidies  for  registration  documents  delivered  to  refugees  and \r\n vulnerable host population.  \r\n\r\n  Reinforce activities related to M&E. The crisis in the northern39 regions, particularly the Far \r\n North, have crippled the already weak routine monitoring systems. The AF will support the \r\n reinforcement of the M&E system, as well as information systems, by integrating related \r\n activities into the performance contract of health facilities, districts, regional delegations, \r\n CDVAs, and Cellule d’information Sanitaire (CIS) of the MoPH. Furthermore, this component \r\n will  contribute  to  the  financing  of  Steering  Committees  and  Technical  Secretariats  at  the \r\n central level and a Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). \r\n\r\n  Strengthen  communicable  disease  surveillance  systems  and  epidemic  preparedness  and \r\n response in refugee‐host communities and refugee camps. In recent years, Cameroon has \r\n had numerous disease outbreaks, particularly in refugee‐affected areas in the North and Far \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 39\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 26 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n North  regions.  These  include  leishmaniosis  (2017),40  polio  (2014),41  yellow  fever  (2013),42 \r\n measles (2015),43 and cholera (2011–2014). Between 2011 and 2014, Cameroon reported \r\n 26,621 cases of cholera leading to 1,031 deaths.44 These periodic outbreaks affect thousands \r\n of households each year and kill as many as 10 percent of those who contract the disease.45 \r\n Despite Cameroon’s vulnerability to outbreaks, particularly in the Far North, there has been \r\n minimal  investment  in  strengthening  communicable  disease  surveillance  and  response \r\n systems,  and  the  first  Public  Health  Emergency  Operation  Center  (PHEOC)  is  still  under \r\n construction in Yaoundé. Once fully operational, the PHEOC can coordinate an emergency \r\n response within 120 minutes of identification of a public health emergency.46 The AF will \r\n support  the  (a)  enhancement  of  community‐level  and  regional‐level  surveillance  and \r\n reporting systems in the northern47 and East regions, by integrating surveillance indicators \r\n in the performance contract of health facilities, health districts, and regional delegation and \r\n CIS;  (b)  analytical  work  on  existing  surveillance  systems  in  refugee‐affected  regions;  (c) \r\n review  and  update  of  disease  priorities  in  the  northern  and  East  regions  and  review  and \r\n develop guidelines, protocols, and tools to enhance surveillance and reporting processes; \r\n and (d) enhancement of the communicable diseases outbreak preparedness and response \r\n capacity. \r\n\r\n 51. The  remaining  activities  supported  by  the  parent  project  under  Component  2  will  remain \r\n unchanged. \r\n\r\n 52. Component 3: Strengthening emergency, sexual and reproductive health services, and water \r\n sanitation hygiene and nutrition service delivery for refugee and host populations in the northern and \r\n East regions (Total new cost: US$10 million IDA18 RSW Grant). The AF will finance the following activities \r\n using the PBF approach:  \r\n\r\n (a) Development of norms, guidelines, and training modules on (i) emergency health services \r\n and  lifesaving  sexual  and  reproductive  health  services,  including  those  related  to  the \r\n management of rape, FGM, and GBV; (ii) nutrition, deworming, and soft WASH interventions \r\n in preschools, schools, health facilities, at the community level, including refugee camps and \r\n the  host  population  and  including  other  activities  in  the  Early  Years  Package;  (iii) \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 40 Outbreak news today. 2017. “Leishmaniosis Outbreak Reported in Cameroon.” Accessed November 30, \r\n\r\n 2017.http://outbreaknewstoday.com/leishmaniasis‐outbreak‐reported‐cameroon‐58045/.  \r\n 41 WHO. 2014. “Poliovirus in Cameroon ‐ Update.” Accessed November 30, 2017. \r\n\r\n http://www.who.int/csr/don/2014_03_17_polio/en/ \r\n 42 WHO. 2013. “Yellow fever in Cameroon.” Accessed November 30, 2017. http://www.who.int/csr/don/2013_10_08/en/  \r\n 43 Reliefweb. 2015. “Cameroon: Measles and Cholera Outbreaks – Nov 2015.” Accessed November 30, 2017. \r\n\r\n https://reliefweb.int/disaster/ep‐2015‐000156‐cmr  \r\n 44 CDC. 2017. “CDC Fights Cholera in Cameroon.” Accessed November 30, 2017. \r\n\r\n https://www.cdc.gov/ncezid/dfwed/stories/fighting‐cholera‐cameroon.html \r\n 45 CDC. 2017. “CDC Fights Cholera in Cameroon.” Accessed November 30, 2017. \r\n\r\n https://www.cdc.gov/ncezid/dfwed/stories/fighting‐cholera‐cameroon.html \r\n 46 CDC. 2017. “Global Health Security Agenda: GHSA Emergency Operations Center Action Package.” Accessed November 30, \r\n\r\n 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/globalhealth/security/actionpackages/emergency_operations_centers.htm.  \r\n 47\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 27 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n comprehensive mental health and psychosocial support programs for refugees, IDPs, and \r\n host populations; and (iv) biomedical waste management.  \r\n\r\n (b) Support  institutional  capacity  building,  including  (i)  sensitivity  training  of  frontline  health \r\n professionals,  CHWs,  and  CBOs  from  refugee  and  host  communities  and  civil  registration \r\n officers;  (ii)  training  of  health  professionals  on  basic  and  comprehensive  emergency \r\n obstetric  and  newborn  care;  and  (iii)  training  of  health  professionals  and  CHWs  on  the \r\n management of GBV (Box 3), FGM, mental health, psychosocial conditions, nutrition, NTDs, \r\n biomedical waste management, and WASH. \r\n\r\n 53. The proposed soft WASH activities will be combined with action research on water and sanitation \r\n practices  in  health  facilities,  sanitation  marketing,  handwashing,  household  water  treatment  and  safe \r\n storage (HWTS), and menstrual hygiene management (MHM). The project also supports strengthening \r\n health  communication  toward  good  sanitation  and  hygiene  behaviors  among  refugees  and  host \r\n community populations at health and nutrition facilities, schools (including preschools), and communities \r\n in an enabling environment.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 28 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Box 3. Gender and GBV, including Sexual Violence  \r\n This project is acutely focused on gender and complementary activities that have been introduced in each project \r\n to ensure maximum impact. \r\n  HSPRP  will (a) provide emergency health services, sexual and reproductive health services, including those \r\n related  to  the  management  of  rape,  FGM,  and  GBV;  (b)  deliver  a  comprehensive  mental  health  and \r\n psychosocial  support  program  for  victims  of  GBV,  including  sexual  violence,  at  the  health  facility  and \r\n community level; (c) provide sensitivity training on GBV and sexual violence for frontline health professionals \r\n and  CHWs  and  through  school‐based  sexual  health  programs;  (d)  deliver  focused  training  of  health \r\n professionals  and  CHWs  on  the  management  of  rape,  FGM,  and  GBV,  including  physical,  sexual,  and \r\n psychological violence; and (e) conduct formative research on MHM.  \r\n  SSNP will introduce complementary interventions to address GBV by including men, boys, couples, and their \r\n communities.  The  feasibility  of  establishing  an  Early  Warning  System  on  GBV  issues,  shared  by  the  four \r\n projects, will be studied. In local councils overlapping with the  HSPRP, the SSNP will explore identifying and \r\n referring beneficiaries in need of this care to health structures.  \r\n  ERSP will carry out training activities to teachers and pedagogic supervisors, complemented by sensitization \r\n on gender and GBV, including sexual violence.  \r\n  CDPSP. Community development plans must explore the specific concerns of women and girls linked to any \r\n subprojects, community investments, and social mobilization efforts to ensure they are considered in any \r\n plan. If women and female youth are not part of community consultations, their issues may not surface and \r\n even when they do participate, sociocultural norms may limit the extent to which GBV issues are discussed. \r\n Therefore, facilitating discussions on sensitive topics such as GBV issues with community members is key.48 \r\n Also, there is always a woman to be selected in the village development committee (Comité de Concertation), \r\n whose function is to follow up implementation of both CDPs and the village plan. Moreover, the CDPSP will \r\n also carry out activities aimed at supporting documentation, especially birth certificates. Women without IDs \r\n (95  percent  of  the  population)  cannot  have  access  to  the  justice  system.  For  example,  according  to \r\n Cameroon’s  penal  code,  a  female  youth  under  the  age  of  18  cannot  be  forced  into  marriage.  However, \r\n without IDs, it is very difficult for women to defend their rights. Therefore, supporting documentation, along \r\n with awareness‐raising campaigns, would be a good opportunity to fight GBV, including sexual violence.  \r\n In addition, adjustments will be made in the project’s environmental and social management framework to tackle \r\n GBV  issues,  including  sexual  violence,  given  the  vulnerability  of  the  targeted  beneficiaries  (see  section  IV.E). \r\n Refugees’ camps are also not exempt from violence against women. Apart from cultural and religious factors, \r\n which  may  hinder  the  equal  development  of  women  and  girls  (access  to  school,  household  occupations  and \r\n exclusion  from  the  decision‐making  system),  phenomena  such  as  rape,  sexual  exploitation,  physical  assault, \r\n domestic violence, and prostitution are also a reality for refugees.  \r\n\r\n 54. Component 4: Contingent Emergency Response Component (Total new cost US$0). A CERC will \r\n be  included  under  the  project  in  accordance  with  Bank  Policy  paragraphs  12  and  13,  for  projects  in \r\n Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints. This will allow for rapid reallocation of \r\n project  proceeds  in  the  event  of  a  natural  or  artificial  disaster  or  crisis  that  has  caused,  or  is  likely  to \r\n imminently cause, a major adverse economic and/or social impact.  \r\n\r\n 55. Following the procedures governed by Bank Policy Section III. Para 12 and 13 (a CERC Operations \r\n Manual  (CERC  OM)  will  be  prepared  by  each  country  as  a  condition  of  disbursement.  Triggers  will  be \r\n clearly outlined in the CERC operations manual (OM) acceptable to the World Bank. Disbursements will \r\n\r\n 48 World Bank. 2017. “Kenya Development Response to Displacement Impact Projects. Understanding and Addressing Gender‐\r\n\r\n Based Violence.” \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 29 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n be  made  against  an  approved  list  of  goods,  works,  and  services  required  to  support  crisis  mitigation, \r\n response and recovery. All expenditures under this activity will be in accordance with paragraphs 12 and \r\n 13  of  Bank  Policy  IPF  and  will  be  appraised,  reviewed,  and  found  to  be  acceptable  to  the  World  Bank \r\n before any disbursement is made (Rapid Response to Crisis and Emergencies). \r\n\r\n 56. The closing date of the project will be extended from May 31, 2012, to December 31, 2022. Table \r\n 1 provides a summary of the parent and AF components. \r\n\r\n Table 1. Summary of Parent Project and AF Components \r\n\r\n Current  AF IDA18 \r\n Propose AF \r\n Cost  RSW \r\n d Cost  Allocation\r\n (US$,  Allocatio\r\n Proposed  (US$,  : IDA18 \r\n Component under  millions n \r\n Component under  millions)  Credit  Action \r\n Parent Project  )  (US$, \r\n AF    (US$, \r\n   millions) \r\n   millions) \r\n    \r\n (a+b+c)  (b) \r\n (a)  (c) \r\n Component 1:  Component 1:  109  130  6  15  Revised: \r\n Strengthening of  Strengthening of  Reinforcement \r\n health service  health service  of \r\n delivery   delivery   Subcomponent \r\n 1.1 \r\n  Subcomponent   Subcomponent  70  91  6  15  Revised: \r\n 1.1: Payment of  1.1: Payment of  Reinforcement \r\n performance  performance \r\n  Subcomponent   Subcomponent  19  19  0  0  No change \r\n 1.2: Support  1.2: Support \r\n the  the \r\n implementatio implementatio\r\n n and  n and \r\n supervision of  supervision of \r\n PBF  PBF \r\n  Subcomponent   Subcomponent  20  20  0  0  No change \r\n 1.3: Additional  1.3: Additional \r\n support for  support for \r\n improving  improving \r\n access to a key  access to a key \r\n package of  package of \r\n RMNCAH and  RMNCAH and \r\n nutrition  nutrition \r\n services  services \r\n Component 2:  Component 2:  18  23  0  5  Revised: \r\n Institutional  Institutional  Inclusion of \r\n Strengthening for  Strengthening for  new activities \r\n Improved Health  Improved Health  and \r\n reinforcement \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 30 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Current  AF IDA18 \r\n Propose AF \r\n Cost  RSW \r\n d Cost  Allocation\r\n (US$,  Allocatio\r\n Proposed  (US$,  : IDA18 \r\n Component under  millions n \r\n Component under  millions)  Credit  Action \r\n Parent Project  )  (US$, \r\n AF    (US$, \r\n   millions) \r\n   millions) \r\n    \r\n (a+b+c)  (b) \r\n (a)  (c) \r\n System  System  of \r\n Performance  Performance  Subcomponent\r\n s 2.1 and 2.2 \r\n  Subcomponent  Subcomponent 2.1:  7  10  0  3  Revised: \r\n 2.1: Supports  Supports  reinforcement \r\n institutional  institutional  and inclusion of \r\n strengthening  strengthening of  new activities \r\n of information  information systems \r\n systems  monitoring and \r\n monitoring and  evaluation, and \r\n evaluation, and  performance \r\n performance  measurement \r\n measurement  mechanisms for the \r\n mechanisms for  health system \r\n the health \r\n system \r\n  Subcomponent  Subcomponent 2.2:  4  6  0  2  Revised: \r\n 2.2:  Reinforcement of  reinforcement \r\n Reinforcement  civil registration \r\n of civil  and vital statistics \r\n registration  systems \r\n and vital \r\n statistics \r\n systems \r\n  Subcomponent  Subcomponent 2.3:  7  7  0  0  No change \r\n 2.3: Program  Program \r\n coordination  coordination \r\n ‐  Component 3:  0  10  0  10  Revised: \r\n Strengthening  New \r\n emergency, sexual  component \r\n and reproductive \r\n health services, and \r\n water and \r\n sanitation and \r\n hygiene and \r\n nutrition service \r\n delivery for refugee \r\n and host \r\n populations in the \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 31 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Current  AF IDA18 \r\n Propose AF \r\n Cost  RSW \r\n d Cost  Allocation\r\n (US$,  Allocatio\r\n Proposed  (US$,  : IDA18 \r\n Component under  millions n \r\n Component under  millions)  Credit  Action \r\n Parent Project  )  (US$, \r\n AF    (US$, \r\n   millions) \r\n   millions) \r\n    \r\n (a+b+c)  (b) \r\n (a)  (c) \r\n northern49 and East \r\n regions. \r\n ‐  Component 4:  0  0  0  0  Revised: \r\n Contingent  New \r\n Emergency  component \r\n Response \r\n Component \r\n Note: Changes with the AF are italicized. \r\n E. Lessons Learnt and Reflected in the Design of This Multisectoral Project \r\n\r\n 57. PBF approach in humanitarian crisis \r\n\r\n (a) PBF IEs have found substantial improvements in utilization and quality of essential health \r\n services across a range of countries experiencing varying levels of fragility or conflict.  \r\n\r\n  Cameroon (IE conducted in the North‐West, South‐West, and East region) \r\n\r\n o Humanitarian crisis in the Far North, North, East, and Adamawa regions  \r\n\r\n o The  PBF  approach  significantly  increased  the  utilization  of  maternal  and  child \r\n health  services  (vaccinations  of  mothers  and  children,  use  of  modern  family \r\n planning,  HIV  testing),  improved  the  structural  quality  of  health  services \r\n (availability of essential inputs, equipment, health professionals), reduced formal \r\n and informal out‐of‐pocket health expenditure, and increased the level of patient \r\n satisfaction50  \r\n\r\n  Democratic Republic of Congo (IE conducted in Katanga province) \r\n\r\n o Classified as a fragility, conflict, and violence (FCV) country \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 49\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n 50 De Walque,D; Robyn, PJ; Saidou, H; Sorgho, G; Steenland. 2017. “Looking into the Performance‐Based Financing Black Box. \r\n\r\n Evidence from an Impact Evaluation in the Health Sector in Cameroon.” \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 32 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n o The PBF approach was associated with a reduction in health worker absenteeism, \r\n reduction  in  user  fees,  and  increased  preventative  sessions  and  outreach \r\n services.51 \r\n\r\n  Burundi \r\n\r\n o Classified as an FCV country  \r\n\r\n o An  IE  of  the  Burundi  PBF  program  showed  that  the  approach  increased  the \r\n probability of institutional delivery (21 percentage points), use of ANC services (7 \r\n percentage points), and modern family planning services (5 percentage points). \r\n The program also increased the quality of care and improved equity52 \r\n\r\n  Nigeria \r\n\r\n o In Adamawa state in Nigeria, the PBF program increased coverage of institutional \r\n delivery, immunization, and family planning from 1–11 percent at baseline to 27–\r\n 36 percent in less than a year, despite the ‘state of emergency’ security situation \r\n and sluggish health performance in the northern states \r\n\r\n (b) The PBF approach has also been shown to53 \r\n\r\n  Motivate and empower providers to focus on results and introduce a results‐oriented \r\n culture at health facilities; \r\n\r\n  Improve accountability as facilities, providers, and supervisors are held accountable \r\n for delivering results and are provided the required resources to carry out activities; \r\n\r\n  Promote quality improvements, with systematic reviews of the quality of care using \r\n standardized checklists; \r\n\r\n  Contribute to enhanced supervision and availability of data which is critical for \r\n reporting results; \r\n\r\n  Focus attention on underserved areas, when used as a mechanism for redressing \r\n inequities in service delivery; and \r\n\r\n  Demonstrate the importance of (a) putting in place mechanisms for validating results \r\n and ascertaining client satisfaction, (b) introducing penalties for nonperformance and \r\n sliding scales for remunerating results contingent on quality improvements, and (c) \r\n conducting rigorous IEs. \r\n\r\n\r\n 51 World Bank. 2013. “Impact Evaluation of PBF in Haut‐Katanga district, Democratic Republic of Congo.” \r\n 52 Bonfrer, I; Soeters, R, van de Poel, E; Basenya, O; Longin, G; van de Looij, F; van Doorslaer, E. 2013. “The Effects of \r\n\r\n Performance‐Based Financing on the Use and Quality of Health Care in Burundi: An Impact Evaluation.” \r\n 53 World Bank. 2014. “The Great Lakes Emergency Sexual and Gender Based Violence and Women’s Health Project.” \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 33 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 58. GBV, including sexual violence54 \r\n\r\n (a) Multisectoral interventions are critical for supporting survivors of GBV and sexual violence, \r\n who  require  multifaceted  assistance,  including  medical  treatment,  mental  health \r\n counselling, psychosocial support, and legal services. \r\n\r\n (b) Health services are an important entry point both for responding to the needs of survivors \r\n and for preventing further violence. There are important synergies from investments in GBV \r\n and  maternal,  reproductive,  and  obstetric  care  which  require  specialized  expertise  and \r\n health system capacity. Given that GBV is an important risk factor for other negative health \r\n outcomes  (that  is,  unwanted  pregnancy,  HIV/AIDS,  and  other  sexually  transmitted \r\n infections), violence prevention will also contribute to preventing these outcomes.  \r\n\r\n (c) There  is  growing  evidence  that  screening  protocols  are  highly  effective  in  increased \r\n detection and referral of survivors of GBV and sexual violence and provision of follow‐up \r\n treatment  with  the  World  Health  Organization  including  these  protocols  among  its  10 \r\n violence  prevention  strategies.  Routine  screening  for  intimate  partner  violence  can \r\n potentially improve identification, care, and treatment of violence. \r\n\r\n 59. Mental health and psychological support55 \r\n\r\n (a) Strengthened  capacity  and  increased  resources  for  mental  health  support  will  not  only \r\n benefit survivors but also the broader population, many of whom suffer from trauma related \r\n to prolonged conflict. \r\n\r\n (b) A multidisciplinary approach is required to tackle mental health as a development challenge. \r\n This  needs  to  integrate  health  services  at  the  community  level,  in  schools,  and  in  the \r\n workplace  to  explicitly  address  the  mental  health  and  psychosocial  needs  of  displaced \r\n people and host communities, including alcohol and other drug‐use problems.  \r\n\r\n (c) An effective mental health and psychosocial response should also include innovative social \r\n protection and employment schemes  that facilitate the reintegration of affected  persons \r\n into social and economic activities.  \r\n\r\n (d) Effective scaled‐up responses to improve the mental health and psychosocial well‐being of \r\n conflict‐affected populations require careful adaptation to specific contexts of multilayered \r\n systems  of  services  and  supports  (for  example,  provision  of  basic  needs  and  essential \r\n services such as food, shelter, water, sanitation, and basic health care; action to strengthen \r\n community and family supports; emotional and practical support through individual, family, \r\n or group interventions; and community‐based primary health care systems). \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 54 World Bank. 2014. “The Great Lakes Emergency Sexual and Gender Based Violence and Women’s Health Project.” \r\n 55 The World Bank. 2016.” Mental Health among Displaced People and Refugees: Making the Case for Action at the World Bank \r\n\r\n Group.” \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 34 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n F. Implementation Arrangements \r\n\r\n Institutional and Implementation Arrangements \r\n\r\n 60. The implementation arrangements will remain largely the same as for the parent project in the \r\n Far North, North, Adamawa, and East regions (figure 1). \r\n\r\n 61. At the central level of the MoPH, the Health Sector Strategy (Stratégie Sectorielle de la Santé, HSS) \r\n Steering Committee (created in 2005), chaired by the Minister of Public Health, will continue to provide \r\n oversight and strategic guidance to the project and will oversee the achievement of the project objectives. \r\n Under  the  authority  of  the  HSS  Steering  Committee,  a  specific  project  technical  committee  has  been \r\n created to provide direct oversight and support to the project. The technical committee, chaired by the \r\n general  secretary  of  MoPH,  includes  (a)  select  directories  of  the  MoPH  and  (b)  key  ministries  whose \r\n support  is  needed  for  successful  implementation  and  sustainability  of  PBF  in  Cameroon  (Ministry  of \r\n Economy and Planning and Ministry of Finance). The technical committee’s tasks include to (a) validate \r\n the  overall  strategic  direction  of  the  PBF  program,  (b)  validate  the  overall  strategic  direction  of  other \r\n interventions  supported  by  the  project,  (c)  ensure  that  the  procedures  set  forth  in  the  project \r\n implementation manual are followed, (d) examine the different contracts and intervene where necessary \r\n to  resolve  issues,  (e)  monitor  PBF  and  other  activities’  implementation  and  intervene  where  problem \r\n resolution  may  require  the  support  of  committee  members,  and  (f)  disseminate  the  results  of  the \r\n evaluations with a view toward mobilizing additional resources and expanding the PBF approach in the \r\n country. \r\n\r\n 62. Project implementation will continue to be coordinated by the PBF Technical Unit of the Ministry \r\n of Health and supported if needed by appropriate consultants. The PBF Technical Unit is responsible for \r\n the day‐to‐day management of the project, informs the HSS Steering Committee of progress achieved in \r\n implementing the PBF approach, oversees both the coordination of the overall PBF program and specific \r\n project implementation for activities supported by the GFF Trust Fund. Also,  it will manage and oversee \r\n the achievements of the interventions related to the AF for the IDA18 RSW. The PBF Technical Unit is \r\n tasked  with  (a)  developing  norms  and  procedures  for  the  PBF  program;  (b)  coordinating  among  and \r\n leading development partners, vertical programs, and departments within the MoPH involved in the PBF \r\n program; (c) conducting performance contracting, evaluation, and coaching activities for decentralized \r\n actors such as the Regional Health Delegations, Contracting and Verification Agencies, and Regional Funds \r\n for  Health  Promotion;  (d)  preparing  and  implementing  PBF  training  programs;  and  (e)  developing  the \r\n scale‐up plan for national coverage. The procedure for activities supported by the AF will be incorporated \r\n in the project implementation manual and the national PBF manual. The national PBF manual will be the \r\n key strategic document providing operational guidelines for implementation of PBF and refugee‐related \r\n activities. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 35 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Figure 1. Institutional Arrangements for Implementation \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n\r\n 63. The  project  will  continue  to  use  CDVAs  established  in  each  region  for  the  following  tasks:  (a) \r\n contracting and coaching health service providers, (b) contracting CBOs for community verification and \r\n verification of declared results by contracted agents. In the regions where refugees are established, CDVAs \r\n will be responsible for the coaching of health facilities to provide essential health, nutrition, and WASH \r\n services to refugees and  vulnerable  host populations, according to the PBF  manual.  Upon verification, \r\n CDVAs  will  send  payment  requests  through  the  PBF  portal,56  which  will  be  received,  validated,  and \r\n processed  by  the  National  PBF  Technical  Unit.  Payments  will  be  made  directly  to  health  facilities  and \r\n regulatory bodies, each of which will have their own independent bank account. CDVAs will pay CBOs \r\n directly for community verification activities.  \r\n\r\n 64. To stimulate the demand side, community PBF is integrated in the project as a complement to \r\n PBF at the health facility level. CHWs and CBOs are trained and contracted by health facilities to provide \r\n prevention and promotional activities at the community level. These include, but are not limited to, (a) \r\n the referral of poor and vulnerable patients, pregnant women, infants, and women of childbearing age to \r\n health facilities; (b) identification of patients lost to follow‐up; and (c) home visits. CHWs and CBOs are \r\n\r\n\r\n 56 www.fbrcameroun.org. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 36 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n supervised by health personnel from health facilities. Their activities are evaluated and verified by health \r\n facilities and counter verified by CDVA verifiers. Their performance payment is made monthly through the \r\n health facilities. For the AF, the package of activities carried out by CHWs and CBOs will be expanded to \r\n include refugees and host populations as beneficiaries. CHWs and CBOs (for example, schools and NGOs) \r\n from refugee and host communities will be contracted to provide community activities in refugee and \r\n host communities and refugee camps, under the supervision of the health facilities. \r\n\r\n 65. GRM.  Project  beneficiaries  will  have  access  to  the  GRM.  The  four  projects  will  establish  a \r\n harmonized GRM mechanism, by setting up a single free hotline for the four projects.  \r\n\r\n Box 4. Integrated RSW Coordination and Project’s Management \r\n  GRM.  Indigenous  Peoples  Plan  (IPP)  and  Resettlement  Action  Plans  (RAPs)  will  include  a  unique  and \r\n harmonized GRM, which will address complaints received from the population (refugees included). The GRM \r\n to be implemented will build on the CDPSP’s experience based on three essential components: (a) systematic \r\n collection  and  management  of  the  project’s  activities  related  to  claims  by  the  PIU;  (b)  a  formal,  popular \r\n complaint mechanism through a free hotline number; and (c) requests for direction and management to/by \r\n local councils and local authorities (traditional rulers included). Based on these three pillars, the borrower \r\n should refine its actual GRM. This will serve as a ‘one‐stop shop’ GRM that will be streamlined in other World \r\n Bank Group‐financed projects. \r\n  RSW‐shared M&E system. The respective M&E system will be coordinated to ensure synergies and savings in \r\n data collection on refugees and host communities. \r\n  \r\n\r\n III. KEY RISKS \r\n\r\n A. Overall Risk Rating and Explanation of Key Risks \r\n\r\n 66. The  overall  risk  is  rated  Substantial.  Risk  identified  include  (a)  political  and  governance  (b) \r\n technical design of the project or program, (c) institutional capacity for implementation and sustainability, \r\n (d) insecurity and challenging context of the northern57 regions, (e) fiduciary aspects, and (f) the protection \r\n of refugees. \r\n\r\n Table 2. Systematic Operations Risk Rating Tool (SORT) \r\n\r\n Risk Category  Rating \r\n 1. Political and Governance  High \r\n 2. Macroeconomic  Substantial \r\n 3. Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate \r\n 4. Technical Design of Project or Program  Substantial \r\n 5. Institutional Capacity for Implementation and Sustainability  Substantial \r\n 6. Fiduciary  Substantial \r\n 7. Environment and Social  Moderate \r\n\r\n 57\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 37 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risk Category  Rating \r\n 8. Stakeholders  Moderate \r\n 9. Other: Refugee Protection  Substantial \r\n Overall  Substantial \r\n\r\n 67. Political  and  governance  risks  are  High.  Governance  indicators  for  Cameroon (e.g. World \r\n Governance Indicators, Mo Ibrahim Index, Corruption Perception index) suggest considerable challenges \r\n that  affect  social  accountability  and  the  proper  management  of  resources.  This  is  compounded  by \r\n uncertainty  related  to  the  upcoming  local,  legislative  and  presidential  elections,  planned  for  October \r\n 2018,  which  could  shift  the  GoC’s  priorities  for  the  health  sector,  particularly  if  there  is  a  change  in \r\n leadership.  This  could  disrupt  the  ongoing  Government‐led  structural  health  sector  reforms  aimed  at \r\n improving efficiency and performance of the health sector, implementation of both the parent project \r\n and  additional  financing  activities,  particularly  in  regions  of  fragility,  and  weakening  of  the  GOC’s \r\n commitment  to  the  refugee  protection  framework.  The  project  has  incorporated  mitigation  measures \r\n including: (i) intensive community mobilization, and sensitization; (ii) adoption of a holistic and sustainable \r\n approach to address the health needs of both refugees and host community members simultaneously (iii) \r\n a robust capacity building and training component at all levels of the health system, which will strengthen \r\n institutional capacity and stewardship of the PBF program, and (iv) implementation of a core package of \r\n activities on citizen engagement at a the community level to foster social accountability. With regards to \r\n the risk related to fragility and access to some areas, the World Bank has been engaged with the GoC, the \r\n UN  and  the  EU  on  the  Recovery  and  Peace‐Building  Assessment  (RPBA)  process  since  2016  and  will \r\n continue to do so. \r\n\r\n 68. The macroeconomic risks are substantial. The macroeconomic risks are related to deterioration \r\n in  fiscal  and  external  balances  between  2014  and  2016,  exposing  macroeconomic  stability,  and  the \r\n country’s vulnerability to oil prices despite its relatively diversified economic base. A further unanticipated \r\n widening of the fiscal deficit would put pressure on the Government to reduce spending on key programs \r\n such as in health and education. \r\n\r\n 69. Risks related to the technical design of the project or program remain Substantial. Although PBF \r\n has been piloted in the country since 2011, there is a substantial risk involved in implementing and rolling \r\n out PBF to national scale. Both the technical and institutional capacity risks are considered substantial. To \r\n mitigate the risk of the technical complexity of the scale‐up, the rollout is being done in a phased manner, \r\n targeting approximately an additional 20 percent of the population per year. Significant implementation \r\n support  is  being  provided  throughout  the  process  and  at  each  stage  assessments  are  being  made  to \r\n identify and address any bottlenecks for successful scale‐up. The project is anchored within the MoPH \r\n under  the  National  PBF  Technical  Unit  to  strengthen  institutional  capacity  and  ownership,  minimize \r\n implementation  delays,  and  mitigate  risks.  In  addition,  the  project  has  recruited  a  PBF  expert  to \r\n strengthen the technical capacity of the PBF Technical Unit. \r\n\r\n 70. Risks  related  to  the  institutional  capacity  for  implementation  and  sustainability  remain \r\n Substantial. Piloting PBF has been successful and there is broad support for a national expansion, but \r\n financial and institutional sustainability remains a risk. To mitigate these risks, the World Bank project \r\n includes  a  robust  capacity  building  and  training  component  into  the  project.  This  will  not  only  allow \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 38 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n strengthened stewardship of the program at the national level but also allow areas that are successfully \r\n implementing PBF to share their experiences with new zones beginning implementation. Additionally, the \r\n Government is expected to progressively increase co‐financing of the program over the lifetime of the \r\n project,  and  the  development  of  the  national  health  financing  strategy  will  contribute  to  designing  a \r\n sustainable and smart health financing in the country, including increasing Government contributions for \r\n the PBF program. The progressive increase in the Government contribution to PBF is part of the ongoing \r\n Development Policy Financing (DPF) Program between Cameroon and the World Bank. It aims to support \r\n the  GoC’s  efforts  to  implement  structural  reforms  that  facilitate  fiscal  adjustments,  boost \r\n competitiveness, and mitigate economic vulnerability created by the economic crisis following the steep \r\n fall in the price of oil, which accounts for 76 percent of the Economic and Monetary Community of Central \r\n Africa’s  (CEMAC)  exports  revenue  in  2014.  One  trigger  of  this  DPF  Program  is  to  increase  the  level  of \r\n funding and management capacity of health facilities and improve the availability of essential medicines \r\n in health regions and districts covered by PBF: (a) the 2018 public health budget increases the minimum \r\n allocation  to  primary  and  secondary  care  facilities  and  regulators  to  at  least  15  percent  of  the  public \r\n budget and uses performance‐based flexible payments in health regions and districts covered by PBF and \r\n (b) the MoPH has signed an official document that allows health facilities to buy pharmaceuticals and \r\n other medical supplies directly from licensed suppliers (public or private). Activities under the AF will be \r\n fully  integrated  in  the  PBF  program,  thus  benefiting  from  all  sustainability  mitigating  measures \r\n implemented.  \r\n\r\n 71. Fiduciary risks for the project remain Substantial. The country environment risk in procurement \r\n especially in public contracts, the delays in procurement processes, and the lack of transparency in the \r\n allocation and use of resources in the health sector in Cameroon remain a challenge and the parent project \r\n and  AF  are  allocating  high  levels  of  financial  resources  through  both  the  PBF  and  non‐PBF  activities. \r\n However,  the  pilot  areas  that  have  been  implementing  PBF  show  that  the  program  itself  has  led  to \r\n improved accountability at the point of service delivery and among regulatory bodies in the health system. \r\n To address these risks, the parent project includes a very strong training/capacity‐building program, which \r\n ensures  that  all  actors  implicated  in  the  program  are  well  versed  in  the  details  of  PBF  and  PBF \r\n implementation. Another risk is fiduciary capacity of the implementation agency. To address the risk, the \r\n experienced fiduciary personnel who ran the first PBF project in Cameroon and has extensive institutional \r\n memory was transferred from the PIU of the first PBF project (HSSIP) to the national PBF unit of the parent \r\n project. Additional fiduciary staff are  being recruited to support  the increased workload of the parent \r\n project. If the AF requires additional human resources, more staff will be recruited.  \r\n\r\n 72. Environmental and social risks are Moderate. The AF will not change the safeguard category of \r\n the project, which remains category B, as it is not anticipated that the project activity will have a large‐\r\n scale  negative  impact  on  the  environment  and  population.  However,  there  are  predictable  potential \r\n negative environmental and social risks and impacts related to the handling and the disposal of medical \r\n waste (such as placentas, syringes, and material used for delivery of pregnant women) in health facilities \r\n covered by the project. In addition, soft WASH interventions in schools and in refugee camps might lead \r\n to conflicts. The AF triggers the same two safeguard policies triggered by the parent project: OP/BP 4.01 \r\n ‐ Environmental Assessment and OP/BP 4.10 ‐ Indigenous People. A social assessment was undertaken \r\n during the preparation of the parent project and an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF)/IPP \r\n was prepared for the parent project and disclosed on February 25, 2016. The Action Plan also included \r\n indicators  and  a  budget  that  are  being  used  during  project  implementation  to  evaluate  progress  and \r\n results. In accordance with OP/PB 4.01, the Medical Waste Management Plan (MWMP) was prepared for \r\n\r\n\r\n Page 39 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the  parent  project,  disclosed  in  2014,  and  is  being  implemented  as  planned.  To  better  mitigate  and \r\n manage  the  abovementioned  risks,  the  MWMP  will  become  a  Hygiene  and  Waste  Management  Plan \r\n (HWMP) and will be updated during project implementation (within three months from project launching) \r\n to  include  measures  related  to  GRM,  occupational  safety,  GBV  risks,  MHM,  HWTS,  and  so  on  and  the \r\n project  will  recruit  a  safeguard  specialist.  In  addition,  the  project  will  develop  and  use  a  rapid \r\n environmental  and  social  screening  checklist/criterion  to  ensure  that  selection  of  beneficiary  refugee \r\n camps,  schools,  and  preschools  (if  any)  is  based  on  a  thorough  investigation.  Findings  of  the  rapid \r\n environmental screening will be reflected in the HWMP. \r\n\r\n 73. Stakeholders risk is Moderate given the multiple actors whose experience and cooperation will \r\n greatly enhance project activities. These include partners such as UNHCR, the main strategic partner in \r\n the field and partners from the three projects (Education, Social Protection and Labor, and Social, Urban, \r\n Rural, and Resilience). Coordination of stakeholders would be the primary risk to consider, which will be \r\n mitigated  by  extensive  communication  and  inclusion  of  stakeholders  during  the  design  and \r\n implementation of the project. \r\n\r\n 74. Insecurity, challenging context of the northern58 regions. The risk of implementing PBF in the \r\n northern regions is Substantial. The northern regions face high levels of chronic poverty, have the poorest \r\n health outcomes in the country, and face an acute shortage of health personnel to deliver health services. \r\n At the same time, instability and displacement of populations has increased in recent years due to violent \r\n attacks by Boko Haram in Cameroon and neighboring Nigeria. This has also resulted in a reduction in the \r\n availability of health services due to staff of health facilities in affected areas fleeing to safer areas. At the \r\n same time, there is an increased need of health services for these displaced populations affected by the \r\n instability. Challenges will persist in efforts to provide support to health service delivery through the PBF \r\n program, ensure appropriate monitoring and verification of service delivery is conducted, and provide \r\n sufficient implementation support to the project.  \r\n\r\n 75. To  mitigate  these  risks  and  address  these  challenges,  the  project  has  partnered  with  other \r\n development partners working in the area and has contracted well‐functioning NGOs already based in the \r\n regions for contracting, verification, and coaching activities. In addition, to respond to the health needs \r\n of population groups affected by the insecurity, the PBF program in Cameroon has an innovative design \r\n component that includes both geographical equity bonuses for areas affected by the instability, as well as \r\n the  provision  of  higher  subsidies  for  services  that  are  provided  at  reduced  cost  or  free  of  charge  to \r\n refugees and displaced populations. This approach provides greater resources to health service providers \r\n in areas affected by the instability, including additional incentives for staff to continue providing services \r\n at these health facilities. The project also takes advantage of the community PBF platform of contracting \r\n CHWs  and  CBOs  to  use  them  to  help  identify,  sensitize,  and  refer  displaced  people  and  refugees  in \r\n communities served by contracted health facilities.  \r\n\r\n 76. Refugee  protection  risks  are  Substantial.  The  World  Bank,  in  consultation  with  UNHCR,  has \r\n confirmed  that  Cameroon’s  protection  framework  is  adequate  for  the  purposes  of  the  sub‐window. \r\n UNHCR  has  provided  the  World  Bank  with  an  overall  positive  assessment  of  Cameroon’s  protection \r\n framework. However, five key risks have been identified: (a) potential deportation remains of particular \r\n concern  in  the  volatile  security  environment  in  the  Far  North  region;  (b)  insecurity  and  high  levels  of \r\n\r\n 58\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 40 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n violence  in  the  Far  North  pose  significant  protection  challenges;  (c)  the  Government  does  not  issue \r\n identity  documents  to  refugees;  (d)  GBV,  including  sexual  violence,  remains  one  of  the  most  serious \r\n threats to the safety and security of refugees and IDP women and children; and (e) refugees have the right \r\n to  legal  residency,  primary  education,  public  health,  and  employment,  but  their  living  conditions  are \r\n generally precarious because of the lack of employment and regular income. To mitigate these risks, the \r\n GoC has committed to a number of new progressive reforms, outlined in its LDP: (a) preparing a medium‐\r\n term refugee management strategy; (b) facilitating greater access to basic social services for refugees, \r\n host communities, and IDPs; (c) improving legal security for refugees to facilitate their resilience; and (d) \r\n better  understanding  the  causes  of  vulnerability  of  refugees  and  host  communities.  The  GoC  has  also \r\n taken  explicit  protection‐related  commitments  in  the  LDP:  “(i)  Issuance  and  recognition  of  biometric \r\n identity documents for refugees (along with travel documents): in accordance with Decree 2007/255 of \r\n September 4, 2007 and Decree 2016/373 of August 4, 2016 on the procedures for Law 97/012 of January \r\n 10,  1997  on  the  requirements  for  the  entry  and  exit  of  foreigners  (DGSN  –  MINATD);  (ii)  Systematic \r\n issuance  of  birth  certificates  for  refugee  children  born  in  Cameroon  with  new  registry  offices  (or \r\n reinforcement  of  existing  registry  offices)  in  areas  with  large  populations  of  refugees  and  displaced \r\n persons; and (iii) Strengthening of the institutional capacities of refugee status management bodies to \r\n facilitate  the  registration  of  asylum  seekers  and  decisions  on  refugee  status  (MINREX  Technical \r\n Secretariat) and ensure that the population census planned in Cameroon in 2018 is comprehensive and \r\n counts all of the people living in border areas.” The Steering Committee will also provide a platform to \r\n discuss the issue of refugees and returns. At the project level, to mitigate refugee protection risks, the \r\n CDPSP will contribute to civil registration (issuance of birth certificates or duplicates), social cohesion, and \r\n peace through participatory approach.  \r\n\r\n IV. APPRAISAL SUMMARY \r\n\r\n A. Economic and Financial Analysis \r\n\r\n Economic Analysis \r\n\r\n 77. The AF will strengthen the development impact of the parent project by ensuring that refugees \r\n (current and incoming) and vulnerable host populations have sustainable and equitable access to high‐\r\n impact emergency health services, primary health care, and maternal and child health services; mental, \r\n psychosocial,  and  GBV  (including  sexual  violence)  services,  and  WASH  and  nutrition  interventions. \r\n Activities under Component 2 will scale up provision of identification documents for refugees. This will \r\n support the GoC’s request to scale up the documentation of refugees and host populations, and where \r\n possible, assist them to acquire identification documents and birth certificates, all of which facilitate their \r\n access  to  other  social  and  educational  benefits.  The  health  surveillance  and  security  components  will \r\n reinforce protection and prevention against infectious diseases in refugee‐hosting regions in Cameroon \r\n\r\n 78. The economic analysis conducted for the parent project remains valid, except that it does not \r\n cover the  new activities in Subcomponent 2.1 (strengthen  communicable  disease surveillance systems \r\n and  epidemic  preparedness  and  response  in  refugee‐host  communities  and  refugee  camps)  and \r\n Component 3 (strengthen emergency, sexual, and reproductive health services and WASH and nutrition \r\n service delivery for refugee and host populations in the northern59 and East regions). These additional \r\n\r\n 59\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 41 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n activities,  supported  by  the  AF,  will  contribute  to  Cameroon’s  long‐term  development  agenda  by  (a) \r\n improving the survival of refugee and host populations and reducing mortality and morbidity related to \r\n communicable  and  non‐communicable  diseases;  (b)  increasing  household  earnings  and  saving \r\n unnecessary health care and social care costs; (c) increasing productivity, labor supply, and human capital; \r\n (d) increasing consumption or production of goods and services that would otherwise not be consumed \r\n or produced; (e) improving health system efficiency; and (f) promoting equity and shared prosperity.  \r\n\r\n 79. Increased  access  to  the  new  proposed  package  of  services  (under  Subcomponent  2.1  and \r\n Component  3)  is  expected  to  have  a  direct  impact  on  the  leading  causes  of  DALYs  in  the  country.60 \r\n Component 2 will strengthen M&E, diseases surveillance, and epidemic preparedness to track progress in \r\n the provision of essential services to refugee and refugee‐host communities during the crisis and recovery \r\n stage  and  ensure  that  outbreaks  of  communicable  diseases  are  identified  and  managed  promptly  and \r\n effectively. Infectious diseases are the leading cause of death in Cameroon, both for host populations and \r\n refugees, more particularly, those with epidemic potential remain a huge threat to the destabilization of \r\n the entire health system (as recently demonstrated with the Ebola outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra \r\n Leone).  Subcomponent  2.1  will  thus  help  Cameroon’s  health  system  to  be  more  resilient  and  will \r\n strengthen it in terms of  early detection of epidemic‐prone  diseases, thus  preserving health and well‐\r\n being of refugees and host communities.  \r\n\r\n 80. A detailed economic and financial analysis for the proposed activities related to GBV including \r\n sexual violence was not carried out due to the scarcity of data on economic impact of service provision \r\n for survivors of GBV including sexual violence, as well as the emergency nature of the project preparation \r\n process. It is well known that the development impacts of violence against women, men, and children are \r\n high. A review of the literature found that the cost of intimate partner violence is significant in low‐ and \r\n middle‐income countries relative to other development expenditures.61 The same review highlighted the \r\n economic costs of inaction and emphasized the urgent need for governments to address violence against \r\n women. \r\n\r\n 81. Violence has a direct and indirect negative effect on individuals, households, and communities \r\n as  reflected  in  additional  medical  expenses,  decreased  labor  market  participation,  and \r\n intergenerational impacts  (for example, disruption in schooling for children in the households). Beyond \r\n the physical and psychological damage for the individuals involved, GBV (including sexual violence) also \r\n carries important social and economic costs. Economically, survivors not only have reduced short‐term \r\n income  potential  but  they  may  also  suffer  from  longer‐term  effects  including  injuries  and  trauma, \r\n reducing long‐term income and productivity.62 Overall the proposed activities to address GBV (including \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 60 Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation. 2017. “Global Burden of Disease in Cameroon.” Accessed January 25, 2018, \r\n\r\n http://www.healthdata.org/cameroon. \r\n 61 The literature review (Intimate Partner Violence: Economic Costs and Implications for Growth and Development) conducted \r\n\r\n for the World Bank in Vietnam, the total cost of intimate partner violence, including out‐of‐pocket expenditure, missed income \r\n and productivity loss, was over 3.0 percent of GDP or nearly double of what was spent on primary education. In Bangladesh, the \r\n cost of intimate partner violence, with only out‐of‐pocket expenditure and reduced income for missing work, was twice what \r\n the Government spent on primary education. In Uganda, the productivity loss due to intimate partner violence‐related \r\n absenteeism was estimated at 1.3 percent of GDP (2012).  \r\n 62 Wilman, C. 2013: Women experiencing IPV earned 29 percent less than women who did not, and this increased to 43 percent \r\n\r\n less if the violence was severe.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 42 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n sexual  violence),  will  contribute  directly  to  improvements  in  health  outcomes,  poverty  reduction,  and \r\n social inclusion. \r\n\r\n 82. Rationale for public sector financing. This AF will support activities that are in the public sector \r\n and are of a public good nature. The private sector has no incentives to finance any of these activities. In \r\n the absence of financing by the World Bank, the GoC may not be able to finance these activities and the \r\n country will continue to experience political and economic pressures from migrations. In the context of \r\n the 1951 Refugee Convention, the GoC is responsible to ensure refugees do not return to a territory where \r\n his or her life or freedom is threatened (the principle of “non‐refoulement”63). In accordance with the \r\n requirements of the convention and protocol, states often provide services to migrants, namely those \r\n who are in the process of applying for asylum or have already secured refugee status. In theory, refugees \r\n often have access to the same services as the citizen of a country. These services include some kind of \r\n legal status, health care, education, and employment opportunities. The Government plays a key role in \r\n the  handling  of  a  range  of  issues  that  can  only  (or  predominantly)  be  accomplished  or  implemented \r\n through Government action. The main rationales warranting public action include the incorporation of \r\n externalities or spillovers, redistribution, and social and political concerns related to host communities \r\n and refugees. \r\n\r\n 83. Value added of World Bank’s support. The World Bank’s support will allow the Government to \r\n reach  its  strategic  objectives  in  the  management  of  refugees  and  refugee‐hosting  communities.  The \r\n strategy  involves  the  transition  from  the  provision  of  humanitarian  support  to  refugees’  inclusion  in  a \r\n longer‐term  agenda  of  development  and  social  protection.  Underlying  the  transition  is  a  potential \r\n reduction of humanitarian support by UN agencies, particularly UNHCR. It is in this context that the World \r\n Bank  is  well  placed  to  support  such  a  transition,  not  only  leveraging  but  also  adding  value  to  the \r\n foundational support provided to refugees by key humanitarian partners, including UNHCR, WFP, United \r\n Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), as well as national and international NGOs. The World Bank project will \r\n also leverage its substantial experience and practice in several sectors related to forced displacement, \r\n governance, service delivery, and HD, and will pair and complement other projects in the World Bank’s \r\n portfolio in Cameroon, including the SSNP, which aims to (a) alleviate poverty and vulnerability in host \r\n communities  and  (b)  explore  avenues  of  integrating  refugees  into  national  systems,  notably  the \r\n accompanying measures focused on human capital; public works and ID registration and active citizenship \r\n for those who desire it; the CDPSP, which aims to alleviate the vulnerability of both refugees and host \r\n communities and mitigate inter‐communities’ conflicts by (i) improving access to basic social services, (ii) \r\n stimulating the local economy through small public infrastructures, (iii) fostering sustainable management \r\n of natural resources, and (iv) fostering the inclusion of refugees in local governance and development. \r\n The projects have made the necessary links for a comprehensive multisectoral approach that covers the \r\n basic HD needs of refugees and hosting communities.  \r\n\r\n Financial Analysis \r\n\r\n 84. Cameroon’s  economy  is  severely  affected  by  the  refugee  crisis  in  the  northern64  and  East \r\n regions. The Far North, North, Adamawa, and East that host refugees represent about 41.3 percent of \r\n Cameroon’s  population  (about  9.1  million  people).  An  estimated  341,000  refugees  have  progressively \r\n\r\n 63\r\n Non-refoulement” refers to expel, deportation or return\r\n 64\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 43 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n taken refuge in Cameroon since 2004, which has strained Cameroon’s public finances, service delivery, \r\n and environment. The crisis is expected to worsen the poverty incidence and widen income inequality \r\n among Cameroonians. Financing requirements to support the influx of CAR and Nigerian refugees have \r\n been estimated at US$176.3 million in 2016 and at US$198 million in 2017. Overall, humanitarian priority \r\n needs, including those of IDPs and vulnerable host populations, amount to US$310 million in 2017 and \r\n US$305 million in 2018.65  The financing gap reaches 81 percent. The International Monetary Fund has \r\n calculated the budgetary impact of the conflict due to Boko Haram (including security expenditure) at \r\n around 1–2 percent of GDP in 2015, which translates to between US$325–US$650 million.66 The GoC has \r\n estimated the financial impact of the destruction of goods, houses (40,000 homes destroyed), schools, \r\n markets,  roads,  and  health  centers  to  about  US$80  million.  However,  the  share  of  investment  budget \r\n allocated to these regions never reached 10 percent of the total budget between 2013 and 2016. In this \r\n challenging environment, GDP growth in Cameroon has decelerated from almost 6 percent (2014–2015) \r\n to an estimated 3.7 percent (2017), despite a relatively diversified and resilient economy, which reflects \r\n a narrowing of Cameroon’s fiscal and external margins of maneuver and an increase in its public debt. \r\n\r\n B. Technical \r\n\r\n 85. As all new interventions under Subcomponent 2.1 and Component 3 will be delivered using the \r\n PBF approach of the parent project, the technical design would remain the same as under the original \r\n project. PBF has mechanisms to ensure equity of access for the poor and vulnerable. First, higher levels \r\n of  equity  bonuses  are  given  to  health  facilities  situated  in  hard‐to‐reach  areas  and  serving  poor \r\n populations. This helps reduce the cost of care and covers transportation costs to the city to purchase \r\n inputs or to the community for outreach activities and home visits. Second, higher levels of subsidies are \r\n paid to health facilities for health care provided free of charge to poor or vulnerable patients. Each health \r\n facility has the right to provide health care free of charge for up to 20 percent of the population who are \r\n the poorest, for which they will be compensated with high levels of PBF subsidies. In instances of crisis or \r\n emergency when more of the population are unable to pay for health care, the ceiling for the provision \r\n of subsidized free care can be raised or even completely removed. If the emergency affects the whole \r\n population of the catchment area of the given health facility, up to 100 percent of the population can \r\n receive health care free of charge. This emergency includes the forced displacement of a population in \r\n the catchment area of a health facility.  \r\n\r\n 86. The  new  interventions  follow  best  practices  for  provision  of  quality  services  for  refugees  and \r\n refugee‐hosting communities. It was informed by reviewing lessons on best practice at an international \r\n level, including experiences in fragile and conflict‐affected states, as well as extensive discussions with \r\n Government counterparts during preparation and appraisal missions, and consultations with multilateral \r\n and bilateral donors (including UNHCR), with extensive experience implementing these types of programs.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 65 See Humanitarian Response Plans for Cameroon (2016 and 2017).  \r\n\r\n https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/operations/cameroon \r\n 66Extrême_Nord du Cameroun : le casse‐tête de la reconstruction en période de conflit. Accessed January 1, 2017. \r\n\r\n https://www.crisisgroup.org/fr/africa/central‐africa/cameroon/b133‐extreme‐nord‐du‐cameroun‐le‐casse‐tete‐de‐la‐\r\n reconstruction‐en‐periode‐de‐conflit. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 44 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n C. Financial Management \r\n\r\n 87. The financial management (FM) arrangements will be managed within the existing setup for the \r\n original health project. The project continues to submit the quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) and \r\n the  last  evaluation  of  FM  was  Moderately  Satisfactory.  The  FM  core  team  consists  of  one  financial \r\n specialist, two accountants, and an internal auditor. The team is well qualified and experienced and has \r\n been  working  on  the  PBF  project  in  Cameroon  for  more  than  five  years.  They  are  in  the  process  of \r\n recruiting new staff to manage the increased workload created by the scaling‐up of PBF, management of \r\n GFF activities, and the transfer of payment responsibilities from the CDVAs to the National Technical PBF \r\n unit.  The  same  financial  arrangement  will  continue  for  the  AF  and  additional  staff  will  be  recruited  if \r\n needed. \r\n\r\n 88. Overall,  the  FM  performance  of  the  project  and  associated  risk  were  rated  Moderately \r\n Satisfactory and Substantial, respectively, following the last supervision mission conducted by the World \r\n Bank  FM  team.  This  is  due  to  shortcomings  that  are  related  mainly  to  inconsistencies  in  the  financial \r\n statements and poor management of the advances made under the project. This risk level will remain the \r\n same for the AF. The project is taking actions to address these weaknesses especially with regard to the \r\n implementation of the new health project. On that basis, it has been agreed that FM arrangements would \r\n remain the same as for the original project. However, because the current arrangement is not taking into \r\n account the AF specificities that include health care operations toward refugees and host communities, it \r\n is  considered  that  the  following  measures  should  be  taken  within  three  months  of  effectiveness  to \r\n mitigate the associated risk: (a) the project procedures manual should be updated to take into account \r\n the  accounting  and  reporting  needs  under  the  AF;  (b)  the  accounting  software  should  be  customized \r\n accordingly,  (c)  two  new  dedicated  Designated  Accounts  (DA)  should  be  opened  and  managed  by  the \r\n Autonomous Amortization Unit (Caisse Autonome d’Amortissement [CAA]), and (d) to ensure the annual \r\n financial statements that will be produced under the AF are audited and the Terms of Reference (ToR) of \r\n the initial project external auditor will be updated to reflect the AF activities.  \r\n\r\n 89. There are no overdue unaudited IFRs or audit reports in the project and the sector at the time of \r\n preparation of this AF. The IFRs are prepared every quarter and submitted to the World Bank regularly \r\n (for example, 45 days after the end of each quarter) with a delay that is being taken care of to ensure \r\n future IFRs are submitted on time. For the sake of reporting on the activities performed under the AF, the \r\n National PBF unit will submit quarterly IFRs in a form and content acceptable to the World Bank within 45 \r\n days after the end of the quarter. The format will be the same as that of the ongoing project and will be \r\n prepared  jointly.  The  2016  audit  report  was  submitted  on  time  and  the  external  auditor  expressed  a \r\n qualified  opinion  pertaining  mainly  to  the  inconsistencies  in  the  financial  statements  and  the  lack  of \r\n justification of the advances pertaining to previous fiscal years. The accounts of this AF will be audited \r\n together  with  the  initial  project  on  an  annual  basis  and  the  external  audit  report  along  with  the \r\n Management Letter will be submitted to IDA within six months after the end of each calendar year. The \r\n ToR of the external auditing firm will include the scope of this AF and the project will comply with the \r\n World Bank disclosure policy of audit reports. \r\n\r\n 90. Disbursement. Upon AF effectiveness, the current disbursement arrangements (IFR based for PBF \r\n activities) under the initial project will apply to the AF as well.  The proposed additional funding of an \r\n amount of US$36 million to be disbursed over three years will finance 100 percent of eligible expenditures \r\n inclusive of taxes. For that purpose, one new designated accounts (DA) will be opened in a commercial \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 45 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n bank acceptable to IDA and managed by CAA. The ceiling of the DA will be established by the Government \r\n in  agreement  with  the  Bank  (WFACS)  depending  on  the  disbursement  methods.  In  addition  to  the \r\n advances  to  the  DA,  the  other  methods  of  disbursing  the  funds  (reimbursement,  direct  payment  and \r\n special commitment) will also be available to the project. The minimum value of applications for these \r\n methods is 20 percent of the DAs ceiling. The project will have to sign and submit Withdrawal Applications \r\n (WA) electronically using the eSignatures module accessible from the Bank’s Client Connection website. \r\n Additional instructions for disbursements will be provided in the Disbursement Letters that will be issued \r\n for this AF. \r\n\r\n 91. The CERC OM and the Disbursement and Financial Information Letter will include the detailed \r\n disbursement arrangements applicable under the CERC component of the proposed AF. As part of such \r\n arrangements, a positive list could be used, which would be featured in the CERC OM, and would include \r\n the items against which disbursements will be made. Where a positive list of expenditures is used, the \r\n documentation required to support disbursement requests should be agreed (for example, invoices and \r\n bills of lading for food imports) and recorded in the CERC OM and the Disbursement Letter. \r\n\r\n 92. For the Contingent Emergency Response Component, the existing flexibility in the Bank Guidance \r\n for Contingent Emergency Response Components (CERC), would be used to provide significant advances \r\n in order to provide the necessary liquidity for fast response. The level of the advance needed for the CERC \r\n would be established independently of any existing advances for the project components and recorded \r\n in  the  revised  Disbursement  and  Financial  Information  Letter.  The  advances  for  the  CERC  would  be \r\n deposited in separate Designated Accounts established for the purpose. \r\n\r\n 93. If  ineligible  expenditures  are  found  to  have  been  made  from  the  Designated  and/or  Project \r\n Accounts, the borrower will be obligated to refund the same. If the Designated Account remains inactive \r\n for  more  than  six  months,  the  WB  may  reduce  the  amount  advanced.  The  WB  will  have  the  right,  as \r\n reflected in the terms of the Financing Agreement, to suspend disbursement of the funds if significant \r\n conditions,  including  reporting  requirements,  are  not  complied  with.  Additional  details  regarding \r\n disbursement are provided in the Disbursement and Financial Information Letter (DFILs). \r\n\r\n 94. The table below sets out the expenditure categories to be financed out of the AF. This table takes \r\n into account the prevailing Country Financing Parameter in setting out the financing levels.  \r\n\r\n Table 3. Allocation of the Proceeds of the AF by Disbursement Category, in U.S. dollar \r\n Allocation  Disbursement Percent \r\n Category of Expenditure \r\n Proposed  Proposed \r\n Cat 1: Performance‐Based Payments under Parts A.1, A.2(a) A.4  31,000,000  100.00 \r\n and Part C.1 of the Project \r\n Cat 2: Goods, consultants’ services, Training and Operating  5,000,000  100.00 \r\n Costs for the Project except Parts A1, A.2(a), A.4 and Part C.1 of \r\n the Project \r\n Cat 3: Emergency Expenditures under Part D of the Project  0  100.00 \r\n Table 4. Action Plan  \r\n Risk  Mitigation Measures  Timeline \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 46 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The AF funds might be comingled with  Open one segregated DA   Immediately after \r\n the initial financing funds  effectiveness \r\n The AF activities may not be  Update the procedures manual to take into  Within two months \r\n adequately captured in the current  account the AF specificities (operations  of effectiveness \r\n internal control system   toward refugees and host communities) \r\n including the associated accounting and \r\n reporting needs  \r\n Delays may occur for the submission of  Customize the accounting software to take  Within two months \r\n agreed consolidated IFRs and annual  into account the AF activities  of effectiveness \r\n project financial statements \r\n The AF annual financial statements  Update the ToR of the external auditor  Within three \r\n might not be audited  months of \r\n effectiveness \r\n\r\n 95. Based on the current overall residual FM risk, which is Substantial, the project will be supervised \r\n twice a year to ensure that the FM arrangements still operate well and funds are used for the intended \r\n purposes and in an efficient way. \r\n\r\n D. Procurement \r\n\r\n Applicable policies and procedures \r\n\r\n 96. The project will be governed by the New Procurement Framework (NPF). All goods, works, non‐\r\n consulting services, and consulting services required for the project and to be financed out of the proceeds \r\n of  the  loan  shall  be  procured  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  set  forth  or  referred  to  in  the \r\n Procurement Regulations (World Bank Procurement Regulations for IPF Borrowers, dated July 1, 2016, \r\n revised in November 2017) and the provisions of the Procurement Plan. In line with Clause 12 of the World \r\n Bank  Policy  ‐  Investment  Policy  Financing  for  ‘Situations  of  Urgent  Need  of  Assistance  or  Capacity \r\n constraints”, a Project Procurement Strategy for Development (PPSD) and the derived Procurement Plan \r\n may be deferred up to the project implementation phase. Considering that the activities under this project \r\n are similar to the parent project, the client with the support of the World Bank will avail these documents \r\n (PPSD and the Procurement plan) no later than the beginning of this project. \r\n\r\n Procurement Arrangement \r\n\r\n 97. Procurement arrangements under the parent project are the responsibility of the PBF Technical \r\n Unit  (PIU),  with  technical  support  provided  by  the  special  tender  board  placed  under  authority  of  the \r\n original  HSSIP  (P104525).  The  special  tender  board  was  set  up  by  the  Ministry  of  Public  Procurement \r\n (Ministère de Marchés Publics, MINMAP) Decree 006/A/MINMAP on May 8, 2013 and modified by Decree \r\n 00000181/A/MINMAP on August 17, 2015. The overall procurement risk for the project was rated High at \r\n the start of the parent project due to, among other factors, (a) the country environment risk of corruption \r\n in procurement, especially in public contracts, (b) the relatively limited experience in the implementation \r\n of  World  Bank‐financed  projects  for  PBF  Technical  Unit  and  MINMAP,  and  (c)  the  potential  conflict  of \r\n interest for MINMAP in relation to the management of complaints linked to contracts directly handled by \r\n MINMAP. Mitigation Action Plans that were agreed on were implemented. These include (a) recruitment \r\n of  a  qualified  procurement  specialist,  (b)  establishment  of  an  administrative  and  financial  manual  to \r\n include procurement arrangements related to this project, and (c) installation of a comprehensive record \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 47 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n keeping  system.  This  has  brought  the  procurement  residual  risk  to  Substantial  and  the  most  recent \r\n procurement performance evaluation was rated Satisfactory.  \r\n\r\n 98. The key risks identified for procurement under this project are as follows: (a) staff involved in the \r\n project may not have sufficient knowledge of the NPF and/or there is a risk of confusion with previous \r\n sets  of  guidelines,  (b)  inadequate  communication  and  interaction  between  the  beneficiaries  and  the \r\n project unit may lead to delays in procurement processes and poor cost estimations, (c) administrative \r\n routines may increase delays in the procurement processes and affect project implementation, and (d) \r\n poor filing may lead to the loss of documents. The residual risk will remain Substantial after adopting the \r\n agreed mitigation Action Plan summarized in table 5. \r\n\r\n Table 5. Key risks identified for procurement and mitigating action plan \r\n\r\n Risk  Action  Responsibility  Date \r\n 1. Staff involved in the  Organize workshop sessions to train on  PIU/World Bank   2 months \r\n project who may not have  the NPF all staff involved in the    after \r\n sufficient knowledge on the  procurement of the project;    effectiveness \r\n NPF and/or risk of confusion       \r\n with the former guidelines   Continuous hands‐on trainings on the  World Bank  During the life \r\n NPF to identified key staff  Procurement  of the project \r\n Specialist \r\n 2. Inadequate  Update the manual of administrative,  PIU  2 months \r\n communication and  financial, accounting procedures to  after \r\n interaction between the  consider this AF, the NPF and clarify the  effectiveness \r\n beneficiaries and the PIU,  role of each team member involved in \r\n which may lead to delays in  the procurement process of the project \r\n procurement processes and  and the maximum delay for each \r\n poor estimation of the costs  procurement stage, specifically about the \r\n review, approval system, and signature \r\n of contracts \r\n 3. Administrative routines  Exercise quality control on all aspects of  PIU  During the life \r\n may increase delays in the  the procurement process, including  of the project \r\n procurement processes and  developing ToRs, technical specifications, \r\n affect project  bidding documents, proposals, request \r\n implementation  for quotations, evaluation, and award \r\n Monitor on a regular basis the  PIU  During the life \r\n Procurement Plan implementation and  of the project \r\n set up a close follow‐up in relation to \r\n beneficiaries and official bodies involved \r\n (MINMAP, CAA) to ensure that \r\n appropriate actions are taken on time \r\n 4. Poor filing, which can lead  Set up an appropriate filing system at the  PIU/Procurement  During the life \r\n to loss of documents  level of PIU to ensure compliance with  specialist  of the project \r\n the World Bank procurement filing \r\n manual \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 48 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 99. Frequency of procurement reviews and supervision. The World Bank’s prior and post reviews \r\n will  be  carried  out  based  on  thresholds  indicated  in  table  6.  IDA  will  conduct  six‐monthly  supervision \r\n missions and annual post‐procurement reviews. The standard post‐procurement reviews by World Bank \r\n staff should cover at least 15 percent of contracts subject to post review. Post reviews consist of reviewing \r\n technical, financial, and procurement reports by World Bank staff or consultants selected and hired by \r\n the  World  Bank.  Project  supervision  missions  shall  include  a  World  Bank  procurement  specialist  or  a \r\n specialized consultant. IDA may also conduct an Independent Procurement Review at any time until two \r\n years after the closing date of the project. \r\n\r\n 100. Procurement prior review.  The  procurement risk is rated Substantial. Table 6 summarizes  the \r\n procurement prior review for ‘Substantial’ risk. These prior review thresholds can evolve per the variation \r\n of procurement risk during the life of the project. \r\n\r\n Table 6. Procurement Prior Review Thresholds (US$, millions) \r\n\r\n Type of Procurement  Thresholds \r\n Goods, information technology, and non‐consulting services  2 \r\n Consulting firms  1 \r\n Individual consultants  0.3 \r\n\r\n E. Social (including Safeguards) \r\n\r\n 101. The AF will not change the safeguard category of the project, which remains category B, as it is \r\n not anticipated that the project activity will have a large‐scale negative impact on the environment and \r\n population. The AF triggers the same two safeguard policies triggered by the parent project: OP/BP 4.01 \r\n ‐ Environmental Assessment and OP/BP 4.10 ‐ Indigenous People. A social assessment was undertaken \r\n during the preparation of the parent project and an IPPF/IPP was prepared for the parent project and \r\n disclosed on February 25, 2016. The Action Plan also included indicators and a budget that are being used \r\n during project implementation to evaluate progress and results.  \r\n\r\n 102. OP  4.10  Indigenous  Peoples.  Even  though  indigenous  peoples  are  not  part  of  the  refugee \r\n population in Cameroon, presence of CAR’s Bororos—a historically marginalized population—should be \r\n well monitored to ensure that actions to be developed in the framework of this AF meet their specific \r\n needs.  The  borrower  would  then  update  or  elaborate  the/an  IPP  that  specifically  sets  actions  to  be \r\n performed for Bororos. \r\n\r\n 103. GBV. As GBV is widespread in Cameroon and in neighboring countries, refugee camps are also not \r\n exempted  from  violence  against  women.  Apart  from  cultural  and  religious  factors  which  hinder  the \r\n development  of  women  and  girls  (access  to  school,  household  occupations,  and  exclusion  from  the \r\n decision‐making  system),  phenomena  such  as  rape,  sexual  exploitation,  physical  assault,  domestic \r\n violence,  and  prostitution  are  a  reality  among  refugees.  These  are  risks  that  could  jeopardize  the \r\n implementation  of  the  AF.  The  borrower  would  consider  preparing  or  amending  the  project’s  social \r\n assessment  to  handle  those  GBV  issues  and  set  up  a  mitigation  plan  that  will  be  implemented  in  all \r\n refugees’ settlements.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 49 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 104. GRM.  The IPP will include a unique and harmonized GRM that will address complaints received \r\n from the populations (refugees included). The GRM to be implemented will build on CDPSP’s experience \r\n based  on  three  essential  components:  (a)  systematic  collection  and  management  of  project  activities‐\r\n related claims by the PIU, (b) formal popular complaint mechanism through a ‘green phone number’, (c) \r\n requests direction and management to/by local councils and local authorities (traditional rulers included). \r\n Based on these three pillars, the borrower should refine its actual GRM. This will serve as a ‘one‐stop \r\n shop’ GRM that will be streamlined in other World Bank Group‐financed projects.  \r\n\r\n F. Environment (including Safeguards) \r\n\r\n 105. The  OP/BP  4.01  Environmental  Assessment  safeguard  was  triggered  during  preparation  of  the \r\n parent  project  due  to  the  potential  negative  environmental  impacts  related  to  the  handling  and  the \r\n disposal of medical waste (such as placentas, syringes, and material used for delivery of pregnant women) \r\n in health facilities covered by the project. In accordance with OP/BP 4.01, the MWMP was prepared and \r\n is being implemented as planned. Given the envisioned soft WASH interventions at the community level \r\n including refugee camps, the MWMP will become the HWMP and will be updated (within three months \r\n from project launching) to include measures related to GRM, occupational safety, GBV risks, MHM, HWTS, \r\n and so on. The project will recruit a safeguard specialist. The project will not support refugee sites that \r\n are in or near national forest reserves, national parks, wildlife reserves, and national historic monuments. \r\n In addition, when selecting and supporting beneficiary camps established by UNHCR, due attention will \r\n be paid to the risk of artificial or natural hazards and the potential risk of conflict with the local population, \r\n protection  of  water  resources,  drainage  and  soil  conditions,  rainfall  patterns,  analysis  of  seasonal \r\n variations  in  water  yield  and  quality  throughout  the  year,  solid  waste  disposal,  number  of  animals  in \r\n camps, availability of an Environmental Action Plan for refugee camps or settlements, and so on. \r\n\r\n V. WORLD BANK GRIEVANCE REDRESS \r\n\r\n 106. Communities and individuals who believe that they are adversely affected by a World Bank (WB) \r\n supported project may submit complaints to existing project‐level grievance redress mechanisms or the \r\n WB’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS). The GRS ensures that complaints received are promptly reviewed \r\n in order to address project‐related concerns. Project affected communities and individuals may submit \r\n their complaint to the WB’s independent Inspection Panel which determines whether harm occurred, or \r\n could  occur,  as  a  result  of  WB  non‐compliance  with  its  policies  and  procedures.  Complaints  may  be \r\n submitted at any time after concerns have been brought directly to the World Banks attention, and Bank \r\n Management has been given an opportunity to respond.  For information on how to submit complaints \r\n to  the  World  Bank’s  corporate  Grievance  Redress  Service  (GRS),  please  visit \r\n http://www.worldbank.org/en/projects‐operations/products‐and‐services/grievance‐redress‐service.  For \r\n information  on  how  to  submit  complaints  to  the  World  Bank  Inspection  Panel,  please  visit \r\n www.inspectionpanel.org \r\n\r\n    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 50 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n VI. SUMMARY OF CHANGES \r\n \r\n  \r\n \r\n I. SUMMARY TABLE OF CHANGES \r\n  \r\n   Changed  Not Changed \r\n Change in Projects Development Objectives    ✔     \r\n Change in Results Framework    ✔     \r\n Change in Components and Cost    ✔     \r\n Change in Loan Closing Date(s)    ✔     \r\n Change in Procurement    ✔     \r\n Change in Implementing Agency        ✔ \r\n Cancellations Proposed        ✔ \r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories        ✔ \r\n Change in Disbursements Arrangements        ✔ \r\n Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered        ✔ \r\n Change of EA category        ✔ \r\n Change in Legal Covenants        ✔ \r\n Change in Institutional Arrangements        ✔ \r\n Change in Financial Management        ✔ \r\n Change in APA Reliance        ✔ \r\n Other Change(s)        ✔ \r\n  \r\n  \r\n II. DETAILED CHANGE(S) \r\n   \r\n PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE\r\n\r\n Current PDO \r\n The proposed Project Development Objective (PDO) is to increase utilization and improve the quality of health \r\n services with a particular focus on reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health and nutrition services.  \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 51 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Proposed New PDO \r\n The new Project Development Objective (PDO) is to: (i) increase utilization and improve the quality of health \r\n services with a particular focus on reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health, and nutritional services for \r\n the population of Cameroon, including refugees and refugee host communities, and (ii) in the event of an Eligible \r\n Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible Emergency \r\n  \r\n \r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK   _DETAILEDCHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n Project Development Objective Indicators    detailed changes\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n   \r\nPDO_IND_TABLE \r\n  \r\n People who have received essential HNP services \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  1,194,615.00  6,020,987.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Children 12‐23 months fully immunized in the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  68.00  68.00  80.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Births attended by a skilled professional in the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  37.60  37.60  55.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Average score of the quality of care checklist \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 52 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  30.00  36.00  50.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Children under 24 months being weighed for growth monitoring in the 3 northern regions (Adamaoua, North, \r\n Far north) and the East \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  16,501.00  1,646,480.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Direct project beneficiaries \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  1,211,116.00  8,267,467.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Female beneficiaries \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom Supplement \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  617,669.00  4,216,408.00  Revised \r\n\r\n          \r\n  \r\n Refugees who have received healthcare (curative and preventative) at health facilities in northern and East \r\n regions \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  600,000.00  New \r\n\r\n Date  02‐Jul‐2018    31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 53 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n   Intermediate  Indicators  \r\n IO_DETAILED_TABLE   detailed changes\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n   \r\n Pregnant women receiving at least 4 antenatal care visits in the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  42.80  42.80  60.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Adolescent girls 10‐19 years benefiting from multisectoral services supported by the GFF Investment Case \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  150,000.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Women 15‐49 using modern contraceptive methods in the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  12.80  12.80  22.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Children aged 6‐59 months who received a vitamin A supplement in the last six months \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  166,205.00  504,286.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n  \r\n Percentage of facilities with 100% tracer drugs available in targeted health facilities on the day of the visit \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  20.00  21.00  40.00  Revised \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 54 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Number of consultations provided to the poor and vulnerable free of charge \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  199,428.00  1,502,057.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Patients/people referred to the health facilities by community health workers \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  58,821.00  343,890.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Percentage of reported maternal deaths audited in PBF districts \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  25.00  Revised \r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Percentage of health facilities conducting community interface meetings \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Marked for \r\n Value  4.00  15.00  60.00 \r\n Deletion \r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  30‐Jun‐2017  31‐May‐2021   \r\n \r\n Percentage of the national population covered by the PBF program \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  25.00  38.00  95.00  Revised \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 55 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Sep‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Percentage of the total budget for family planning needs funded by the Ministry of Public Health budget \r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Marked for \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  50.00 \r\n Deletion \r\n Date  30‐Jun‐2016  29‐Mar‐2017  31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Number of children and pregnant women dewormed \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  3,542,000.00  New \r\n\r\n Date  02‐Jul‐2018    31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n Number of refugee children and pregnant women dewormed \r\n Unit of Measure: Number \r\n Indicator Type: Custom \r\n  \r\n   Baseline  Actual (Current)  End Target  Action \r\n Value  0.00  0.00  637,000.00  New \r\n\r\n Date  02‐Jul‐2018    31‐Dec‐2022   \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n COMPONENTS \r\nCurrent Component Name  Current Cost  Action  Proposed Component  Proposed Cost (US$, \r\n (US$, millions)  Name  millions) \r\nStrengthening of Health  109.00  Revised  Strengthening of Health  130.00 \r\nService Delivery  Service Delivery \r\nInstitutional Strengthening  18.00  Revised  Institutional  23.00 \r\nfor Improved Health System  Strengthening for \r\nPerformance  Improved Health System \r\n Performance \r\n  0.00  New  Strengthening  10.00 \r\n emergency, sexual and \r\n reproductive health \r\n services, and water, \r\n sanitation and hygiene \r\n\r\n\r\n Page 56 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n and nutrition service \r\n delivery for refugee and \r\n host populations in the \r\n northern and East \r\n regions \r\n   0.00  New  Contingent Emergency  0.00 \r\n Response Component \r\n TOTAL   127.00       163.00 \r\n\r\n    \r\n LOAN CLOSING DATE(S) \r\n Ln/Cr/Tf  Status  Original Closing  Current  Proposed   Proposed Deadline \r\n   Closing(s)   Closing   for Withdrawal \r\n     Applications \r\n IDA‐57900  Effective  31‐May‐2021  31‐May‐2021  31‐Dec‐2022  30‐Apr‐2023 \r\n TF‐A2177  Effective  31‐May‐2021  31‐May‐2021  31‐Dec‐2022  30‐Apr‐2023 \r\n\r\n     \r\n  \r\n  Expected Disbursements (in US$, millions) \r\n  \r\n  DISBURSTB\r\n L                   \r\n Fiscal Year    2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 \r\n\r\n Annual     0.00     9.04    20.71    29.61    31.83    31.18    28.33    12.31     0.00 \r\n\r\n Cumulative     0.00     9.04    29.74    59.35    91.18   122.36   150.69   163.00   163.00 \r\n \r\n  \r\n SYSTEMATIC OPERATIONS RISK‐RATING TOOL (SORT) \r\n Risk Category  Latest ISR Rating  Current Rating \r\n  \r\n  Moderate   High \r\n  Political and Governance \r\n  Moderate   Substantial \r\n  Macroeconomic \r\n  Moderate   Moderate \r\n  Sector Strategies and Policies \r\n  Substantial   Substantial \r\n  Technical Design of Project or Program \r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and   Substantial   Substantial \r\n  Sustainability \r\n  Substantial   Substantial \r\n  Fiduciary \r\n  Moderate   Moderate \r\n  Environment and Social \r\n  Moderate   Moderate \r\n  Stakeholders \r\n  Substantial   Substantial \r\n  Other \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 57 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall   Substantial   Substantial \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\nLEGAL COVENANTS2 \r\n\r\n LEGAL COVENANTS – Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n Sections and Description \r\n Without limitation upon the provisions of Paragraph (a) of Section I.A.2 of the Financing Agreement, the PBF \r\n Technical Unit shall at all times: (i) be comprised of qualified and experienced personnel in adequate numbers and \r\n to this end, inter alia, recruit: (A) a procurement specialist and a financial management specialist; and (B) not later \r\n than  two (2) months after the Effective Date, an accountant, an assistant accountant, and an internal auditor; all in \r\n accordance with Section III of the Financial Agreement, with qualifications and terms of reference acceptable to the \r\n Association; and (ii) be responsible for coordinating the day‐to‐day implementation of the Project, including, \r\n preparing the proposed overall Annual Work Plan and Budget for the Project, updating the Procurement Plan and \r\n consolidating the Project reports for the Technical Working Group. \r\n The Recipient shall not later than thirty (30) days after the Effective Date update  the Project operational manual, \r\n containing detailed arrangements and procedures for: (a) institutional coordination and day‐to‐day execution of \r\n the Project; (b) Project budgeting, disbursement and financial management; (c) procurement; (d) monitoring, \r\n evaluation, reporting and communication; (e) environmental and safeguard management; and (f) such other \r\n administrative, financial, technical and organizational arrangements and procedures as shall be required for the \r\n Project. \r\n The Recipient shall maintain or, as needed, in accordance with Section III of the Financing Agreement, recruit not \r\n later that nine (9) months after the Effective Date and thereafter maintain, throughout Project implementation, \r\n external verification agents, with qualifications, experience, and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association, \r\n for purposes of the third‐party verification of the Basic Health Services Package to be carried out under Part A.1 of \r\n the Project; and \r\n  \r\n The Recipient shall cause said external verification agents to carry out, once every semester, throughout Project \r\n implementation, verification exercises of Basic Health Services Package, including community and focus group \r\n surveys, beneficiary spot checks, verification of data provided and records kept by the relevant Participating Health \r\n Authority in relation to the Basic Health Services Package, and assessments of the quality of health services \r\n provided under such Basic Health Services Package, in accordance with the provisions of the PBF Manual. \r\n  \r\n \r\n \r\n Conditions \r\n \r\n Type  Description \r\n Effectiveness  Article V. 5.01. The Additional Condition of Effectiveness consists of the \r\n following, namely, that the Association is satisfied that the Recipient has an \r\n  adequate refugee protection framework. \r\n Type  Description \r\n Disbursement  Schedule 2. Section III. B. (b). Under Category (1) unless such a withdrawal is \r\n made on the basis of a Performance‐Based Contract executed between an \r\n Implementing Agent, on behalf of the Recipient and a Participating Health \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 58 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Authority in accordance with the provisions of Section I.G.2 of Schedule 2 to this \r\n   Agreement. \r\n Type  Description \r\n Disbursement  Schedule 2. Section. III. (c) under Category (3), for Emergency Expenditures, \r\n under Part D of the Project, unless and until the Association is satisfied, and \r\n notified the Recipient of its satisfaction, that all of the following conditions have \r\n been met in respect of said activities:   \r\n  \r\n (i) the Recipient has determined that an Eligible Crisis or Emergency has \r\n occurred, has furnished to the Association a request to include said activities in \r\n the CER Part in order to respond to said Eligible Crisis or Emergency, and the \r\n Association has agreed with such determination, accepted said request and \r\n notified the Recipient thereof; \r\n  \r\n (ii) the Recipient has prepared and disclosed all safeguards instruments required \r\n for said activities, and the Recipient has implemented any actions which are \r\n required to be taken under said instruments, all in accordance with the \r\n provisions of Section I.D of Schedule 2 to this Agreement; \r\n  \r\n (iii) the Recipient’s Coordinating Authority has adequate staff and resources, in \r\n accordance with the provisions of Section I.D of this Schedule 2 to this \r\n Agreement, for the purposes of said activities; and \r\n  \r\n (iv) the Recipient has adopted an CER Operations Manual in form, substance and \r\n manner acceptable to the Association and the provisions of the CER Operations \r\n Manual remain, or have been updated in accordance with the provisions of \r\n Section I.D of this Schedule 2 so as to be ‐ appropriate for the inclusion and \r\n implementation of said activities under the CER Part. \r\n    \r\n    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 59 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n VII. RESULTS FRAMEWORK   \r\n\r\n  \r\n  \r\n \r\n  \r\n \r\n  \r\n Results Framework \r\n COUNTRY : Cameroon  \r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project ‐ Additional Financing \r\n   RESULT YES PDO \r\n Project Development Objectives \r\n  \r\n The new Project Development Objective (PDO) is to: (i) increase utilization and improve the quality of health services with a particular focus on \r\n reproductive, maternal, child and adolescent health, and nutritional services for the population of Cameroon, including refugees and refugee host \r\n communities, and (ii) in the event of an Eligible Emergency, to provide immediate and effective response to said Eligible Emergency \r\n  \r\n Project Development Objective Indicators \r\n  \r\n Unit of  Data Source /  Responsibility for \r\n Action  Indicator Name  Core  Baseline  End Target  Frequency \r\n Measure  Methodology  Data Collection \r\n  \r\n Revised  Name: People      Number  0.00  6,020,987.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n who have  0    Statistics   \r\n received essential \r\n HNP services \r\n  \r\n   Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Children      Percentage  68.00  80.00  Annually  Household  MOPH \r\n 12‐23 months     \r\n fully immunized in \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 60 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n the 3 Northern  Survey \r\n regions and the   \r\n East \r\n  \r\n  Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Births      Percentage  37.60  55.00  Annually   Household  MOPH \r\n attended by a    survey   \r\n skilled   \r\n professional in the \r\n 3 Northern \r\n regions and the \r\n East \r\n  \r\n  Description: Deliveries attended by a qualified health professional in Adamaoua, Far‐North, North and East regions \r\n Revised  Name: Average      Percentage  30.00  50.00  Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n score of the    Statistics   \r\n quality of care \r\n checklist \r\n  \r\n  Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Children      Number  0.00  1,646,480.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n under 24 months  0    Statistics   \r\n being weighed for \r\n growth \r\n monitoring in the \r\n 3 northern \r\n regions \r\n (Adamaoua, \r\n North, Far north) \r\n and the East \r\n  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 61 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Description: Children under 24 months being weighed for growth monitoring in the 3 Northern regions \r\n Revised  Name: Direct      Number  0.00  8,267,467.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n project  0    Statistics   \r\n beneficiaries   \r\n \r\n Revised  Female      Number  0.00  4,216,408.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n beneficiaries  0    Statistics   \r\n  \r\n    \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Description: Direct beneficiaries are people or groups who directly derive benefits from an intervention (i.e., children who benefit from an immunization \r\n program; families that have a new piped water connection). Please note that this indicator requires supplemental information. Supplemental Value: \r\n Female beneficiaries (percentage). Based on the assessment and definition of direct project beneficiaries, specify what proportion of the direct project \r\n  beneficiaries are female. This indicator is calculated as a percentage. \r\n New  Name: Refugees      Number  0.00  600,000.00  Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n who have    Statistics   \r\n received   \r\n healthcare \r\n (curative and \r\n preventative) at \r\n health facilities in \r\n northern and East \r\n regions \r\n  \r\n \r\n Description:  \r\n RESULT_YES_IO \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 62 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Results Indicators \r\n\r\n Responsibility \r\n Unit of  Data Source / \r\n Action  Indicator Name  Core  Baseline  End Target  Frequency  for Data \r\n Measure  Methodology \r\n Collection \r\n \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Revised  Name: Pregnant      Percentage  42.80  60.00  Annually  Household Survey  MOPH \r\n women receiving at       \r\n least 4 antenatal care \r\n visits in the 3 \r\n Northern regions and \r\n the East \r\n  \r\n Description: Number of pregnant women who had at least 4 antenatal care visits before delivery in Adamaoua, Far‐North, North and East regions \r\n  (percentage) \r\n Revised  Name: Adolescent      Number  0.00  150,000.0 Annualy  Report from Project  MOPH \r\n girls 10‐19 years  0    and National   \r\n benefiting from  Multisectoral \r\n multisectoral  Program for \r\n services supported  Combating \r\n by the GFF  Maternal, Newborn \r\n Investment Case  and Child Mortality \r\n  \r\n Description: Adolescent girls aged 10‐19 years benefiting from multisectoral services supported by the GFF Investment Case (number), for example: \r\n conditional cash transfer program for adolescent girls linked to education outcomes, life skills coaching, an education sector PBF pilot and additional \r\n  cash transfer support from health, sanitation and nutrition outcomes (to be finalized with the Investment Case) \r\n Revised  Name: Women 15‐49      Percentage  12.80  22.00  Annually  Household surveys  MOPH \r\n using modern     \r\n contraceptive \r\n methods in the 3 \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 63 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Northern regions and \r\n the East \r\n  \r\n Description: Women 15‐49 using modern methods such as injections, pills, implants, IUDs and condoms would be taken into account (same definition \r\n  as the MICS 2014 survey will be used) in Adamaoua, Far North, North and East regions. \r\n Revised  Name: Children aged      Number  0.00  504,286.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n 6‐59 months who  0    Statistics   \r\n received a vitamin A \r\n supplement in the \r\n last six months \r\n  \r\n  Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Percentage of      Percentage  20.00  40.00  Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n facilities with 100%    Statistics   \r\n tracer drugs available \r\n in targeted health \r\n facilities on the day \r\n of the visit \r\n  \r\n  Description: Based on current levels in HSSIP project and 6% in new areas (baseline for HSSIP) \r\n Revised  Name: Number of      Number  0.00  1,502,057. Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n consultations  00    Statistics   \r\n provided to the poor \r\n and vulnerable free \r\n of charge \r\n  \r\n  Description: Using the validated definition and selection criteria for identification of the poor and vulnerable. \r\n Revised  Name:      Number  0.00  343,890.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n Patients/people  0    statistics   \r\n referred to the \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 64 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n health facilities by   \r\n community health \r\n workers \r\n  \r\n   Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Percentage of      Percentage  0.00  25.00  Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n reported maternal    Statistics   \r\n deaths audited in \r\n PBF districts \r\n  \r\n   Description:  \r\n Revised  Name: Percentage of      Percentage  25.00  95.00  Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n the national    Statistics   \r\n population covered \r\n by the PBF program \r\n  \r\n   Description: Percentage of the total national population covered by the PBF program (measured by district populations included in the program) \r\n New  Name: Number of      Number  0.00  3,542,000. Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n children and  00    Statistics   \r\n pregnant women   \r\n dewormed \r\n  \r\n   Description:  \r\n New  Name: Number of      Number  0.00  637,000.0 Quarterly  Report from PBF  MOPH \r\n refugee children and  0    Statistics   \r\n pregnant women   \r\n dewormed \r\n  \r\n    \r\n Description:  \r\n \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 65 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n   \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 66 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\nRESULT YES TARGET VALUES \r\n Target Values \r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators FY_Result1 \r\n\r\n Action  Indicator Name  Baseline  End Target \r\n Revised  People who have received essential HNP services  0.00  6,020,987.00 \r\n Revised  Children 12‐23 months fully immunized in the 3 \r\n 68.00  80.00 \r\n Northern regions and the East \r\n Revised  Births attended by a skilled professional in the 3 \r\n 37.60  55.00 \r\n Northern regions and the East \r\n Revised  Average score of the quality of care checklist  30.00  50.00 \r\n Revised  Children under 24 months being weighed for growth \r\n monitoring in the 3 northern regions (Adamaoua,  0.00  1,646,480.00 \r\n North, Far north) and the East \r\n Revised  Direct project beneficiaries  0.00  8,267,467.00 \r\n Revised  Female beneficiaries  0.00  4,216,408.00 \r\n New  Refugees who have received healthcare (curative and \r\n preventative) at health facilities in northern and East  0.00  600,000.00 \r\n regions \r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators FY_Result1 \r\n\r\n Action  Indicator Name    Baseline  End Target \r\n Revised  Pregnant women receiving at least 4 antenatal care \r\n 42.80  60.00 \r\n visits in the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 67 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Revised  Adolescent girls 10‐19 years benefiting from \r\n multisectoral services supported by the GFF Investment  0.00  150,000.00 \r\n Case \r\n Revised  Women 15‐49 using modern contraceptive methods in \r\n 12.80  22.00 \r\n the 3 Northern regions and the East \r\n Revised  Children aged 6‐59 months who received a vitamin A \r\n 0.00  504,286.00 \r\n supplement in the last six months \r\n Revised  Percentage of facilities with 100% tracer drugs available \r\n 20.00  40.00 \r\n in targeted health facilities on the day of the visit \r\n Revised  Number of consultations provided to the poor and \r\n 0.00  1,502,057.00 \r\n vulnerable free of charge \r\n Revised  Patients/people referred to the health facilities by \r\n 0.00  343,890.00 \r\n community health workers \r\n Revised  Percentage of reported maternal deaths audited in PBF \r\n 0.00  25.00 \r\n districts \r\n Revised  Percentage of the national population covered by the \r\n 25.00  95.00 \r\n PBF program \r\n New  Number of children and pregnant women dewormed  0.00  3,542,000.00 \r\n New  Number of refugee children and pregnant women \r\n 0.00  637,000.00 \r\n dewormed \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 68 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAnnex 1. The Government’s Approach to the Refugee Crisis \r\n\r\n1. There is a commitment from the Government to welcome refugees. Among national and local \r\nauthorities there is both a commitment to acceptance and harmony and concerns around tensions with \r\nhosting communities and potential security risks stemming from the presence of refugees and increased \r\ncross‐border activities. While the approach toward CAR refugees in the East has been relatively welcoming \r\n(with a degree of socioeconomic inclusion in host communities), the attitude toward Nigerian refugees in \r\nthe Far North has been influenced by the fear of Boko Haram, with repeated reports of Nigerian refugees \r\nbeing rejected at the border or forcibly returned and the imposition of a stricter encampment policy. \r\n\r\n2. Overall, the legal framework governing the situation of refugees is adequate, but implementation \r\nis  difficult.  Cameroon  is  a  party  to  most  major  international  agreements  relevant  to  refugees  (1951 \r\nConvention,  1967  Protocol,  and  1969  Organisation  of  African  Unity  Convention)  and  promulgated  a \r\nrefugee law in 2005. In terms of IDP protection, Cameroon acceded to the Kampala Convention in April \r\n2015, but it remains to domesticate the convention into national law. Within the framework convention \r\non  the  gradual  integration  of  refugees  into  the  national  health  system  that  was  signed  between  the \r\nMinistry  for  Public  Health  and  UNHCR  in  October  2016,  UNHCR  subsidizes  the  free  provision  of  basic \r\nhealth care services for refugees (70 percent of the costs); however, the convention currently covers less \r\nthan 50 percent of the health districts which host refugees. As for access to education, while refugees \r\nbenefit in principle from free access to primary public education, as with poor Cameroonians, they often \r\nstruggle to cover the substantive secondary costs (APEE contribution, uniforms, school material, and so \r\non). Documentation, however, remains a critical issue for refugees. For the time being refugee cards are \r\nissued to refugees by UNHCR; however, these cards are not always recognized by authorities and security \r\nforces at local level which can have a negative impact on free movement and access to the labor market \r\nand services. As for out‐of‐camp refugees in the Far North region, registration of refugees and access to \r\nrefugee cards remains a challenge and puts refugees in an even more precarious situation in terms of \r\nprotection. While refugees have the right to own land, this is in practice not consistently implemented \r\ndue to traditional rules governing land distribution and competing local claims.  \r\n\r\n3. There  is  neither  a  clear  policy  nor  institutional  arrangements  to  manage  the  medium‐term, \r\nsocioeconomic dimension of the refugee crisis. Several ministries and various levels of Government share \r\noverlapping  responsibilities.  The  Ministry  of  Territorial  Administration  (Ministre  de  l’Administration \r\nterritorial  [MINAT])  and  Ministry  of  Decentralization  and  Local  Development  are  central  to  the \r\nGovernment’s  approach  to  refugees,  particularly  in  rural  areas  where  they  are  represented  through  a \r\nstrong network of  gouverneurs,  prefets, and  sous‐prefets, who play a key role related to issues such as \r\nintelligence  and  crisis  management,  land  issues,  and  local  conflicts.  The  Ministry  of  Regional \r\nAdministration  and  Decentralization  is  furthermore  the  focal  point  within  the  Government  for \r\nhumanitarian  issues.  MINEPAT  is  the  key  coordinating  counterpart  for  development  actors  and  is  also \r\ncoleading  the  RPBA  process.  Sectoral  ministries  (for  example,  education,  water,  health,  agriculture,  or \r\nsocial affairs) tend to pay relatively less attention to remote hosting regions. Devolved and decentralized \r\nauthorities as well as traditional leaders often lack resources,  although some have  developed  creative \r\nresponses to improve the situation of their communities. The network of associations and civil society \r\norganizations is comparably weak (for example, youth and women) and operates in a fragmented manner, \r\nthat is, with varying objectives and coordination mechanisms.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 69 of 80\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nHealth System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n4. Despite the fact that the emergency phase is over, the Government continues to rely on external \r\npartners, including on UNHCR, to manage and provide assistance to refugees. This largely reflects a lack \r\nof  fiscal  resources  (with  only  a  small  share  of  budget  resources  allocated  to  hosting  regions)  and  the \r\nlimited administrative and technical capacity available in remote border regions.  \r\n\r\n5. The influx of refugees increases pressure on basic community infrastructure and generates urgent \r\nneeds with regard to access to education, food, water, sanitation, and health care. Education is, in this \r\ncontext, one of the many sectors that requires support from Cameroonian authorities and development \r\npartners. No specific measures have been taken by MINEDUB to support schools with increased refugee‐\r\nrelated enrollment. Many affected schools lack sufficient numbers of teachers, and quality teaching and \r\nlearning materials. While some data are available from specialized agencies, MINEDUB faces a shortage \r\nof data relevant to the education challenges of refugees and affected host communities at the school level \r\nto inform pragmatic support to schools. There is a need for the education sector to identify and update \r\nneeds on a regular basis and to establish a response mechanism to address immediate needs in schools.  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 70 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAnnex 2. Commitments of the Government in Support of Refugees, Internally Displaced Populations, and Host Communities \r\n\r\n Monitoring \r\n Responsibility (Government  Implementation  Strategy  Implementation \r\n Commitments/Actions of Government \r\n Side)  Deadline  UNHCR/Focal  under RSW \r\n Point UNHCR \r\n Sector/thematic area 1: Defining a medium‐term and long‐term strategy for refugees, IDPs, and host communities \r\n 1. Develop a national strategy on forced displacement  MINATD/MINREX/MINEPAT  June 2018  RCP Pillar  Steering \r\n (‘operational implementation of Pillar 1 of the Recovery  1/Support  Committee \r\n and Peacebuilding Strategy’) and strengthen its  Plan/MYMP \r\n leadership with a medium‐term and long‐term strategy to \r\n address forced displacement (‘to ensure the proper \r\n coherence of the actions taken by the Government, local \r\n and regional authorities and their humanitarian and \r\n development partners’) \r\n 2. Develop an operational plan covering the period 2018– MINEPAT/MINATD/MINREX  June 2018  RCP Pillar  Steering \r\n 2022 to strengthen solidarity mechanism for refugees and  1/MYMP  Committee  \r\n IDPs \r\n\r\n\r\n Sector/thematic area 2: Ensure better coordination of State actions under the existing MINEPAT‐UNHCR Partnership Agreement \r\n\r\n 1. The Steering Committee of the MINEPAT‐UNHCR  MINEPAT  2017–2020  MINEPAT‐UNHCR  Safety Nets \r\n Partnership Agreement  Partnership  Health  \r\n a. “Serves as a platform for all of the development  Agreement and  Education \r\n actions so that the programs can be prioritized in the  Support Plan/RCP  CDPSP \r\n regions/areas/villages affected by inflows of  Pillar  Steering \r\n refugees”  1/Objectives 2 et  Committee  \r\n b. The Government “plans to extend it to the other  3 MYMP \r\n regions affected by the refugee and internally \r\n displaced persons crisis” (beyond the East, Adamawa \r\n and North) \r\n c. “The Government intends to use the Partnership \r\n Agreement between the Government of Cameroon \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 71 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Monitoring \r\n Responsibility (Government  Implementation  Strategy  Implementation \r\n Commitments/Actions of Government \r\n Side)  Deadline  UNHCR/Focal  under RSW \r\n Point UNHCR \r\n and the United Nations High Commissioner for \r\n Refugees (…) to coordinate action under Pillar 1 of \r\n the Recovery and Peace Consolidation Strategy, in \r\n close collaboration with the Forced Displacement \r\n Program”   \r\n d. The RCP Strategic Steering Committee’s “decisions \r\n will guide the deliberations of the Steering \r\n Committee for the Partnership Agreement with \r\n UNHCR”, which will coordinate the monitoring of \r\n “projects available to it” implementation and “Pillar 1 \r\n of the Recovery and Peace Consolidation Strategy” \r\n e. “IDA18 resources will be used to finance the \r\n Secretariat of the Steering Committee for the \r\n Partnership Agreement and for implementing \r\n support plans for towns hosting refugees”  \r\nSector/thematic area 3: Ensure refugees’ protection \r\n\r\n1. Issuance and recognition of biometric identity documents  MINATD/DGSN   End of 2019   Objective 1  Safety Nets \r\n for refugees  MYMP \r\n /Protection \r\n2. Systematic issuance of birth certificates for refugee  MINATD/CTD  2018–2019  Objective 1  Safety Nets \r\n children born in Cameroon with new registry offices (or  MYMP/Protection  CDPSP \r\n reinforcement of existing registry offices) in border areas   Community \r\n Services \r\n3. Strengthening of the institutional capacities of refugee  MINREX  2018–2019  Objective 1  Steering \r\n status management bodies (Technical Secretariat)  MYMP/Protection  Committee \r\n\r\n4. “In terms of protection, IDA18 resources will be used to  MINREX, MINATD/CTD,  2018–2019  Objective 1  Safety Nets \r\n finance strengthening of the Technical Secretariat for  MINATD, DGSN  MYMP/Protection \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 72 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Monitoring \r\n Responsibility (Government  Implementation  Strategy  Implementation \r\n Commitments/Actions of Government \r\n Side)  Deadline  UNHCR/Focal  under RSW \r\n Point UNHCR \r\n attributing refugee status, strengthening deconcentrated  Community \r\n registry offices and issuance of biometric identity  Services \r\n documents” \r\n5. Support mechanisms for a permanent return of IDPs that  MINATD/MINDEF/MINEPAT  2018  Objective 4  CDPSP \r\n maintains their dignity and their security   MYMP  Safety Nets \r\n /Protection \r\n6. “For Nigerian refugees applying for repatriation, the  MINATD/MINREX/MINDEF  2018  Objective 4  Steering \r\n Government undertakes to facilitate their return under  MYMP  Committee \r\n the terms set out in the Tripartite Agreement. For  /Protection \r\n refugees wishing to remain in Cameroon, the \r\n Government will provide assistance and protection in \r\n accordance with international standards” \r\nSector/thematic area 4: Facilitate greater access to basic social services and socio‐economic inclusion of refugees, host populations and IDPs \r\n\r\n1. Draft support plans complementing local council‐level  MINEPAT   December 2018   Support Plan  CDPSP \r\n development plans implemented by the CDPSP \r\n\r\n2. Prioritize programs that promote social and economic  MINEPAT  2018  Support Plan  Safety Nets \r\n integration in the local council/health districts affected by  Objectives 2 and  Health  \r\n flows of refugees and provide basic services equitably at  3 MYMP  Education \r\n the local level  Livelihoods  CDPSP \r\n Strategy \r\n3. Facilitate refugees’ resilience, autonomy, and access to  MINEPAT  2018  Support Plan  Safety Nets \r\n basic social services and to IGAs  Objectives 2 and  Health  \r\n 3 MYMP  Education \r\n Livelihoods  CDPSP \r\n Strategy \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 73 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Monitoring \r\n Responsibility (Government  Implementation  Strategy  Implementation \r\n Commitments/Actions of Government \r\n Side)  Deadline  UNHCR/Focal  under RSW \r\n Point UNHCR \r\n4. Define a policy and local arrangements for refugees’  MINADER/MINEPIA/MINCAF  2018  Support Plan  Steering \r\n access to crop and grazing land  Livelihoods  Committee \r\n Strategy  \r\n Objectives 2 and \r\n 3 MYMP \r\n5. Develop/extend to areas affected by flows of refugees  MINEPAT/WB Projects   December 2018  Support Plan  Safety Nets \r\n and IDPs the Safety Nets, Health and Basic education  Strategy CBI  Health  \r\n projects  Livelihoods  Education \r\n Strategy  \r\n Objectives 1 and \r\n 2 MYMP \r\nSector/thematic area 5: To acquire knowledge tools to better address the refugees crisis  \r\n\r\n1. Assess poverty and vulnerability factors affecting refugees  MINEPAT/MINAS  June 2018  Strategy CBI  Safety Net \r\n and host communities (multisectoral study led by INS)  Livelihoods \r\n Strategy  \r\n MYMP \r\n2. Develop a strategic note on documentation of refugees to  MINEPAT/MINATD   June 2018   Objective 1  Steering \r\n define documentation process for refugees and issuance  MYMP  Committee \r\n of identity documents   Protection  Safety Net \r\n\r\n\r\n3. Develop recommendations on agro‐pastoral conflicts in  MINADER/MINEPIA/MINCAF   June 2018  Livelihoods  Steering \r\n the Far North, complementing the study carried out in the  Strategy  Committee \r\n East, North, and Adamawa \r\n\r\nIDA18 Financing \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 74 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Monitoring \r\n Responsibility (Government  Implementation  Strategy  Implementation \r\n Commitments/Actions of Government \r\n Side)  Deadline  UNHCR/Focal  under RSW \r\n Point UNHCR \r\n 1. IDA18 resources will be used to finance strengthening of  MINREX  2018–2019    Safety Nets \r\n the Technical Secretariat for attributing refugee status, \r\n strengthening deconcentrated registry offices, and \r\n issuance of biometric identity documents  \r\n 2. IDA18 resources will be used to finance the Secretariat of  MINEPAT  2017–2019    Safety Nets \r\n the Steering Committee for the Partnership Agreement  Health  \r\n and for implementing support plans for towns hosting  Education \r\n refugees.   CDPSP \r\n 3. The ‘Social Safety Net’ project, the Health System  MINEPAT/MINSANTE/MINEDUB  2018–2019    Safety Nets \r\n Performance Reinforcement project, the Basic Education  Health  \r\n Project, and CDPSP are to receive IDA funds.  Education \r\n CDPSP \r\n  \r\n \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 75 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAnnex 3. World Bank integrated approach through IDA18 Refugee Sub‐Window in Cameroon   \r\n\r\n1. The World Bank is supporting an integrated approach to address key challenges facing refugees \r\nand  host  communities,  building  on  the  work  of  the  ongoing  projects  (CDPSP,  SSNP,  and  HSRSP)  and \r\ncomplementing  projects  in  the  pipeline  (ERSP).  Table  3.1  summarizes  the  key  interventions  financed \r\nunder IDA18 RSW. \r\n\r\n Table 3. 1. Interventions under Preparation in Cameroon Supported by IDA18 RSW \r\n\r\n Additional \r\n Project  Amount \r\n Additional Activities under RSW  Synergies under RSW \r\n Name  under RSW \r\n (Grant) \r\n ERSP   Improved distribution of teachers recruited by the  US$36  Integration of health, \r\n (P160926)  state in public primary schools (including focus on  million  nutrition, and early \r\n refugee‐affected local councils)   childhood \r\n  Increased capacities of teachers in the effective and  development \r\n efficient use of the new curriculum in preprimary and  contents in \r\n primary schools (including focus on refugee‐affected  community preschool \r\n local councils)  centers \r\n  Increased availability of essential textbooks in public   \r\n primary schools  Inclusion of contents \r\n  Increased access to preschool in rural areas through  related to GBV \r\n community preschools, in line with national standards  prevention, child \r\n  Establishment of a standardized student learning  rights, and refugee \r\n assessment system for primary and secondary  protection in teacher \r\n education  training \r\n  Integrated education management information system   \r\n functional and operational  School‐based \r\n   Improved learning environment and quality of  sensitization on birth \r\n education for children in host community schools  registration \r\n affected refugees   \r\n  Support a transition from input‐based financing to PBF  Modules on parental \r\n at the school level. (including focus on refugee‐ education \r\n affected local councils) \r\n SSNP AF   Human capital development (parental awareness  US$60  Common targeting at \r\n campaigns) for children ages 3 to 5   million  the local council level \r\n  Development of training modules in partnership with   \r\n UNICEF  Training sessions \r\n  Facilitator training (recruitment, contract, duration,  (parental education) \r\n and training)  in schools \r\n  Registering for national ID and birth certificate   \r\n Organization of public \r\n hearings and \r\n sensitization \r\n HSPRP AF  The proposed AF will support the reinforcement of  US$36  School‐based \r\n equity mechanisms of PBF to ensure the provision of  million  activities \r\n health care services to refugees and vulnerable host  (psychosocial support, \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 76 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Additional \r\n Project  Amount \r\n Additional Activities under RSW  Synergies under RSW \r\n Name  under RSW \r\n (Grant) \r\n populations and will finance training of health personnel  deworming, nutrition, \r\n and provision, through the PBF approach, of new specific  WASH, and other \r\n health care to refugees and host population  health promotion \r\n (management of rape, FGM, and GBV, including physical,  activities) \r\n sexual, and psychological violence) \r\n CDPSP AF  The proposed AF will assist in continuing activities  US$48  Enhance service \r\n initiated under the original project CDPSP III  million  delivery and social \r\n (Components 1, 2 and 3) to ensure sustainability and  services for the local \r\n alleviate pressures in host local councils induced by the  councils hosting \r\n influx of refugees.   refugees \r\n The AF will target 41 local councils in the Far North,   \r\n North, Adamawa, and East regions currently affected by  Develop social \r\n the influx of refugees.  infrastructure in the \r\n Under this AF and based on its experience with working  education sector \r\n in local councils hosting refugees, CDPSP III will be the \r\n main vehicle for (a) enhancing through community‐\r\n driven development activities both service delivery and \r\n social cohesion in refugee‐hosting areas, (b) reinforcing \r\n the capacity of local governments in accountable \r\n frontline services delivery for both displaced and host \r\n communities; and (c) strengthening the capacity and role \r\n of local government in facilitating land planning and \r\n management through an inclusive approach.  \r\n   \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 77 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAnnex 4. Results monitoring and evaluation  \r\n\r\n1. The Results Framework focuses on accountability for results in the delivery of RMNCAH and \r\nnutrition services. The project approach to results monitoring aims at extending beyond tracking of inputs \r\nand  outputs  by  placing  a  strong  emphasis  on  intermediate  outcomes.  When  possible,  the  proposed \r\nResults Framework will use existing indicators and data to measure the progress of both the project and \r\nits  contribution  to  the  overall  national  program.  This  will  benefit  the  program  by  strengthening  and \r\nincreasing the efficiency of existing data collection mechanisms. \r\n\r\n2. Routine  monthly  and  quarterly  data  collected  through  the  web‐based  PBF  system  will  be \r\naggregated for the project’s quarterly and annual indicators and will be linked to the national health \r\nmanagement information system system (currently being reinforced by the introduction and scale‐up \r\nof  DHIS2).  The  project  monitoring  system  will  include  (a)  identification  and  consolidation  of  M&E \r\nindicators;  (b)  training  and  capacity‐building  initiatives  at  the  national,  regional,  and  local  levels;  (c) \r\nstandardized  methods  and  tools  to  facilitate  systematic  collection  and  sharing  of  information;  (d)  an \r\nindependent  review  by  external  technical  consultants  (External  Evaluation  Agency);  and  (e)  annual \r\nprogram evaluations and strategic planning exercises for each component. \r\n\r\n3. The GFF Investment Case will include both a Results Framework with key indicators to track \r\nprogress in achieving objectives as well as a clearly defined learning agenda. The content of the learning \r\nagenda, which may include IEs, qualitative research, specific surveys, process evaluations, was defined in \r\nearly 2016 during the process of developing the Investment Case.  \r\n\r\n4. In  addition  to  the  ongoing  community  PBF  IE,  the  project  will  also  include  a  prospective \r\nevaluation for the multisectoral program in the northern67 regions, plus several rounds of SDI surveys \r\nand national health accounts.  \r\n\r\nSustainability  \r\n\r\n5. Technical sustainability will be ensured by capacity‐building and knowledge transfer activities \r\nthroughout the project. While capacity already exists for implementing Component 1 through experience \r\nwith PBF and an extensive training program which continues to build in‐country capacity, capacity in the \r\nNational PBF Technical Unit will be strengthened during project implementation through trainings and on‐\r\nthe‐job coaching. A training‐of‐trainers program for PBF is currently being developed and will create a \r\npool of knowledgeable PBF trainers who will then train additional trainers using cascade training to ensure \r\ncapacity at all levels of the health system.  \r\n\r\n6. Financial  sustainability  of  PBF  can  be  reasonably  achieved  given  the  limited  cost  of  this \r\nmechanism and the current low level of financing the Government is investing in the health sector. The \r\nproject will help improve the efficiency of health spending by improving the outcomes obtained from the \r\ncurrent total health expenditure of US$138 per capita per year (PPP). By spending US$4– US$5 per capita \r\nper year (including overhead costs) and less than US$100 million per year for national coverage, given \r\ncurrent  expenditure  patterns  the  cost  is  likely  to  be  affordable  and  sustainable  in  the  long  term. \r\nAdditionally, by integrating an ongoing policy dialogue on reforming the financing structure of the MoPH, \r\n\r\n67\r\n Northern regions refer to the Far North region, North region and Adamawa region.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 78 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nincluding  the  replacement  of  the  budget  for  health  facility  operational  costs  that  is  managed  by  a \r\ncentralized decision‐making approach with budget lines for PBF subsidies (with which health facilities have \r\nautonomy  to  plan  and  use)  and  making  sure  PBF  is  embedded  in  the  broader  health  sector  national \r\nfinancing strategy, the project is expected to institutionalize these PBF reforms.  \r\n\r\n7. Financial sustainability following the close of the project will be a continuing process, but the \r\nGovernment has already demonstrated its commitment to increasing the budget line for maternal and \r\nchild health and establishing a dedicated budget line for PBF. This signals Government’s recognition of \r\nthe importance of continuing to deliver results post World Bank support. These efforts will also require \r\ncontinued capacity building at all levels of the system (from civil society upwards) and close collaboration \r\nwith other development partners. Collaboration with all development partners, including those who do \r\nnot  necessarily  support  PBF,  has  improved  through  the  GFF’s  highly  consultative  and  participatory \r\nprocess, the launch of an inclusive national health financing strategy, and focus on the common goal of \r\nUHC. \r\n\r\n   \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 79 of 80\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Health System Performance Reinforcement Project - Additional Financing (P164954)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAnnex 5. Cameroon MAP of Refugees and Host Communities  \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  \r\n Source: World Bank, January 2018. \r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Page 80 of 80\r\n\f" }, "D29765361": { "id": "29765361", "admreg": "Africa West,Africa West,Africa,Africa", "count": "Ghana", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Child health,Nutrition and food security,Population and reproductive health,Health system performance", "docdt": "2018-03-29T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/294821522342941149/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Ghana-Maternal-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Project-P145792-Sequence-No-08.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/294821522342941149/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Ghana-Maternal-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Project-P145792-Sequence-No-08.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/294821522342941149/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Ghana-Maternal-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Project-P145792-Sequence-No-08", "projectid": "P145792", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/294821522342941149/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Ghana-Maternal-Child-Health-and-Nutrition-Project-P145792-Sequence-No-08", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\nGhana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Ghana | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 8 | ARCHIVED on 29-Mar-2018 | ISR31783 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Ministry of Health, Republic of Ghana, GHANA HEALTH SERVICES, National Health Insurance Agency\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:20-May-2014 Effectiveness Date:12-Feb-2015\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:16-Mar-2018 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:--\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2020 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective is to improve utilization of community-based health and nutrition services by women of reproductive age,\r\n especially pregnant women, and children under the age of 2 years.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nComponent 1. Community-Based Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Interventions:(Cost $62.00 M)\r\nComponent 2: Institutional strengthening Capacity Building, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Project Management:(Cost $7.50 M)\r\nComponent 3: Epidemic Preparedness and Control:(Cost $3.50 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Low  Low\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 1 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The World Bank supported Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Improvement Project (MCHNP) (Cr No.4563-GH) started implementation in\r\n February 2015. About 26% of project funds have been disbursed by Ghana Health Service (GHS) to the regions to enable service delivery at the\r\n Community-Based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) level. The funds released have facilitated outreach services in the communities, home visits,\r\n durbars (community level meetings on health-related topics), meetings of community health committees and service delivery in over 2,400 CHPS\r\n communities. The funds have also been used to develop a training program for the CHPS level. Community-based Performance Based Financing\r\n (cPBF) has been launched in 8 pilot districts in the Upper East, Upper West, Northern and Volta Regions to test the model of financial motivation as a\r\n tool for self-directed service delivery improvement. An impact evaluation baseline has been concluded and contracts have been issued for service\r\n delivery to start.\r\n The current ISR is an interim report, and thus maintains the same ratings. Another ISR will be reported following the Mid-Term Review (MTR) of the\r\n project in March. The MTR will conduct a full review of how the project is advancing its objectives.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 2 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 3 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 4 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Low  Low\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Low  Low\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Low  Low\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Low  Low\r\n Fiduciary  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Low  Low\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Low  Low\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Births (deliveries) attended by skilled health personnel (annual, cumulative) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 180,000.00 967,546.00 1,369,526.00 2,105,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The annual number of births attended by skilled health personnel in the project regions was 384,546 in 2015, 402,265 in 2016, 402,715 in\r\n 2017. These numbers include the Ashanti, Greater Accra, Northern, Upper East, Upper West and Volta regions. 650,265 was the total\r\n number for all of Ghana in 2015, and 633,129 was the total number for all of Ghana in 2016.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 5 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Births attended by skilled health personnel (annual) (Number, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 180,000.00 -- 402,715.00 450,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of pregnant women making the first antenatal visit before the fourth month of pregnancy (annual) (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 44.00 45.00 44.00 55.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportions of new females (15-49) acceptors of modern family planning methods (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 25.00 9.00 34.00 35.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2016 07-Mar-2017 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The MTR will review the target, baseline and definition of this indicator.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of children under two years in the intervention areas attending community growth promotion activities (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 6 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 74.00 74.00 75.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2016 07-Mar-2017 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The MTR will review the definition of this indicator.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 0-6 months exclusively breasted in the past 24 hours. (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 46.00 52.00 52.00 54.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Dec-2011 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4,752,918.00 6,667,724.00 5,000,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The MTR will review the target, baseline and definition of this indicator.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 64.90 80.00 80.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 7 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n The full project results framework will be reviewed during the MTR, including the target, baseline and definition of indicators.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of children aged 6-59 months having received vitamin A supplement in the last 6 months (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 74.00 65.00 65.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Dec-2011 31-Dec-2015 07-Mar-2016 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Ambulance Stations Renovated (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 11.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of children aged 6-23 months who are fed from the 4+ food groups the night preceding the survey (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 46.00 28.10 28.10 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Dec-2011 31-Dec-2015 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children under five years with diarrhea treated in the two weeks preceding the survey given ORT (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 48.00 62.00 62.00 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Dec-2011 31-Dec-2015 07-Mar-2017 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 8 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Adolescents 15-19 years attending health and nutrition education sessions (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 498,555.00 609,512.00 500,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2016 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Pregnant women reporting having slept under an ITN the night preceding the survey visit (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 33.00 43.00 43.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 30-Dec-2011 31-Dec-2015 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Long-lasting insecticide-treated malaria nets purchased and/or distributed (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 576,345.00 576,345.00 500,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health personnel receiving training (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 261.00 261.00 15,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 9 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Community counsellors trained (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 55,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Community-based Planning and Services Zones receiving supervision visits from Sub-District level (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Citizen score card rolled out in communities in 4 project districts in the Northern Region (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  People who have received essential health, nutrition, and population (HNP) services (Number, Corporate)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,466,101.00 1,979,038.00 2,705,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 10 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of women and children who have received basic nutrition services (Number, Corporate Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 498,555.00 609,512.00 500,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2016 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of deliveries attended by skilled health personnel (Number, Corporate Breakdown)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 967,546.00 1,369,526.00 2,105,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 28-Jun-2013 30-Jun-2017 07-Mar-2018 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P145792 IDA-54630 Effective USD 68.00 68.00 0.00 16.31 47.07 26%\r\n\r\n P145792 TF-16617 Effective USD 5.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P145792 IDA-54630 Effective 20-May-2014 05-Jan-2015 12-Feb-2015 30-Jun-2020 30-Jun-2020\r\n P145792 TF-16617 Effective 05-Jan-2015 05-Jan-2015 12-Feb-2015 30-Jun-2020 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 11 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Ghana - Maternal, Child Health and Nutrition Project (P145792)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 29-Jul-2015 ,Level 2 Approved on 30-Dec-2015\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/29/2018 Page 12 of 12\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D29740661": { "id": "29740661", "admreg": "Africa West,Africa West,Africa,Africa", "count": "Mali", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Social Protection and Labor Policy & Systems,Other human development", "docdt": "2018-03-22T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/528911521714774593/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328-Sequence-No-09.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/528911521714774593/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328-Sequence-No-09.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/528911521714774593/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328-Sequence-No-09", "projectid": "P127328", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/528911521714774593/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Emergency-Safety-Nets-project-Jigis-m-jiri-P127328-Sequence-No-09", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\nEmergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n AFRICA | Mali | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\n IBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2013 | Seq No: 9 | ARCHIVED on 22-Mar-2018 | ISR31000 |\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementing Agencies: Programme de Filets Sociaux, Unite Technique de Gestion des filets sociaux au Mali - JigisemeJiri, Ministere de l’Economie\r\n et des finances\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Key Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:30-Apr-2013 Effectiveness Date:17-Aug-2013\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:29-Feb-2016 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:17-Jun-2016\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2018 Revised Closing Date:31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objectives\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The objectives of the Project are to provide targeted cash transfers to the poor and food insecure households and to establishbuilding blocks\r\n for a national safety net system for the Recipient.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)\r\n The objectives of the project are to increase access to targeted cash transfers for poor and vulnerable households and build an adaptive\r\n national safety net system in Recipient  s territory .\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\n1. Cash transfer programs and accompanying measures:(Cost $66.50 M)\r\n2. Establishment of a basic safety net system:(Cost $6.80 M)\r\n3. Project management:(Cost $6.70 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\n Name Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Progress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 1 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Implementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n 1. The project is underway to achieve the objectives and the results obtained are considered satisfactory.\r\n 2. The project supported the implementation of the social protection and poverty alleviation agenda of the Government through:\r\n • its support to the coordination of interventions (for example: synergy with ANAM) support;\r\n • its support for the articulation of national policies on Social Protection, Health insurance, Nutrition and food security;\r\n • its support for the harmonization of approaches to the creation of the social protection system by the mobilization of donors for technical\r\n discussions and the financing of certain activities.\r\n • its support the training and capacity building of government actors about technical aspects of safety nets programs.\r\n 3. The JigisemeJiri Project is being implemented for almost 4 years. To date, the project is: (a) providing quarterly cash transfers to 67,867 families,\r\n reaching 390,465 individuals (80,975 children 0-5; 103,874 children 6-14; and 31,092 elderlies aged 60+), of which 49% are women, in Kaye, Sikasso,\r\n Koulikoro, Segou, Mopti, Gao and Bamako. The project is also providing information sessions through accompanying measures that promote good\r\n practiced on nutrition, health, education and family economy for the participants and other members or the community to promote behavioral changes.\r\n 4. Since October 2017, the project provides nutritional supplements to 105,000 beneficiaries (70% are children under 5 years old, and 30% pregnant\r\n women); and started provision of Income Generating Activities to 5,127 households.\r\n 5. In addition to that, due to the project partnership with\r\n • the National Agency for Medical Assistance (Agence Nationale d’Assistance Medicale) in charge of RAMED, 56,698 heads of households and\r\n direct family members received the RAMED card for free health care; and\r\n • the Mutuelle Interprofessionnelle du Mali (MIPROMA), 1 351 enrollment cards to the MIPROMA were distributed to program beneficiaries to\r\n support the government objective of achieving universal health coverage for the Malian population.\r\n 6. The project is increasing coverage in the North by including new areas of Mopti, Gao and Tombouctou (see\r\n http://www.jigisemejiri.org/prestations/#!/) with cash transfer and or income generating activities and or labor intensive public works, and it is\r\n supporting the rehabilitation of the Kona port.\r\n 7. Last October, the International Food Policy Research Institute presented the mid-line reports findings that indicate that\r\n • Per households’ self-reports on how they used their last cash transfer, the three largest categories of expenses were food consumption, health,\r\n and agricultural investments (about 65 percent, 11 percent, and 4 percent, respectively), corresponding to approximately 80 percent of the last\r\n transfer received or 24,000 FCFA.\r\n • The intervention improves households’ consumption and reduces poverty, albeit not significantly. The program reduces household poverty by\r\n 1.80 percentage points as measured by the Household Consumption relatively to the national poverty line, representing a 21 percent reduction in\r\n poverty headcount index. This result corroborates finding that most expenditures from transfers occurred immediately after payment but the\r\n recommended recall period for consumption measures only looks at the past 30 days. This result implies that households may experience larger\r\n reductions in poverty by reducing three months’ window for payments.\r\n • The intervention significantly reduces household food insecurity by 1.88 points as measured by the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale,\r\n representing a 27-percent reduction in food insecurity.\r\n • The intervention significantly improves household dietary diversity as measured by the Dietary Diversity Index (DDI) and Food Consumption\r\n Score (FCS). The program increases the DDI by 1 item or nearly a 7-percent increase relative to the control group, and increases the FCS by 3.7\r\n points or a 6-percent increase relative to the midline control mean.\r\n • The intervention also significantly increases household savings and investment.\r\n • It increases the proportion that invests in small animals by 6 percentage points, with an average amount of about 3,352 FCFA spent in the\r\n past 12 months among those who invest.\r\n • It increases the proportion that invests in livestock by 11 percentage points, with an average amount of 23,463 FCFA spent in the past 12\r\n months among those who invest.\r\n • The intervention has no statistically significant impact on a summary maternal knowledge score on health and nutrition and the lack of impact of\r\n the accompanying measures intervention on maternal knowledge of child nutrition and health may be explained by limited direct exposure of\r\n mothers to the accompanying measures sessions.\r\n • The intervention also had no significant impact on child stimulation practices, as measured with 5 key questions used in the Multiple Indicator\r\n Cluster Survey to describe interactions between children and their caregivers.\r\n • The intervention also had no impact on child nutritional status and growth. Child anemia, stunting, and wasting remain very high at midline.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 2 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n Because of the key findings, the upcoming additional financing of the project will redesign the accompanying measures by adding a Case\r\n Management System (CMS) and exploring a full integration with the upcoming health project to improve access of beneficiaries to health centers . The\r\n CMS will provide more incentives on families to invest in the human capital of their children with the goal of reducing the intergenerational\r\n transmission of poverty, and to strengthen knowledge. A CMS through home visits allow to\r\n • Assess needs and conditions of households and their members\r\n • Identify opportunities and actions by households to move out of poverty and vulnerability;\r\n • Identify supporting services that households/household members are eligible for;\r\n • Refer to locally available services (e.g linking to health project PBF); and\r\n • Provide counseling services to households/household members, depending on needs and conditions based on Mali experience of children’s\r\n health and education.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 3 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n Sustainability\r\n\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Low  Low\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n Results\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to cash transfers established by the project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 60,715.00 67,867.00 75,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to cash transfers established by the project: direct cash transfers (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 43,613.00 60,715.00 67,867.00 62,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to cash transfers established by the project: LIPWP (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 20,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Households with access to cash transfers established by the project: IGAP (Number, Custom Breakdown)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 4 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 5,127.00 10,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 0-5 benefiting from cash transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 75,730.00 80,975.00 65,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 343,838.00 390,465.00 450,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 48.84 48.59 40.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries households that are below the poverty line (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 80.00 80.00 75.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 17-Jun-2016 17-Jun-2016 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 5 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Registry for potential beneficiaries of safety nets programs (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 60,715.00 74,845.00 80,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 6-14 benefiting from cash transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 87,865.00 103,874.00 100,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Elderly 60+ benefiting of Cash Transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 27,448.00 31,092.00 25,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 6 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiary households that have been identified and registered (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 60,715.00 74,845.00 80,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  % of beneficiaries that report they are aware of program IGAP objectives and entitlements (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Process evaluation and focus groups are the main source of information. First round of analysis expected to happen in January 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  % of beneficiaries receiving contingency resources within 60 days of identification of needs (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Process evaluation and focus groups are the main source of information. First round of analysis expected to happen in January 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 7 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  % of beneficiaries that report they are aware of LIPWP program objectives and entitlements (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Process evaluation and focus groups are the main source of information. First round of analysis expected to happen in January 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  % of beneficiaries households reporting that their livelihoods has benefitted from LIPWP created assets (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 75.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Process evaluation and focus groups are the main source of information. First round of analysis expected to happen in January 2019.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Workdays created (Days, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 1,200,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 8 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  % of beneficiaries receiving regular payments within the agreed time frame for LIPWP activities as specified in the Operations\r\n Manual (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Jun-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Beneficiaries complying with the requirement of participating in the accompanying measures (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 85.00 97.27 75.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 31-Oct-2016 15-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children benefitting from Nutritional Packages in household receiving cash transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 8.00 0.00 70,963.00 102,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 30-Sep-2014 15-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of targeted households with increased consumption (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 85.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 30-Sep-2014 15-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n Results from IE midline report.\r\n The estimated impacts of the combined Cash transfers (CT) and Accompanying measures (AM) intervention on whether households hold\r\n savings, owe credit, or participate in tontines (which can be viewed as a type of savings). We see that the intervention causes a 3-\r\n percentage-point increase in the proportion of households with savings, significant at the 10-percent level. Although this is a small change\r\n in absolute terms, it is meaningful. At baseline, only 6 percent of treatment households and 5 percent of control households held savings.\r\n Thus, this represents about a 50-percent increase in the share of households with savings due to the combined intervention......Comparing\r\n these responses between the pooled treatment and control groups at midline, using single-difference estimation.The table shows the\r\n proportion of households reporting each type of investment as well as its average value across all households (filling in zero for households\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 9 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n that did not report such investments). We see that the combined intervention causes large increases in the proportion of households\r\n reporting any investment in small animals (6 percentage points, or a 67-percent increase relative to the midline control mean) and any\r\n investment in livestock (11 percentage points, or an 85-percent increase relative to the midline control mean). These increases are also\r\n reflected in terms of the value of the investments: over the course of the past 12 months, the average treatment household invested 503\r\n FCFA more on small animals and 5,631 FCFA more on livestock. Making a rough calculation based on the proportion that reported\r\n investing at all in each, on average, this comes out to approximately 3,352 FCFA more in the past 12 months on small animals for the 15\r\n percent of treatment households that invested in them, and approximately 23,463 FCFA more in the past 12 months on livestock for the 24\r\n percent that invested in them....\r\n Taken together, the results indicate that the combined CT and AM intervention increases the proportion of households that have any\r\n savings, increases the proportion that invest in small animals, and increases the proportion that invest in livestock. The latter two\r\n investments appear sizeable in value among those who make them, particularly in the case of livestock. They are also consistent with\r\n households’ direct reports of using a substantial share of transfers on agricultural inputs and investments, which they may consider to\r\n include investments in livestock. As described in the conceptual framework, the use of transfers for investment in assets is consistent with\r\n delivery of larger and less frequent transfer amounts.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of targeted households with food consumption score >35 (consumption) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 71.90 83.00 92.00 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 31-Jul-2015 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A management information system is developed (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 17-Jun-2016 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  MIS system generates regular reports of adequate quality (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4.00 12.00 8.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 10 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Frequency of cash transfers payment (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 4.00 4.00 3.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  The process evaluation and impact evaluation are in place and produce reliable information (Yes/No, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value N Y Y Y\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Project management expenses ratio (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 9.17 8.07 20.00\r\n\r\n Date 07-Aug-2013 14-Jun-2017 15-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP127328 IDA-H8350 Effective USD 70.00 70.00 0.00 53.38 12.23 81%\r\n\r\nP157892 TF-A2384 Effective USD 10.00 10.00 0.00 2.49 7.51 25%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 11 of 12\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Emergency Safety Nets project (Jigiséméjiri) (P127328)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P127328 IDA-H8350 Effective 30-Apr-2013 27-May-2013 17-Aug-2013 30-Jun-2018 31-Dec-2019\r\n P157892 TF-A2384 Effective 01-Sep-2016 01-Dec-2016 01-Dec-2016 30-Jun-2018 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n P157892-Safety Nets Project (Jigisemejiri) ,P165064-Safety Nets Project (Jigisemejiri)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/22/2018 Public Disclosure Copy Page 12 of 12\r\n\f" }, "D29741192": { "id": "29741192", "admreg": "Africa East,Africa East,Africa,Africa", "count": "Ethiopia", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Rural markets,Gender,Nutrition and food security,Rural services and infrastructure,Rural policies and institutions", "docdt": "2018-03-22T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/638121521723720593/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Second-Agricultural-Growth-Project-P148591.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/638121521723720593/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Second-Agricultural-Growth-Project-P148591.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/638121521723720593/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Second-Agricultural-Growth-Project-P148591", "projectid": "P148591", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/638121521723720593/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Second-Agricultural-Growth-Project-P148591", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Second Agricultural Growth Project (P148591)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES31429\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n SECOND AGRICULTURAL GROWTH PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON MARCH 31, 2015\r\n TO\r\n\r\n FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ETHIOPIA\r\n\r\n\r\nAGRICULTURE\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Carolyn Turk\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Juergen Voegele\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Mark E. Cackler\r\n Task Team Leader: Vikas Choudhary, Hayalsew Yilma, Teklu\r\n Tesfaye Toli\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Second Agricultural Growth Project (P148591)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP148591 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n31-Mar-2015 10-Oct-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nFederal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe Project Development Objective is to increase agricultural productivity and commercialization of small holder\r\nfarmers targeted by the project.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-56050 31-Mar-2015 07-May-2015 31-Aug-2015 10-Oct-2020 350.00 132.09 224.34\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Second Agricultural Growth Project (P148591)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nA. Project Status and Achievements\r\n\r\n1. The Second Agriculture Growth Project (AGP2) was approved by the World Bank Board on March 31, 2015 with\r\na total project cost of US$581.80. The World Bank Board approved IDA allocation of US$350 million for the project.\r\nSince the board approval, a US $99.89 Multi-Donor Trust Fund (MDTF), a $30 million Global Agriculture and Food\r\nSecurity Program (GAFSP) grant, and US$70 million in parallel financing from development partners, have been\r\nsecured for supporting AGP2. The Project Development Objective is to increase agricultural productivity and\r\ncommercialization of smallholder farmers targeted by the project. The project has five components: Component 1-\r\nAgriculture Public Support Services; Component 2- Agricultural Research; Component 3- Small-scale Irrigation;\r\nComponent 4- Agricultural Marketing and Value Chains Development; and Component 5- Project Management,\r\nCapacity Building and M&E.\r\n\r\n2. The project was declared effective on August 31, 2015, following the approval of the Project Implementation\r\nManual (PIM). The project was launched on November 14, 2015 and has been under implementation since then. All\r\nthe participating 157 woredas have now commenced the implementation of project activities based on approved\r\nannual work plans. MDTF to co-finance and support AGP2 implementation has been established. Disbursement stands\r\nat 38 percent of IDA funding.\r\n\r\nB. Rationale for Restructuring:\r\n\r\n3. The project was appraised and approved for $581.80 million by the World Bank board with IDA allocation of\r\n$350 million. The Financing agreement for IDA Credit 5605-ET had indicated that 100% of the expenditure is to be\r\nfinanced by IDA. At that time, the other sources of financing were not secured. Since two additional sources of\r\nfinancing for AGP2, Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) and Global Agriculture Food Security Program (GAFSP), have been\r\nsecured, a level two restructuring is needed to change the percentage of expenditure to be financed.\r\n\r\n4. During completion of the Agricultural Growth Program (Credit 4878-ET; IDA Grant No. H600-ET, which closed on\r\nApril 17, 2017 /appraisal of the AGP2 project, a review of the implementation of the Resettlement Policy Framework\r\nnoted that there was a risk that social due diligence was not followed with regards to voluntary land donations. This\r\nwas noted in the GFR for the ET AGPII Support MDTF (#23671). Following on a retrospective due diligence of\r\nsubprojects under the parent project, a template was developed to better document subsequent land donations.\r\n\r\nC. Description of Proposed Changes\r\n\r\n5. The following changes to the AGP2 are proposed:\r\n\r\ni. Inclusion of Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF), financed by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and\r\nDevelopment of Canada (DFATD), United States Agency for International Development, the Netherland Ministry of\r\nForeign Affairs, and European Union, as a source of financing for the Second Agriculture Growth Project. The total\r\ncommitment made by donors for the MDTF is $99.89 million and first tranche of $28, 597,006.68 has been transferred\r\nto TF0A4876 under GFR# 23671. This will necessitate a change in the disbursement percentages for Category 1 under\r\nthe IDA Credit from “100% IDA” to “such percentage as determined by the Bank and communicated via letter on a\r\nquarterly basis.” The MDTF Financed disbursement percentages will be include the creation of two new categories,\r\nwith Category 2 financing 100% of sub-component 4 (c), value chain activities for wheat, sesame, and apiculture,\r\n(honey), to be implemented by Agriculture Transformation Agency (ATA), with the amount to be financed being\r\nUS$$1.4 million for this tranche. The MDTF also includes support for activities under component 5 (b), with no amount\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Second Agricultural Growth Project (P148591)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ncurrently allocated to this category and a disbursement percentage of 0. Sub-component 5 (b) is currently fully\r\nfinanced by the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development of Canada (DFATD) through a parallel financing\r\nand is not part of the Bank-financed project. Category 1 will be amended to only include goods, works, non-consulting\r\nservices, training and Operating costs excluding subcomponents 4 (c) and 5(b).\r\n\r\nii. Safeguards: A specific clause is being added to the Safeguards section of the IDA Financing Agreement to ensure\r\ngreater compliance with OP4.12. Similar language has also been adopted in the Grant Agreement for the MDTF.\r\n\r\n6. There are no changes in project activities, nor are there any changes that would require amendment to the\r\nproject development objective or elevate the safeguard category. The proposed restructuring qualifies as a level two\r\nrestructuring under OP 10.00 which requires the Country Director’s approval.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\f" }, "D29738932": { "id": "29738932", "admreg": "Africa East,Africa East,Africa,Africa", "count": "Kenya", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Child health,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Population and reproductive health", "docdt": "2018-03-21T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/861911521652545114/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Transforming-Health-Systems-for-Universal-Care-P152394-Sequence-No-04.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/861911521652545114/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Transforming-Health-Systems-for-Universal-Care-P152394-Sequence-No-04.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/861911521652545114/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Transforming-Health-Systems-for-Universal-Care-P152394-Sequence-No-04", "projectid": "P152394", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/861911521652545114/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Transforming-Health-Systems-for-Universal-Care-P152394-Sequence-No-04", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n\r\nTransforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Kenya | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2016 | Seq No: 4 | ARCHIVED on 21-Mar-2018 | ISR30680 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: National Treasury, Ministry of Health\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:15-Jun-2016 Effectiveness Date:29-Sep-2016\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:29-Mar-2019 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:--\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Sep-2021 Revised Closing Date:30-Sep-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective is to improve utilization and quality of primary health care services with a focus on reproductive, maternal,\r\n newborn, child, and adolescent health services.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)PHRPDODEL\r\n The project development objective is to improve utilization and quality of primary health care services with a focus on reproductive, maternal,\r\n newborn, child, and adolescent health services.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nImproving Primary Health Care Results:(Cost $150.00 M)\r\nStrengthening Institutional Capacity:(Cost $15.10 M)\r\nCross-county and Intergovernmental Collaboration, and Project Management:(Cost $26.00 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care Project aims to improve the utilization and quality of primary health care services with a focus on\r\n reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health services.\r\n The dedicated project management team (PMT) has been working with the implementing entities to accelerate implementation and the following have\r\n been achieved:\r\n • Component 1 coordinator, 4 assistant coordinators and Component 2 coordinator were recruited and began carrying out their respective roles;\r\n • New county health management teams were sensitized about the Project and trained on preparation of AWPs; All 47 counties now have an AWP\r\n incorporating on-budget support and will initiate the planned activities supported by the Project;\r\n • 46 out of 47 counties transferred FY 2017/18 county allocations in a timely manner from the County Revenue Fund to the Special Purpose\r\n Account and one county did with a slight delay;\r\n • Kenya Medical Supplies Authority (KEMSA) has begun procurement of family planning commodities; some commodities have been delivered to\r\n KEMSA and will be distributed to counties based on guidance from the Division of Family Health and county governments;\r\n • National implementing entities were sensitized about the Project -developed detailed implementation plans and started initiating activities; Training\r\n of the first batch of 400 enrolled community health nurses is ongoing and the second batch is being selected. The Adolescent Sexual and\r\n Reproductive Health policy implementation framework was finalized and validated;\r\n • The Kenya School of Government trained 168 county and national participants in proposal writing to help them prepare a cross-county and inter-\r\n governmental collaboration proposal. 29 proposals were submitted of which 21 are intergovernmental and 8 are cross-county collaboration. The\r\n Project sub-TWG is planning to share selected winning proposals by mid-March 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  High  High  High\r\n Macroeconomic  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  Moderate  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  High  High  High\r\n Fiduciary  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  Low  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  Substantial  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children younger than 1 year who were fully immunized (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 73.00 -- 59.70 76.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Pregnant women attending at least four ANC visits (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 40.00 34.20 25.60 46.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 30-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Births attended by skilled health personnel (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 57.00 52.20 44.80 64.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 30-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Women between the ages of 15-49 years currently using a modern FP method (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 41.00 -- 33.30 45.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Inspected facilities meeting safety standards (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 26.00 50.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n The decline in 4 PDO indicators compared to the baseline was caused by the protracted health worker strike which may have also affected the\r\n decline in reporting into DHIS2. FY 2017/18 Q2 report shows that the indicators are improving compared to Q1.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Functional community units (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 1,549.00 2,106.00 2,550.00 2,400.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 30-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Grievances registered related to delivery of project benefits that are addressed (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Pregnant women attending ANC supplemented with IFA (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 31.00 -- 52.20 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities providing BEmOC (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 39.00 -- 26.00 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 11-Mar-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Facilities inspected for safety standards (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 6.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 11-Mar-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Facilities submitting complete DHIS data in a timely manner (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 76.00 -- 70.50 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Registration of births (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 67.80 65.90 65.90 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2015 30-Jun-2017 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  RMNCAH related operations research completed to inform policy/strategy (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 3.00\r\n\r\n Date 11-Mar-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  A benefit package developed, costed, and disseminated (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 0.00 1.00\r\n\r\n Date 11-Mar-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Implementing entities submitting the annual FM and technical report on time (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 100.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 11-Mar-2016 -- 29-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2021\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n The GRM will become operational in June 2018. The PMT is following up with the MoH on the RMNCAH related operations research and\r\n development/dissemination of a costed benefit package.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP152394 IDA-58360 Effective USD 150.00 150.00 0.00 16.16 136.04 11%\r\n\r\nP152394 TF-A2561 Effective USD 40.00 40.00 0.00 7.01 32.99 18%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Transforming Health Systems for Universal Care (P152394)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n P152394 TF-A2792 Effective USD 1.10 1.10 0.00 0.29 0.81 27%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P152394 IDA-58360 Effective 15-Jun-2016 04-Jul-2016 29-Sep-2016 30-Sep-2021 30-Sep-2021\r\n P152394 TF-A2561 Effective 15-Jun-2016 04-Jul-2016 29-Sep-2016 30-Sep-2021 30-Sep-2021\r\n P152394 TF-A2792 Effective 15-Jun-2016 04-Jul-2016 04-Jul-2016 30-Jun-2020 30-Jun-2020\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n There are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n3/21/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D29722408": { "id": "29722408", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Congo, Democratic Republic of,Africa", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Infrastructure services for private sector development,Regulation and competition policy,Regional integration,Nutrition and food security,Rural services and infrastructure", "docdt": "2018-03-15T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/503961521112343299/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-AFCC2-RI-Regional-Great-Lakes-Integrated-Agriculture-Development-Project-P143307.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/503961521112343299/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-AFCC2-RI-Regional-Great-Lakes-Integrated-Agriculture-Development-Project-P143307.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/503961521112343299/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-AFCC2-RI-Regional-Great-Lakes-Integrated-Agriculture-Development-Project-P143307", "projectid": "P143307", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/503961521112343299/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-AFCC2-RI-Regional-Great-Lakes-Integrated-Agriculture-Development-Project-P143307", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES31817\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n AFCC2/RI-REGIONAL GREAT LAKES INTEGRATED AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON JUNE 21, 2016\r\n TO\r\n\r\n THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAGRICULTURE\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Franck Bousquet\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Juergen Voegele\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Dina Umali-Deininger\r\n Task Team Leader: Nora Kaoues, Amadou Oumar Ba, Amadou\r\n Alassane\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\n\r\nIDA: International Development Association\r\nPDO: Project Development objective\r\nRGLIADP: Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Note to Task Teams: The following sections are system generated and can only be edited online in the Portal.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP143307 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nFull Assessment (A) Full Assessment (A)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n21-Jun-2016 30-Nov-2022\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nThe Democratic Republic of Congo Minstry of Agriculture and rural Development\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe project development objectives (PDO) are (i) €€to increase agricultural productivity and commercialization in\r\ntargeted areas in the territory of the Recipient and improve agricultural regional integration; and (ii) to provide\r\nimmediate and effective response in the event of an eligible crisis or emergency.\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-D1810 05-May-2017 14-Jun-2017 15-Nov-2017 30-Nov-2022 75.00 11.26 69.04\r\nIDA-58520 21-Jun-2016 07-Sep-2016 31-Dec-2021 150.00 0 154.31\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n Policy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\n Does this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\n No\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n I. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\nBackground: The development objective of the Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development\r\nProject is to (i) increase agricultural productivity and commercialization in targeted areas in the territory of the\r\nRecipient and improve agricultural regional integration; and (ii) to provide immediate and effective response in\r\nthe event of an eligible crisis or emergency. The total project financing is US$ 150 million IDA. The RGLIADP\r\nwas approved by the Board on June 21, 2016 and the legal agreement was signed on September 7, 2016, with a\r\nfirst effectiveness deadline set for January 5, 2017, extended a first time to July 31, 2017, then to December 8,\r\n2017 and exceptionally a third time to March 30, 2018.\r\n\r\nAll Effectiveness Conditions Under the Financing Agreement: Credit No. 5852-ZR are now fulfilled. The\r\nFinancing Agreement includes three conditions of effectiveness: (i) Establishment of a Project Coordination Unit;\r\n(ii) Establishment of the Project Steering Committee; and (iii) Adoption of the Project Implementation Manual.\r\nTo date, all three project effectiveness conditions have been fulfilled:\r\n\r\n\r\n (i) Establishment of a Project Coordination Unit and appointment of a Project coordinator, a\r\n procurement specialist, a finance and administration manager and an accountant for the Project\r\n Coordination Unit: This is completed. the project coordination unit is the same as the Project\r\n Implementation Unit (PIU) of the Projet d’Appui à la Réhabilitation et la Relance du Secteur\r\n Agricole (PARRSA1) project located within the Ministry of Agriculture. It managed the Project\r\n Preparation PPA during the preparation phase. The Recipient has confirmed this through a specific\r\n Arrêté which was signed on October 21, 2017; in addition, the recruitment process of key personal\r\n of the Provincial Project Implementation Units has been completed;\r\n\r\n\r\n (ii) Establishment of the Project Steering Committee: This is completed. An Arrêté was prepared and\r\n signed on October 21, 2017 by the Minister of Agriculture;\r\n\r\n\r\n (iii) Adoption of the Project Implementation Manual: the final document was approved by the Bank on\r\n March 9, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1 Agriculture Rehabilitation and Recovery Support Project (ARRSP)\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n (iv) The Recipient has submitted to the Association a ratification law No17/010 dated November 21,\r\n 2017 attesting that the Financing Agreement is legally binding. The legal opinion issued on\r\n January 1, 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\nII. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\nProposed Changes: The designation of a representative for the Regional Coordination Committee is a dated\r\ncovenant that was due December 15, 2016. As a representative has not yet been designated, this lapsed\r\ncovenant has become an effectiveness condition. The Recipient is working on the designation of the\r\nrepresentative and has notified the Bank that it would like first to convene a meeting with their counterparts\r\nfrom Burundi and discuss further whom to designate as this would not impact the first six months of\r\nimplementation. Therefore, the Recipient would like to designate a representative for the Regional\r\nCoordination Committee no later than six months after the Projects Effective Date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\nChange in Legal Covenants ✔\r\nOther Change(s) ✔\r\nChange in Implementing Agency ✔\r\nChange in DDO Status ✔\r\nChange in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\nChange in Results Framework ✔\r\nChange in Components and Cost ✔\r\nChange in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\nCancellations Proposed ✔\r\nReallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\nChange in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\nChange in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\nChange in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\nChange in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\nChange of EA category ✔\r\nChange in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Change in Financial Management ✔\r\n Change in Procurement ✔\r\n Change in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\n Change in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Technical Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Social Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_LEGCOV_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n LEGAL COVENANTS\r\n\r\n Loan/Credit/TF Description Status Action\r\n\r\n\r\n Finance Agreement :Recruitment of external auditor |\r\n Description :The Recipient shall recruit, no later than six\r\n (6) months after the Effective Date, an independent\r\n IDA-58520 Not yet due No Change\r\n external auditor for the Project in accordance with the\r\n provisions of Section III of Schedule 2 to the Financing\r\n Agreement. | Due Date :\r\n\r\n\r\n Finance Agreement :Upgrading of existing Financial\r\n Management Software and fiduciary staff training |\r\n Description :The Recipient shall have upgraded the\r\n existing financial management software, no later than\r\n three (3) months after the Effective Date, in form and\r\n IDA-58520 Not yet due No Change\r\n substance acceptable to the Association and included\r\n the procurement system (planning, monitoring and\r\n contract management) with thereto. The Recipient\r\n should train new fiduciary staff on the use of that\r\n software. | Due Date :\r\n\r\n\r\n Finance Agreement :Update the project manual of\r\n IDA-58520 Expected soon No Change\r\n procedures that will include FM and accounting aspect\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n AFCC2/RI-Regional Great Lakes Integrated Agriculture Development Project (P143307)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n | Description :The Recipient shall ensure that the\r\n existing financial manual of procedures has been\r\n updated within 3 months after the effectiveness to take\r\n into consideration any specific concerns relating to this\r\n project. | Due Date :\r\n\r\n\r\n Finance Agreement: Designate, by no later than\r\nIDA-58520 December 15, 2016, a representative for the Not complied with New\r\n RegionalCoordination Committee.\r\n\r\n Please note: the last dated covenant “Finance Agreement: Designate, by no later than December 15, 2016, a\r\nrepresentative for the RegionalCoordination Committee” is not new. It was not reflected into the Project’s\r\ndatasheet. Its due date was December 15, 2016. It is now due , no later than six (6) months after the Effective\r\nDate.\r\n\f" }, "D29717703": { "id": "29717703", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Niger", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social dev/gender/inclusion,Nutrition and food security,Education for all,Gender,Decentralization,Human development", "docdt": "2018-03-14T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/806561520996886921/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-GPE-Support-to-Quality-Education-Project-P132405.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/806561520996886921/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-GPE-Support-to-Quality-Education-Project-P132405.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/806561520996886921/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-GPE-Support-to-Quality-Education-Project-P132405", "projectid": "P132405", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/806561520996886921/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-Niger-GPE-Support-to-Quality-Education-Project-P132405", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES29894\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n\r\n ON A\r\n\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n NIGER - GPE - SUPPORT TO QUALITY EDUCATION PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON JULY 7, 2014\r\n TO\r\n\r\n REPUBLIC OF NIGER\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nEDUCATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Soukeyna Kane\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Jaime Saavedra Chanduvi\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Meskerem Mulatu\r\n Task Team Leader: Pamela Mulet, Adama Ouedraogo\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS\r\n\r\n\r\nAFD Agence Française de Développement (French Development Agency)\r\nCONFEMEN Conférence des Ministres de l’Education des Etats et Gouvernements de la Francophonie\r\nDCA Delegated Contracting Agency\r\nDDEP Departmental Directorates of Primary Education\r\nDREP Regional Directorates of Primary Education\r\nENI Ecole Nationale d’Instituteur (Primary Teacher Training School)\r\nFCFA West African CFA Franc\r\nGIZ Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit\r\nGPE Global Partnership for Education\r\nIDA International Development Association\r\nIEB Inspecteur de l’Education de Base (Basic Education Inspector)\r\nIFADEM Initiative Francophone pour la Formation à Distance des Maîtres\r\nISR Implementation Status Report\r\nJICA Japan International Cooperation Agency\r\nMEP Ministère de l’Enseignement Primaire, de l’Alphabétisation, de la Promotion des Langues Nationales et\r\n de l’Education Civique (Ministry of Primary Education)\r\nMES Ministère des Enseignements Secondaires (Ministry of Secondary Education)\r\nMS4SSA Math and Science for Sub-Saharan Africa Initiative\r\nNGO Non-Governmental Organization\r\nOIF Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie (International Organisation of La Francophonie)\r\nPAEQ Projet d’Appui à une Education de Qualité (Support to Quality Education Project)\r\nPASEC Programme d’analyse des systèmes éducatifs de la CONFEMEN\r\nPDO Project Development Indicators\r\nPMAQ Initiative du Paquet Minimum Axé sur la Qualité\r\nPSEF Education and Training Sector Program/Plan\r\nSABER Systems Approach for Better Education Results\r\nTA Technical Assistance\r\nUSD United States Dollar\r\nWFP World Food Program\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nBASIC DATA\r\n\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP132405 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\nPartial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B)\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n07-Jul-2014 30-Sep-2018\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\n Ministry of Primary Education, Literacy, Promotion of\r\nRepublic of Niger National Languages and Civic Education,Ministry of\r\n Secondary Education\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe objective of the Project is to improve access to schooling, retention of students in school, and the quality of the\r\nteaching and learning environment at the basic education level, in the Republic of Niger.\r\n\r\nOPS_TABLE_PDO_CURRENTPDO\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nTF-16565 19-Jul-2014 19-Jul-2014 19-Dec-2014 30-Sep-2018 84.20 46.89 37.31\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n I. PROJECT STATUS AND RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n1. The proposed restructuring includes (i) an extension of the project closing date by 9 months to June 30, 2019, (ii) a\r\n reallocation of funds between components and disbursement categories, (iii) updated disbursement estimates, and\r\n (iv) changes to the end target dates in the Results Framework to account for the project extension. Although the\r\n project is performing well, the extension is necessary to allow for additional time to complete key project activities\r\n and disburse remaining funds, while the reallocation is necessary due to the addition of the Swiss funds to the pool as\r\n well as to reallocate the contingencies and the savings from the construction parts of the project to the quality and\r\n systems strengthening activities. The additional funding for quality and school grants will further contribute to\r\n improving the learning environment in basic education. The restructuring does not include any changes to the PDO,\r\n indicators, safeguards triggers or legal covenants.\r\n\r\n2. The Niger Support to Quality Education Project (PAEQ) is funded by a Global Partnership Education (GPE) grant in the\r\n amount of US$84.2 million for which the World Bank is the Grant Agent (GA). The Project was approved on July 7,\r\n 2014 and became effective on December 19, 2014. It is pooled at recipient level with a grant from Agence Française\r\n de Développement (AFD) in the amount of Euro 12 million, and since January 1, 2017, with a grant from the Swiss\r\n Cooperation in the amount of FCFA 2.65 billion, amounting to a total financing of US$102.5 million. The original closing\r\n date is September 30, 2018. There have been no restructurings or extensions to date.\r\n\r\n3. The Project Development Objective (PDO) -- to improve access to schooling, retention of students in school, and the\r\n quality of the teaching and learning environment at the basic education level, in the Republic of Niger -- is still deemed\r\n relevant and remains strongly aligned with the Government’s Education and Training Sector Plan (PSEF 2014-2024).\r\n\r\n4. Progress towards achievement of the PDO was rated satisfactory in the last ISR (November 2017), which followed a\r\n supervision mission. Despite a difficult and very low-capacity context, significant progress has been made towards\r\n achievement of the PDO and implementation of Project activities. Implementation of all components and sub-\r\n components is moving forward at a good pace, but overall implementation progress remains Moderately Satisfactory,\r\n as it has not been possible to catch up with initial implementation delays for certain activities, particularly for the\r\n school construction. Gains have been observed on all PDO- and intermediate-level indicators, which reached their\r\n target or are on a positive track to do so.\r\n\r\n5. The following PDO indicators have been met or exceeded their end of project target:\r\n  Primary completion rate will reach 59.6 percent by June 2018: the end target was exceeded as the primary\r\n completion rates reported in December 2016 and December 2017 were respectively of 78.3 percent and 83\r\n percent1.\r\n  Primary Education Gender Parity: all areas targeted by the project have achieved gender parity during the project\r\n implementation.\r\n  Secondary education Gender parity: all areas targeted by the project have achieved gender parity in secondary\r\n education during the project implementation: the end target has been exceeded with an actual increase of 0.04\r\n as reported in 2017.\r\n  Appropriate tools and materials for improving reading in the early grades are adopted by the Ministry of\r\n Primary Education (MEP): the target has been achieved in 2016. These materials are to be delivered either as part\r\n of the new curriculum or through a community-led remediation program, Initiative du Paquet Minimum Axé sur\r\n la Qualité (PMAQ), that is organized by the school committees.\r\n\r\n1 Source: Government reports based on the annual school census and official population data.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6. The remaining PDO indicators are on a positive track to reach their target:\r\n  A system for learning assessments at the primary level is in place: in addition to the delivery of the 2016\r\n Programme d’analyse des systèmes éducatifs de la CONFEMEN (PASEC) report, several specific learning\r\n assessments have been conducted with project financing under the leadership of both ministries of primary and\r\n secondary education. MEP has requested the support of PASEC for the design and implementation of the national\r\n system for learning assessment at the primary level and the agreement for this is under preparation. In addition,\r\n Niger has decided to participate in the PASEC 2019 assessment to have a better understanding of students’\r\n learning achievements, build the ministry’s capacity to conduct student assessments, and make informed\r\n education policy decisions.\r\n  Utility of the learning assessment system: this indicator is on track and will be measured in the next six months.\r\n The Bank team and the MEP discussed the way forward for the MEP to carry out a self-evaluation to inform and\r\n track this indicator.\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries: as of November 2017, the project has reached 1,985,425 direct beneficiaries against\r\n an end-project target of 2,100,000 direct beneficiaries.\r\n  The share of female direct beneficiaries: as of November 2017, the share of female direct beneficiaries was 44.6\r\n percent against an end-project target of 47 percent.\r\n\r\n7. The following section provides an overview of achievements to date under each component.\r\n\r\nComponent 1: Expanding equitable access to schooling and retention of students in school\r\n\r\n8. Ministry of Primary Education (MEP): Under this component, the construction of 570 primary school classrooms has\r\n now been completed (out of 1,245 planned classrooms) and construction has started for 330 classrooms which, as of\r\n December 2017, were at 53.33 percent of completion. The construction of 345 additional classrooms is expected to\r\n start in April 2018. In terms of support to girls’ education, the MEP has conducted campaigns to sensitize communities\r\n to the importance of girls’ schooling, reaching a total of 192,232 beneficiaries, of whom 57 percent are female. Other\r\n awareness-building activities were conducted including roundtables, workshops for the relevant stakeholders and\r\n locally-based outreach campaigns. With regards to literacy, 200 functional literacy centers opened across 32 selected\r\n priority areas, and literacy training is being provided to 11,136 women by the 14 selected non-governmental\r\n organizations (NGOs). The training provided in these 200 centers is expected to be completed by January 2018. Under\r\n the contract with the World Food Programme (WFP), canteens are opened in 559 schools at the beginning of school\r\n year 2016/17, which will continue to operate in the current school year (2017/18). These canteens benefitted 47,592\r\n children this year, including 21,116 girls. A Systems Approach for Better Education Results (SABER) school feeding\r\n diagnostic study has been delivered with a suggested action plan, and 2,102 school directors and school-management\r\n committee (CGDES) members were trained in canteen management. With regards to school health promotion and\r\n the use of latrines, awareness activities have been undertaken reaching 3,861 beneficiaries. In addition, 2,006 focal\r\n points from the Regional Directorates of Primary Education (DREP), Departmental Directorates of Primary Education\r\n (DDEP), Inspecteur de l’Education de Base (Basic Education Inspector) (IEB) and teachers were trained on water,\r\n hygiene and sanitation, and use of latrines while 189 inspectors were trained in hygiene standards and promotion.\r\n\r\n9. Ministry of Secondary Education (MES): The launch of construction of lower secondary school classrooms has been\r\n delayed due to difficulties recruiting the Delegated Contracting Agencies (DCA) to manage this activity, but the process\r\n is now completed and contracts have been signed with the two DCAs, which are also managing some additional\r\n construction for the MEP. With respect to the end-target of 330 constructed classrooms, construction has started for\r\n 166 classrooms, and preparation for the remainder is progressing as planned. The sub-component for providing grants\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n to selected girls in 39 lower secondary schools is progressing well and has likely helped retain more of the girls in\r\n school. As of the beginning of the 2017/18 school year -- the third year of this program – 596 of the original 700 girls\r\n were still in school and therefore still in the grant program. It appears that the grants have improved retention in\r\n school (85 percent instead of 76 percent for non-recipient girls), and no early marriage was reported among them.\r\n Repetition is high, however, in Niger’s lower secondary schools in general, and some of the grantees were also not\r\n promoted to the next grade due to poor grades at the end of their first year and/or second year. These girls remain\r\n grantees for the duration of the project, which may however not be able to support them until they reach the end of\r\n the cycle. Outreach and awareness-building activities conducted by MES to promote education for girls have reached\r\n 29,646 beneficiaries, of whom 56 percent are female. For the country as a whole, the gender parity index for lower\r\n secondary has improved from 0.69 to 0.73 over the project period.\r\n\r\nComponent 2: Improving the quality of teaching and learning\r\n\r\n10. Ministry of Primary Education (MEP): The key activities that have been undertaken are: (i) developing the grade 2 and\r\n grade 3 curricula, including the development of textbooks and teacher guides for those grades in five national\r\n languages while simultaneously testing the new national language curriculum in 500 classes across Niger; (ii) revising\r\n the curriculum for pre-service teacher training in line with the reform with the support of an international specialist;\r\n (iii) improving teaching quality (undertaken by the teacher training directorate) through other training activities; and\r\n (iv) strengthening progressively the national learning assessment system. To date, in-service training was provided to\r\n a total of 4,500 contract-teachers (of whom 48 percent are women), and to 3,316 teacher-trainers, inspectors and\r\n academic advisors (13 percent of whom are women). Part of the training was conducted through the Initiative\r\n Francophone pour la Formation à Distance des Maîtres (IFADEM) distance learning program developed by OIF. In\r\n addition, the Project funded training to support the curriculum reform for 450 pedagogical advisors, 400 advisors in\r\n the primary teacher training school (ENI), 600 regional trainers, 500 Grade 1 and 500 Grade 2 teachers and 500 school\r\n directors. The Project has financed the construction of three teacher training school that are now completed. Several\r\n of the contracts for printing textbooks and other teaching and learning materials have experienced some procurement\r\n delays. However, the bidding was re-launched with revised bidding documents for several contracts which, during the\r\n first round, had not received sufficient bids from qualified firms.\r\n\r\n11. Ministry of Secondary Education (MES): The Ministry has trained a total of 2,660 contractual teachers who had not\r\n received pre-service training (14.7 percent of whom are women), and a total of 2,130 teacher trainers, inspectors and\r\n academic advisors (15 percent of whom are women). To date, the project has financed the acquisition of 242,970\r\n textbooks and 12,000 teacher guides in French, mathematics and sciences for the two first grades of lower secondary,\r\n and these were delivered to 646 rural lower secondary schools. The Project has also financed the Ministry’s\r\n participation in the regional Math and Science for Sub-Saharan Africa initiative (MS4SSA), for which Niger has been\r\n competitively selected as one of the regional nodes. On student assessments, the MES produced a report assessing\r\n learning outcomes in Mathematics and French for students in Grades 7-10.\r\n\r\nComponent 3: Strengthening management capacity\r\n\r\n12. School grants: 1,760 primary schools received a school grant and 16,618 stakeholders were trained in school grant\r\n management in 2016/2017. At the secondary school level, 1,677 school directors and stakeholders were also trained.\r\n A total of 5,901 school committees were strengthened, including 5,519 in primary schools and 382 in lower secondary\r\n schools.\r\n\r\n13. Both ministries - MEP and MES - are moving quickly towards having human resource management strategies and\r\n capacity building plans in place. Trainings for a considerable number of staff at the central and regional levels have\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n been carried out, including for 489 MEP and 733 MES officials. The established Implementation Support Agency and\r\n the consulting engineering technical assistance (TA) are contributing to building MEP and MES capacities in daily\r\n project management and implementation. There are still capacity constraints in the two ministries but the Mid-Term\r\n Review has acknowledged the improvement in administrative and technical skills among MEP and MES teams, while\r\n also noting the high staff turnover which may undermine long-term capacity building.\r\n\r\n14. Over the past year, a comprehensive reform program has taken shape to put in place a teacher/human resources\r\n database in the education sector and beyond, including the Ministries of Finance and Civil Service. This program will\r\n be financed by several development partners through projects or budget support, including the IDA-financed Public-\r\n Sector Capacity and Performance for Service Delivery Project (P145261), GIZ, the European Union, and this project.\r\n Moreover, the implementation support missions have been able to bring all key stakeholders together to exchange\r\n information and move towards a coordinated approach. This initiative could greatly improve human resources and\r\n payroll management in the education sector. This collaboration has also been supported by a grant from the World\r\n Bank Results in Education for All Children (REACH) Trust Fund.\r\n\r\n A. RATIONALE FOR RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n15. The project restructuring includes: (i) an extension of the project closing date by 9 months to June 30, 2019 and (ii) a\r\n reallocation of funds between components and disbursement categories, (iii) updated disbursement estimates, and\r\n (iv) change to the end target date in the results framework to account for the project extension.\r\n\r\n16. The proposed extension is necessary to enable the Government to complete key activities that are critical to achieve\r\n the PDO.\r\n\r\n17. With regards to the first objective of expanding equitable access to schooling and retention of students in school, the\r\n additional time would allow the Project to complete the classroom construction program and the delivery of school\r\n equipment. The additional time would also allow to extend the provision of grants to girls in lower secondary school\r\n for an additional year – for girls who did not repeat, this additional year would be the last year of the basic education\r\n cycle.\r\n\r\n18. For the second objective of improving the quality and learning, the additional time would allow the Project to support\r\n the piloting of the revised Grade 2 curriculum during the 2017-2018 academic year and its extension during 2018-\r\n 2019. Given the positive results of the pilot for the community-led remedial program (PMAQ) supported by JICA,\r\n additional time would also allow the project to refine and scale-up this initiative. As measuring student outcomes is\r\n crucial to improved learning, a Project extension would support an agreement between Niger and CONFEMEN on the\r\n country’s participation in the PASEC 2019 exercise, and on the development of a national system for large-scale\r\n standardized assessments in Niger.\r\n\r\n19. Finally, the additional 9 months would be key to complete essential activities to strengthen sector management\r\n capacity, a dimension that contributes to both objectives.\r\n\r\n20. The reallocation of funds between components and disbursement categories is necessary to better align the required\r\n funding for the remaining project activities. MEP and MES have undergone a multi-annual programming exercise\r\n consisting of the review of PAEQ budget execution as of October 31, 2017, and a cost estimation of the remaining key\r\n activities to be implemented in 2018 and 2019. The results of this programming include the Swiss Cooperation funding.\r\n However, due to initial adjustments in prices as well as a favorable exchange rate, there are funds left over from the\r\n construction sub-component of the project; consequently, some reallocation of funds is necessary between sub-\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\ncomponents and components. The disbursement estimates will be adjusted to better reflect the timeline of\r\ndisbursements over the extended 9 months. Proposed changes are detailed in section II.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n II. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\r\n\r\n21. The extension and reallocation will enable the Government to complete the construction program of primary and\r\n secondary schools supported by the Project, to extend the provision of grants to girls in lower secondary school for\r\n an additional year and allow them to complete the basic education cycle in June 2019, to support the experimentation\r\n of the revised Grade 2 curriculum during the 2017-2018 academic year and its extension during 2018-2019, and to\r\n develop a national system for large-scale standardized student assessments.\r\n\r\n22. Change in Components and Cost. The objectives, activities, and implementation of the components will not change;\r\n however, reallocation between components will address necessary adjustments taking into account the actual\r\n expenditures and remaining activities critical to achieving the PDO. In total, US$9,505,086 million (11 percent) in GPE\r\n financing will be reallocated between Components 1, 2 and 3. Detailed information on reallocation by component\r\n and financing source is provided in Table 1. The reallocation includes the following key adjustments:\r\n\r\na. Component 1 - Expanding equitable access to schooling and retention of students in school\r\n  Due to surpluses coming from initial overestimates, funds from Sub-component 1.1 – Education infrastructure\r\n and Sub-component 1.2 Girls’ access to education will be reallocated to Sub-component 1.3 – School feeding and\r\n student health and Component 2 – Improving the quality of teaching and learning. Savings were made through (i)\r\n the procurement methods and simplification of project management for school constructions, and (ii) initial\r\n overestimates of grants to girls and impact of the recipients’ attrition rate.\r\nb. Component 2 - Improving the quality of teaching and learning\r\n  Funds from Component 1 and 4 will be reallocated to Component 2 to support the provision of pedagogical input\r\n and the delivery of teacher training. Additional resources are necessary to complete remaining key activities\r\n pertaining to the extension of the curriculum reform, including the provision of student and teacher manuals,\r\n delivery of initial and in-service teacher training, and provision of pedagogic supervision. Support to PMAQ\r\n initiative and to the national assessment system will also be covered.\r\nc. Component 3 - Strengthening management capacity\r\n  Funds from Sub-component 3.2 and Component 4 will be reallocated to Sub-component 3.1 and 3.3 to support\r\n additional project management and coordination funds required during the extension of the project by 9 months,\r\n as well as to continue to support capacity enhancement activities for both Ministries.\r\nd. Component 4 – Non-allocated resources\r\n  Funds under Component 4 aim at filling financial gaps due to unforeseen circumstances. These funds will be\r\n entirely reallocated to Component 2 and 3.\r\n\r\n\r\n23. Change in Loan Closing Date(s). Based on the Government’s request for the extension of the project’s closing date (in\r\n a letter dated December 13, 2017), the closing date of the project supported by the GPE-grant (TF-16565) will be\r\n extended from September 30, 2018 to June 30, 2019, to allow for sufficient time to complete key planned activities.\r\n\r\n\r\n24. Reallocation between Disbursement Categories. As described above, the reallocation between disbursement\r\n categories is necessary to adequately align the remaining funding required to achieve the remaining project activities\r\n described earlier. The reallocation would allow for proposed project activities to be carried out as planned, without\r\n changes to the core activities and project targets. In total, US$ 8,262,551 of the GPE funds (US$ 6,706,162 from\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n Category 3, US$ 1,412,700 from Category 4, and US$ 143,689 from Category 6) will be reallocated between Categories\r\n 1, 2 and 5 (US$4,436,569 to Category 1, US$1,556,389 to Category 2, and US$2,269,593 to Category 5) as shown in\r\n Table 2below.\r\n\r\n25. Change in Disbursement Estimates. The disbursement estimates are being adjusted to account for the extended\r\n closing date and to more accurately reflect the disbursement progress to date. As of December 1, 2017, disbursement\r\n stands at 51 percent, equivalent to US$45 million out of the original US$84.2 million in GPE financing. It is expected\r\n that the remaining US$39 million would be disbursed as follows: US$28 million in FY18 and US$11 million in FY19.\r\n\r\n26. Results Framework. There will be no major changes to the results framework, which will retain the same indicators.\r\n However, the end target dates will be adjusted in the Results Framework to account for the project extension.\r\n\r\n\r\n27. Audit Report. All audit report has been submitted. There is no overdue audit report.\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTable 1. Reallocation of Resources between components under the PAEQ Pool Fund\r\n Initial New GPE GPE New\r\n Credit/TF Difference % GPE\r\n Allocation in Allocation in reallocation allocation\r\n number in USD Reallocation\r\n USD USD in USD in USD\r\n\r\nComponent 1: Expanding equitable access to schooling and 57 774 930 53 191 578 -4 583 352 -5 029 027 1 279 387 -8%\r\nretention of students in school\r\nSub-component 1.1: Education infrastructure 43 618 091 38 225 456 -5 392 635 -4 411 715 0 -12%\r\n\r\n AFD & CS 7 934 131 6 953 210 -980 920 0\r\n\r\n GPE 35 683 960 31 272 245 -4 411 715 -4 411 715 0 -12%\r\nSub-component 1.2: Girls’ access to education 6 774 287 6 019 718 -754 569 -617 313 -11%\r\n AFD & CS 1 232 243 1 094 987 -137 256\r\n GPE 5 542 044 4 924 731 -617 313 -617 313 -11%\r\nSub-component 1.3: School feeding and student health 7 382 552 8 946 404 1 563 852 0 1 279 387 21%\r\n AFD & CS 1 342 886 1 627 351 284 465\r\n GPE 6 039 666 7 319 053 1 279 387 1 279 387 21%\r\nComponent 2. Improving the quality of teaching and learning 22 786 581 30 233 047 7 446 466 6 091 954 33%\r\n\r\nSub-component 2.1: Pedagogical inputs 9 649 911 12 986 830 3 336 919 2 729 933 35%\r\n\r\n AFD & CS 1 755 319 2 362 304 606 986\r\n GPE 7 894 592 10 624 525 2 729 933 2 729 933 35%\r\n\r\nSub-component 2.2: Teacher training. 9 855 536 13 370 983 3 515 447 2 875 987 36%\r\n\r\n AFD & CS 1 792 722 2 432 182 639 460\r\n GPE 8 062 814 10 938 801 2 875 987 2 875 987 36%\r\n\r\nSub-component 2.3: Learning outcomes. 3 281 134 3 875 234 594 100 486 033 18%\r\n AFD & CS 596 838 704 905 108 067\r\n GPE 2 684 296 3 170 329 486 033 486 033 18%\r\n Component 3 : Strengthening management capacity 19 087 803 19 502 022 414 219 -1 799 162 2 133 745 2%\r\nSub-component 3.1: Capacity enhancement of the 6 156 758 7 024 116 867 358 709 585 14%\r\nministries in charge of basic education.\r\n AFD & CS 1 119 914 1 277 687 157 772\r\n GPE 5 036 844 5 746 429 709 585 709 585 14%\r\nSub-component 3.2: Central and decentralized 10 467 107 8 267 911 -2 199 196 -1 799 162 -21%\r\neducation system management\r\n AFD & CS 1 903 967 1 503 933 -400 034\r\n GPE 8 563 140 6 763 978 -1 799 162 -1 799 162 -21%\r\nSub-component 3.3: Project management and\r\n 2 463 938 4 209 995 1 746 057 1 424 159 71%\r\ncoordination.\r\n AFD & CS 448 190 770 088 321 898\r\n GPE 2 015 748 3 439 907 1 424 159 1 424 159 71%\r\nNot allocated 4 3 277 333 0 -3 277 333 -2 676 896 -100%\r\n AFD & CS 600 437 0 -600 437\r\n GPE 2 676 896 0 -2 676 896 -2 676 896 -100%\r\nTOTAL 102 926 647 102 926 647 0 -9 505 086 9 505 086 0%\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTable 2. Reallocation of Resources between disbursement categories under the GPE financing\r\n\r\n Initial New\r\n Categories Designation allocation in allocation in\r\n USD USD\r\n\r\n Total 84,200,000 84,200,000\r\n\r\n Goods, works, non-consulting services, and consultants’\r\n 1 services, Training and Operating Costs under the following\r\n Parts of the Project: 1.1(b), 1.2(a), 1.3, 2.1(a), 2.2(a), 2.3, 39,700,000 44,136,569\r\n 3.1(a), 3.2(a) (but excluding Part 3.2(a)(iv)) and 3.3(a)\r\n Goods, works, non-consulting services, and consultants’\r\n 2 services, Training and Operating Costs under the following\r\n Parts of the Project: 1.2(b) (but excluding Part 1.2(b)(ii)), 6,900,000 8,456,389\r\n 2.1(b), 2.2(b), 3.1(b), 3.2(b) and 3.3(b)\r\n 3 Works, goods, non-consulting services and consultants’ 25,400,000 18,693,838\r\n services under Part 1.1(a)(i) of the Project\r\n 4\r\n Works, goods, non-consulting services and consultants’ 9,200,000 7,787,300\r\n services under Part 1.1(a)(ii) of the Project\r\n 5 School Improvement Grants under Part 3.2(a)(iv) of the 2,000,000 4,269,593\r\n Project\r\n 6\r\n Education Grants under Part 1.2(b)(ii) of the Project 1,000,000 856,311\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n III. SUMMARY OF CHANGES\r\n\r\n Changed Not Changed\r\n Change in Results Framework ✔\r\n Change in Components and Cost ✔\r\n Change in Loan Closing Date(s) ✔\r\n Reallocation between Disbursement Categories ✔\r\n Change in Disbursement Estimates ✔\r\n Change in Implementation Schedule ✔\r\n Change in Implementing Agency ✔\r\n Change in DDO Status ✔\r\n Change in Projects Development Objectives ✔\r\n Cancellations Proposed ✔\r\n Change in Disbursements Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Overall Risk Rating ✔\r\n Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered ✔\r\n Change of EA category ✔\r\n Change in Legal Covenants ✔\r\n Change in Institutional Arrangements ✔\r\n Change in Financial Management ✔\r\n Change in Procurement ✔\r\n Other Change(s) ✔\r\n Change in Economic and Financial Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Technical Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Social Analysis ✔\r\n Change in Environmental Analysis ✔\r\n\r\n\r\n IV. DETAILED CHANGE(S)\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_RESULTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESULTS FRAMEWORK\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\nPDO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Primary completion rate\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 51.20 83.00 58.60 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Increase in primary education gender parity index in areas targeted by the project (average)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 0.03 0.03 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Increase in lower secondary education gender parity index in areas targeted by the project (average)\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 0.04 0.03 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n System for learning assessment at the primary level\r\n Unit of Measure: Yes/No\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value No No Yes Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Jun-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Utility of the learning assessment system\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Supplement\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 3.00 Revised\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Appropriate tools and materials for improving reading in the early grades are adopted by MEP\r\n Unit of Measure: Yes/No\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value No Yes Yes Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Jun-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Direct project beneficiaries\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 1985425.00 2100000.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Female beneficiaries\r\n Unit of Measure: Percentage\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Supplement\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 45.00 44.60 47.00 Revised\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIntermediate Indicators\r\nIO_IND_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Number of additional classrooms built or rehabilitated at the primary level resulting from project interventions.\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 570.00 1245.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Number of classrooms built at the lower secondary level resulting from project interventions\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 0.00 330.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nTotal enrollments in primary education (all schools)\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 2166268.00 2773348.00 2400000.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nGirls, boys, parents and teachers reached through subcomponent 1(B) on promoting girls education\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 221878.00 100000.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nStudents reached through school feeding programs\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 47592.00 90000.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nCurriculum review for first cycle of primary school completed\r\nUnit of Measure: Yes/No\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue No Yes Yes Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nContract teachers trained as a result of the project\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nValue 0.00 7160.00 3500.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Primary\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 4500.00 2500.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2016 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Lower secondary\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 2660.00 1000.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2016 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nShare of grade 1-3 teachers trained for teaching early grade reading and simple classroom assessment\r\nUnit of Measure: Percentage\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 0.00 75.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nTeacher trainers, inspectors and pedagogical advisors trained through the project\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 5446.00 800.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nAssessment of reading fluency conducted for grade 2 and 3 and results shared widely\r\nUnit of Measure: Yes/No\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nValue No Yes Yes Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nHuman resource management strategy developed and implemented\r\nUnit of Measure: Yes/No\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue No Yes Yes Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nNumber of school management committees (CGDES) strengthened through the project\r\nUnit of Measure: Number\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\nValue 0.00 5901.00 2800.00 Revised\r\n\r\nDate 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Primary\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 5519.00 2761.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n Lower secondary\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom Breakdown\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 382.00 39.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\nMES organizational review completed\r\nUnit of Measure: Yes/No\r\nIndicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Value No No Yes Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n Regular education sector reviews held during project implementation\r\n Unit of Measure: Number\r\n Indicator Type: Custom\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Current) End Target Action\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 4.00 Revised\r\n\r\n Date 01-Apr-2014 01-Nov-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n OPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_COMPONENTS_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n COMPONENTS\r\n Current\r\n Current Proposed Proposed\r\n Cost Action\r\n Component Name Component Name Cost (US$M)\r\n (US$M)\r\n Expanding equitable access to Expanding equitable access to\r\n schooling and retention of 55.00 Revised schooling and retention of 53.00\r\n students in school students in school\r\n Improving the quality of teaching Improving the quality of\r\n 23.00 Revised 30.00\r\n and learning teaching and learning\r\n Strengthening management Strengthening management\r\n 18.00 Revised 19.00\r\n capacity capacity\r\n Contingencies 4.00 Revised Contingencies 0.00\r\n\r\n TOTAL 100.00 102.00\r\n\r\n\r\n OPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_LOANCLOSING_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n LOAN CLOSING DATE(S)\r\n\r\n Original Revised Proposed Proposed Deadline\r\n Ln/Cr/Tf Status Closing Closing(s) Closing for Withdrawal\r\n Applications\r\n TF-16565 Effective 30-Sep-2018 30-Jun-2019 30-Oct-2019\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_REALLOCATION _TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Financing %\r\n Current Allocation Actuals + Committed Proposed Allocation\r\n (Type Total)\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n Niger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\nTF-16565-001 | Currency: USD\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 1 Current Expenditure Category: GD/WRK/NCS/CONS/TR/OP COST PART...\r\n\r\n 39,700,000.00 20,222,478.33 44,136,569.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 2 Current Expenditure Category: GD/WRK/NCS/CONS/TR/OP COST PART...\r\n\r\n 6,900,000.00 6,627,740.56 8,456,389.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 3 Current Expenditure Category: WRK/GD/NCS/CONS PART 1.1(a)(i)\r\n\r\n 25,400,000.00 9,966,300.31 18,693,838.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 4 Current Expenditure Category: WRK/GD/NCS/CONS PART 1.1(a)(ii)\r\n\r\n 9,200,000.00 1,478,158.42 7,787,300.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 5 Current Expenditure Category: SCHOOL IMPVMT GRT PART 3.2(a)(iv)\r\n\r\n 2,000,000.00 804,317.69 4,269,593.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\niLap Category Sequence No: 6 Current Expenditure Category: EDUCATION GRANTS PART 1.2(b)(ii)\r\n\r\n 1,000,000.00 424,551.18 856,311.00 100.00 100.00\r\n\r\n\r\nTotal 84,200,000.00 39,523,546.49 84,200,000.00\r\n\r\nOPS_DETAILEDCHANGES_DISBURSEMENT_TABLE\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDISBURSEMENT ESTIMATES\r\n\r\nChange in Disbursement Estimates\r\nYes\r\n\r\n Year Current Proposed\r\n 2019 1,200,000.00 11,000,000.00\r\n\fThe World Bank\r\nNiger - GPE - Support to Quality Education Project (P132405)\r\n\f" }, "D29518534": { "id": "29518534", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services,Human development", "docdt": "2018-01-18T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/544471516305976178/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-07.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/544471516305976178/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-07.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/544471516305976178/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-07", "projectid": "P133597", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/544471516305976178/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Safety-Net-operation-P133597-Sequence-No-07", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\nSenegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Senegal | Social Protection & Labor Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 7 | ARCHIVED on 18-Jan-2018 | ISR30408 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Delegation Generale a la Protection Sociale et la Solidarite Nationale, Delegation a la protection sociale DGPSN, Ministere\r\nde l’Economie et des Finances et du Plan\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:29-Apr-2014 Effectiveness Date:07-Aug-2014\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:20-Feb-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:20-Feb-2017\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2019 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The development objectives of the proposed Project are to support the establishment of building blocks for the social safety net system and to\r\n provide targeted cash transfers to poor and vulnerable households.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n Yes\r\n\r\n Board Approved Revised Project Development Objective (If project is formally restructured)PHRPDODEL\r\n TThe objectives of the Project are to: (a) support the establishment of building blocks for the social safety net system; and (b) increase the access of\r\n poor and vulnerable households to targeted and adaptive cash transfers programs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nSupport to the Development of the Social Safety Net System:(Cost $8.80 M)\r\nSupport to Targeted Cash Transfer Programs for Poor and Vulnerable Households:(Cost $42.75 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 1 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n Project implementation has been underway for 31 months. The progress towards PDO achievement and the implementation of both components are\r\n satisfactory. A lot of progress has been done regarding the construction of the Registre National Unique, the implementation of the PNBSF, the\r\n Response to Shocks pilot and the productive safety nets project. However, the financial management, procurement and monitoring and evaluation\r\n continue to be assessed as being moderately satisfactory.\r\n The RNU started the full update of its data in 4 regions. The community targeting phase is over and the survey phase should start beginning of 2018.\r\n Together with the update of its data, the RNU is extending its scope to include all of the poor households in the country: passing from 450 000\r\n households to 550 000 households. However, insufficient progress has been made in the roll out of the Management Information System (MIS).\r\n Contracts with the social operators of the PNBSF have been renewed, except for the region of Sedhiou. All toolkits have been distributed for\r\n communication and information sessions. It was decided during the last mission to reorganize the regional coordinators to give them more resources to\r\n do supervision on the ground. As for the RNU, the roll out of the PNBSF MIS has not made much progress since last semester. The PNBSF will\r\n increase its number of beneficiaries to 400 000 in 2018 after a President’s request. The PNBSF should align its extension to the RNU’s update and\r\n extension.\r\n Since the last reporting period, substantial progress has been made in strengthening the response to shocks mechanisms. The pilot for the seasonal\r\n food security response was implemented and targeted 8 000 households. For the first time the government used 1) the Unique Registry to target the\r\n households for the response to shocks; 2) cash transfers in response to a shock instead of rice distribution and 3) the operational set up of the cash\r\n transfer program (PNBSF) to roll out the shock response enabling them to be faster and less costly. Dialogue is ongoing to strengthen the early warning\r\n system.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 2 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households enrolled in the RNU (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 60,000.00 280,000.00 442,000.00 600,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 31-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of PNBSF beneficiary households who live below the poverty line (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- 93.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 31-Mar-2016 20-Oct-2016 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n this was measured on the last group of households (4th generation) who became PNBSF beneficiaries at the end of 2016. It was measured\r\n on a representative sample during the baseline survey of the impact evaluation.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of female among beneficiaries of the PNBSF (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Dec-2016 28-Dec-2016 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 3 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of MOUs signed between the DGPSN and sectorial actors to define sectoral involvement in the PNBSF. (Number,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 1.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 -- -- 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of households in the unique registry with complete and coherent information for all the variable collected (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 65.00 -- -- 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 -- -- 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n this indicator will be calculated when the DGPSN organizes the audit of the RNU. It should be done in 2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of modules of the MIS PNBSF that are operational: beneficiary management, conditionality monitoring, payment,\r\n promotion and communication, grievance management, and adaptive intervention (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 6.00 6.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Apr-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n the modules are operational (the MIS is live) but are not used by the local NGOs implementing the CCT program yet\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 4 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of modules of the MIS of the RNU that are operational: geographic segmentation, geographic targeting, community\r\n targeting, categorical targeting, promotion and communication, grievance manageme (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 7.00 7.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 28-Apr-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n The modules are operational (the MIS is live) but are not used by the local NGOs implementing the CCT program yet\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Utilization of a module of the RNU MIS for sectoral department to request data (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 YES\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 28-Apr-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of complaints and grievances of the PNBSF resolved without delay (Text, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n 60% cases\r\n Value 0.00 not collected 85% resolved\r\n without delay\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Apr-2017 28-Apr-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of complaints and grievances of the RNU resolved without delay (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 100.00 60.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 28-Apr-2017 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 5 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of local committees who understand the objectives of the RNU (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 70.00 66.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 29-Dec-2016 27-Jul-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of PNBSF beneficiary households (who have signed their moral contract) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 48,000.00 99,924.00 218,194.00 300,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 31-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of PNBSF beneficiaries who know the program s parameters as mentioned in the community scorecard (on\r\n their rights and responsibilities with regard to conditionalities, program rules, and (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 43.00 70.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 -- 27-Jul-2018 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of PNBSF beneficiary households for which the conditionality on attendance to the sensitization sessions was monitored\r\n during the last four sessions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 93.00 50.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 31-Mar-2016 09-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 6 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Share of PNBSF beneficiary households who attended the last four sensitization sessions (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 50.00 70.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 17-Mar-2016 09-Oct-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of annual evaluations of the PNBSF on the basis of community score cards (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 2.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-May-2014 28-Dec-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n one conducted by a firm in 2016\r\n one conducted internally by the DGPSN in july 2017\r\n one conducted by a firm in 2017 (ongoing ) [not counted here]\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households benefiting from temporary transfers in response to shocks (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 8,147.00 8,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 15-Mar-2016 15-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households in the RNU benefiting from productive transfers (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 12,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Mar-2016 17-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 7 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of households in the RNU benefiting from productive accompanying measures to increase their resilience. The\r\n measures include (a) the preferential inclusion of poor households in existing resil (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 50,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 17-Mar-2016 17-Mar-2016 18-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Utilization of tools from the safety nets system (RNU and cash transfers) in the programmes to respond to shocks implemented\r\n in the project (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 2.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 13-Jun-2017 13-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 27-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Quarterly payment implemented without major problems (5= no problem, 4= one problem, etc.) (Amount(USD), Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 5.00 40.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Jun-2017 14-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of data updated annually in the RNU during the cycle of total update of the Registry (30% every year) (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 14-Jun-2017 14-Jun-2017 18-Dec-2017 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n in the process of updating 100 000 households\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 8 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P133597 IDA-54330 Effective USD 40.50 40.50 0.00 21.76 15.01 59%\r\n\r\n P133597 TF-A2849 Effective USD 11.05 11.05 0.00 3.07 7.98 28%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P133597 IDA-54330 Effective 29-Apr-2014 30-May-2014 07-Aug-2014 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n P133597 TF-A2849 Effective 24-Aug-2016 08-Oct-2016 08-Oct-2016 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 9 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Safety Net operation (P133597)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 16-Nov-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nP156160-Social Safety Net\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/18/2018 Page 10 of 10\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D29498206": { "id": "29498206", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Senegal", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Human development,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Social Safety Nets/Social Assistance &\n Social Care Services", "docdt": "2018-01-10T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/668701515618600350/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-08.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/668701515618600350/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-08.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/668701515618600350/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-08", "projectid": "P129472", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/668701515618600350/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Senegal-Health-Nutrition-Financing-P129472-Sequence-No-08", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\nSenegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Senegal | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 8 | ARCHIVED on 10-Jan-2018 | ISR31022 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Ministry of Health and Prevention, Government of Senegal\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:11-Dec-2013 Effectiveness Date:14-May-2014\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:09-Jan-2017 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:01-Jun-2017\r\n Original Closing Date:29-Jun-2018 Revised Closing Date:29-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The objective of the project is to increase utilization and quality of maternal, neonatal and child health and nutritional services, especially among the\r\n poorest households in Targeted Areas in the Recipients territory.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\n1. Result-Based Financing for health and nutrition services and capacity building:(Cost $22.30 M)\r\n2. Improvement of accessibility to maternal, nutrition, and children health services:(Cost $14.00 M)\r\n3. Institutional strengthening and project implementation:(Cost $6.00 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Unsatisfactory  Moderately Unsatisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Unsatisfactory  Moderately Unsatisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 1 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The Project is rated as Moderately Unsatisfactorily due to low disbursements, weaknesses in financial management and difficult implementation of the\r\n Results Based Financing component (half of Project funding).\r\n Fiduciary management and disbursement. The Project is experiencing quite a paradox: disbursements are low but expressed needs by different\r\n components (especially Cellule de Lutte contre la Malnutrition-CLM, Agence pour la Couverture Maladie Universelle-ACMU, Agence Nationale de\r\n Statistique Demographique-ANSD …) are not adequately answered due to cash flow and fiduciary issues. Additional staff within the Project have been\r\n recruited to support the financial management workload, a training on disbursements has been conducted by colleagues from disbursements unit and\r\n the Bank team is working closely with the Project coordination to ensure smooth disbursements.\r\n Results-Based Financing. The RBF Manual has been revised (using recommendations from the external evaluation of the RBF) in September 2017\r\n but delays to finalize it was due to lack of financial simulations for the new approach. This approach should be implemented from January 2018.\r\n Components 2 and 3 of the Project are rated Moderately Satisfactorily as their implementation is ongoing, as planned, but there were some initial delays\r\n and still some fiduciary constraints for a smooth implementation.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Fiduciary  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Moderate\r\n Stakeholders  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  Low\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of poorest people among the total number of project beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 -- -- 25.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 -- -- 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 2 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  New acceptors of modern contraceptive method (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 71,700.00 75,217.00 67,324.00\r\n\r\n Date 05-Jun-2013 30-Dec-2016 22-Dec-2017 30-Jun-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Births (deliveries) attended by skilled health personnel (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 96,164.00 147,930.00 271,679.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 30-Dec-2016 22-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Proportion of pregnant women having 4 antenatal care visits (at standard quality) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 50.00 37.30 60.94 67.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 30-Sep-2016 22-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Severa malnourished detected children who are referred and received at the health center for all necessary visits (Percentage,\r\n Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 3 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 84.00 84.00 80.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 30-Dec-2016 30-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Index of quality of health care (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 69.28 72.66 65.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 30-Jun-2016 30-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health personnel receiving training (number) (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1,932.00 2,916.00 1,300.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Feb-2011 30-Mar-2017 22-Dec-2017 31-Dec-2017\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Number of health facilities that have a RBF contract (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 318.00 318.00 383.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 30-Dec-2016 30-Dec-2016 31-Mar-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n Comments\r\n As a result of the revision of the RBF manual in 2017, no RBF contract has been signed during the process.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 4 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children aged 0-24 months who attended at least one growth monitoring and promotion service during the 2 precedent months\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 134,363.00 134,363.00 374,307.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 30-Dec-2016 30-Dec-2016 31-Mar-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  One continuous Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) report and one health Service Delivery report are produced every year\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 6.00 6.00 8.00\r\n\r\n Date 01-Jul-2013 30-Mar-2017 30-Mar-2017 30-Mar-2018\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nData on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\nProject Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\nP129472 IDA-53240 Effective USD 20.00 20.00 0.00 8.76 9.79 47%\r\n\r\nP129472 TF-15872 Effective USD 20.00 20.00 0.00 3.77 16.23 19%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 5 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n P129472 TF-16618 Closed USD 0.45 0.19 0.26 0.19 0.00 100%\r\n\r\n P129472 TF-A0565 Closed USD 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.79 0.04 95%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P129472 IDA-53240 Effective 11-Dec-2013 28-Mar-2014 14-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n P129472 TF-15872 Effective 28-Mar-2014 28-Mar-2014 29-May-2014 29-Jun-2018 29-Jun-2018\r\n P129472 TF-16618 Closed 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 17-Dec-2014 30-Jun-2015 31-Mar-2016\r\n P129472 TF-A0565 Closed 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 28-Jan-2016 31-Dec-2016 31-Dec-2016\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n Level 2 Approved on 04-May-2016\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 6 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Senegal Health & Nutrition Financing (P129472)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/10/2018 Page 7 of 7\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D29379032": { "id": "29379032", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Congo, Republic of", "docty": "Project Paper", "theme": "Social protection and risk management,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Other communicable diseases,Child health,Human development,Social dev/gender/inclusion", "docdt": "2018-01-04T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/154831515089145199/pdf/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-CG-Rep-Health-Sector-Project-P143849.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/154831515089145199/text/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-CG-Rep-Health-Sector-Project-P143849.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/154831515089145199/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-CG-Rep-Health-Sector-Project-P143849", "projectid": "P143849", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/154831515089145199/Disclosable-Restructuring-Paper-CG-Rep-Health-Sector-Project-P143849", "doc-text": " The World Bank\r\n CG Rep. Health Sector Project (P143849)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n REPORT NO.: RES30130\r\n\r\n DOCUMENT OF THE WORLD BANK\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n RESTRUCTURING PAPER\r\n ON A\r\n PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING\r\n\r\n OF\r\n\r\n CG REP. HEALTH SECTOR PROJECT\r\n APPROVED ON DECEMBER 20, 2013\r\n TO\r\n\r\n MINISTRY OF FINANCE\r\n\r\n\r\nHEALTH, NUTRITION & POPULATION\r\n\r\nAFRICA\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop\r\n Country Director: Ahmadou Moustapha Ndiaye\r\n Senior Global Practice Director: Timothy Grant Evans\r\n Practice Manager/Manager: Trina S. Haque\r\n Task Team Leader: Gyorgy Bela Fritsche, Hadia Nazem Samaha\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n CG Rep. Health Sector Project (P143849)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nI. BASIC DATA\r\n\r\nProduct Information\r\n\r\nProject ID Financing Instrument\r\nP143849 Investment Project Financing\r\n\r\nOriginal EA Category Current EA Category\r\n\r\n\r\nApproval Date Current Closing Date\r\n20-Dec-2013 28-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOrganizations\r\n\r\nBorrower Responsible Agency\r\nMinistry of Finance Ministry of Health and Populaton\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objective (PDO)\r\nOriginal PDO\r\nThe project development objective is to increase utilization and quality of maternal and child health services in\r\ntargeted areas.\r\nSummary Status of Financing\r\n\r\n\r\n Net\r\nLn/Cr/Tf Approval Signing Effectiveness Closing Commitment Disbursed Undisbursed\r\n\r\nIDA-53570 20-Dec-2013 19-Feb-2014 21-Jan-2015 28-Jun-2019 10.00 5.32 3.97\r\nTF-15744 19-Feb-2014 19-Feb-2014 21-Jan-2015 28-Jun-2019 10.00 5.31 4.69\r\n\r\n\r\nPolicy Waiver(s)\r\n\r\nDoes this restructuring trigger the need for any policy waiver(s)?\r\nNo\r\n\r\n\r\nII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT STATUS AND PROPOSED CHANGES\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n CG Rep. Health Sector Project (P143849)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1. Implementation over the last six months has been on a positive trend, with tangible results on the ground. A\r\nnew coordinator has implemented activities agreed upon during the January 2017 mid-term review. The last program\r\ncomponents, such as the household visit program and the indigent exemption program, were put into place. After\r\nconsultation with the CMU, a simple restructuring was completed in June 2017; this restructuring changed the\r\ndisbursement ratios from 84 percent Government and 16 percent World Bank to 2 percent Government and 98\r\npercent World Bank to allow the project to continue in its current form by frontloading IDA/TF resources. The current\r\nrestructuring proposes to change this disbursement ratio to 0 percent Government and 100% World Bank resources.\r\n\r\n2. The Project Development Objective (PDO) of PDSSII remains unchanged. The PDO is to increase utilization and\r\nquality of maternal and child health services in targeted areas. PDSSII has three sources of financing: an IDA Credit of\r\nUS$10 million equivalent, a US$10 million grant from the Health Results Innovation Trust Fund (HRITF), and a\r\ncounterpart funding commitment of US$100 million. The project was approved by the Board on December 20, 2013\r\nand became effective in January 2015. The two project components are: (1) improvement of utilization and quality of\r\nhealth services at health facilities through performance-based financing (PBF); and (2) strengthening health financing\r\nand health policy capabilities. To date, 50 percent of the parent project has been disbursed. Disbursement projections\r\nshow that by April 2018, 100 percent of the parent project will be fully disbursed.\r\n\r\n3. There has been progress made toward achievement of results indicators. Both the quality and quantity of health\r\nservices have increased in contracted health centers and hospitals across the various departments targeted by the\r\nproject. Quality of care in health centers over a one-year period, from the first quarter 2016 to the first quarter 2017,\r\nhas increased from 43.4 percent to 61.7 percent. Quality in hospitals over a one–year period over the same period,\r\nincreased from 40 percent to 51.2 percent. The quantity of services in health centers has increased in most services\r\nover the past year, for instance, institutional deliveries in health centers have increased by 74.4 percent over the past\r\n12 months. Furthermore, health system strengthening through policy dialogue on issues related to health financing,\r\npharmaceuticals, and public-private partnership have progressed as well. The project has financed national health\r\naccount studies, as well as a health financing assessment which includes the recently completed costing of a minimum\r\nbenefit package.\r\n\r\n4. The ratings for both IP and PDO were upgraded in the last ISR in September 2017 from Moderately\r\nUnsatisfactory to Moderately Satisfactory due to solid progress on the quantity and quality of services delivered over\r\nthe past six months, especially in the areas of project management and monitoring and evaluation. The project\r\nactivities are well underway and are being implemented satisfactorily.\r\n\r\n5. The purpose of this level II restructuring is to re-reallocate funds between categories of expenditure to keep up\r\nwith the evolution of the project. The main purpose for the reallocation is to pay for an emergency 6-month supply of\r\nvaccines and vaccine commodities.\r\n\r\nThe proposed reallocation is from Category 1 [PBF Grants Part 1(a)] to Category 2 [PBF Development Grants Part i(b)]\r\nand Category 3 [Goods, Non-consulting Services, Consultant Services, Training and Operational Costs Part 1(b)(ii)].\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nIII. DETAILED CHANGES\r\n\f The World Bank\r\n CG Rep. Health Sector Project (P143849)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nREALLOCATION BETWEEN DISBURSEMENT CATEGORIES\r\n\r\n Current\r\n Current Actuals + Proposed Disbursement %\r\nLn/Cr/TF Expenditure\r\n Allocation Committed Allocation (Type Total)\r\n Category\r\n Current Proposed\r\n\r\n\r\n IDA-53570- PPF GRANTS\r\n 4,900,000.00 1,754,311.02 3,405,236.49 45.00 50\r\n 001 PART 1(a)\r\n Currency: PPF DEVELOPMT\r\n XDR GRANTS PART 1 500,000.00 493,004.86 1,151,949.51 45.00 50\r\n (b)(i)\r\n GD/NCS/CS/TR/\r\n OP PART 1(b)(ii), 1,200,000.00 811,634.45 2,042,814.00 45.00 50\r\n 2\r\n Total 6,600,000.00 3,058,950.33 6,600,000.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n TF-15744- PBF GRANTS\r\n 7,478,731.00 2,462,560.24 5,384,373.00 45.00 50\r\n 001 PART 1(a)\r\n Currency: PBF\r\n USD DEVELOPMT\r\n 688,048.00 686,747.25 1,601,514.00 45.00 50\r\n GRANTS PART 1\r\n (b)(i)\r\n GD/NCS/CS/TR/\r\n OP PART 1(b)(ii), 1,833,221.00 1,133,859.72 3,014,113.00 45.00 50\r\n 2\r\n Total 10,000,000.00 4,283,167.21 10,000,000.00\r\n\f" }, "D29341693": { "id": "29341693", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Zambia", "docty": "Implementation Status and Results Report", "theme": "Malaria,Nutrition and food security,Health system performance,Participation and civic engagement,Administrative and civil service reform", "docdt": "2018-01-03T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Project Documents,Project Documents", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/540641515020887789/pdf/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-08.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/540641515020887789/text/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-08.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/540641515020887789/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-08", "projectid": "P145335", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/540641515020887789/Disclosable-Version-of-the-ISR-Health-Services-Improvement-Project-P145335-Sequence-No-08", "doc-text": " Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\nHealth Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\nAFRICA | Zambia | Health, Nutrition & Population Global Practice |\r\nIBRD/IDA | Investment Project Financing | FY 2014 | Seq No: 8 | ARCHIVED on 03-Jan-2018 | ISR30978 |\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementing Agencies: Ministry of Finance (Republic of Zambia), Ministry of Health, Ministry of Health\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates\r\n\r\n Key Project Dates\r\n\r\n Bank Approval Date:21-Mar-2014 Effectiveness Date:31-Mar-2015\r\n Planned Mid Term Review Date:16-Apr-2018 Actual Mid-Term Review Date:--\r\n Original Closing Date:30-Jun-2019 Revised Closing Date:30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nProject Development Objectives\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective (from Project Appraisal Document)\r\n The project development objective is to improve health delivery systems and utilization of maternal, newborn and child health and nutrition services\r\n in project areas.\r\n\r\n Has the Project Development Objective been changed since Board Approval of the Project Objective?\r\n No\r\n\r\n PHRPDODEL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nComponents\r\n\r\nName\r\nComponent 1: Strengthening capacity for primary and community level MNCH and nutrition services:(Cost $27.50 M)\r\nComponent 2: Strengthening utilization of primary and community level MNCH and nutrition services through results based financing ap\r\nproaches:(Cost $24.00 M)\r\nComponent 3: Strengthening project management and policy analysis:(Cost $15.50 M)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOverall Ratings\r\nName Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\nProgress towards achievement of PDO  Moderately Satisfactory  Moderately Satisfactory\r\nOverall Implementation Progress (IP)  Moderately Satisfactory  Satisfactory\r\nOverall Risk Rating  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nImplementation Status and Key Decisions\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 1 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n The detailed implementation status is provided below. Overall, Implementation of project activities has improved tremendously with positive\r\n progress towards achievement of project development indicators.\r\n Enhanced training capacity and standards for nursing and midwifery:\r\n Pre-Service Training -There has been substantial progress in institutional capacity building in the eight training institutions in the five target provinces.\r\n A total of 514 nurses and mid wives have graduated based on the enhanced pre-service curricula. More are expected to graduate in December 2017.\r\n Continuous Professional Development (CPD)- The 3-month in-service induction training modules have been translated into CPD and the delivery\r\n modalities have been defined and agreed upon. Further training to enhance capacity in Maternal Neonatal Child Health (MNCH) and nutrition for all\r\n health providers in post will now be done through CPD since from December 2017, all graduates will have been trained under the enhanced pre-service\r\n training curriculum.\r\n Training of Tutors- A Total of 62 Tutors and Clinical Instructors from 31 training institutions countrywide completed the modular training on the\r\n enhanced pre-service training curriculum with a view of improving their skills in MNCH and nutrition. Out of this number, 35 of them were from the\r\n training institutions in the five target provinces. The monitoring reports of the training institutions indicates that all Public Nursing Schools Countrywide\r\n are implementing the enhanced pre-service curricula and have functional skills laboratories in place with the minimum required models and equipment\r\n in place.\r\n Improved Supply Chain Systems for Essential Commodities: In a quest to improve availability of essential commodities at service delivery points,\r\n MoH through Medical Stores Limited(MSL) seeks to decentralize the storage and distribution of medicines and medical supplies by establishing\r\n Regional Hubs. So far, four (4) hubs have been established and are operational using leased facilities. The ZHSIP has contributed to the\r\n operationalization of two (2) of these hubs. Since project appraisal there has been some adjustments in the location of some hubs. The focus of support\r\n under the project has been adjusted accordingly.\r\n Additional resources have been mobilized from UNDP and the Global Fund to scale up the pilot to 60 Health facilities in 11 districts to ensure reliability\r\n and validity of the results from the electronic Zambia Inventory Control System (e-ZICS) pilot\r\n Improved referral system and linkages across levels of care: The Community Health Strategy has been approved and is expected to guide\r\n community stakeholder engagement and participation. The strategy has streamlined relationships between the community structures and health\r\n facilities critical for building effective referral systems. Lessons learnt from the Ethiopia knowledge learning and sharing experience have been included\r\n in the development of the community health strategy. Speedy implementation of high impact MNCH and nutrition interventions at health facility and\r\n community levels is expected to have a positive impact on the achievement of PDO indicators.\r\n Expand Results Based Financing (RBF) at primary facility and community Levels:\r\n RBF approach has been scale up to 39 districts at 621 health facilities (20 district hospitals and 601 health centers). However, the total number of\r\n districts in the 5 provinces under the project has increased from 39 to 58 due to the creation of additional districts by the Government. The Community\r\n level RBF approach has been implemented in 365 Neighborhood Health Committees (NHCs). Expansion to an additional 1,390 NHCs is under way.\r\n Project management and implementation, monitoring and evaluation:\r\n Recruitment of additional staff: Almost all the staff complement planned for the project are in place except for the positions of Procurement Specialist\r\n and Project Coordinator. In the interim, one Procurement Specialist from the Procurement and Supplies Unit (PSU) has been attached to work on the\r\n Project. The Deputy Director of Public Health has also continued to work on the project as Project Coordinator and RMNCH specialist.\r\n The Senior Management Team (SMT) is now responsible for oversight of the implementation of the Project; the overall management of the Project is\r\n under the Directorate of Public Health (DPH) headed by a Project Coordinator to provide leadership during the implementation process. The Project\r\n Coordinator is also responsible for coordinating and maintaining regular dialogue and functional links with other Directorates and sub-Program\r\n Managers, and Cooperating Partners.\r\n Support evidence-based policy analysis and health financing innovations: The MoH is implementing evidence-based research for policy analysis\r\n including: the 2013-2016 National Health Accounts (NHA) survey; Rational Drug Use study; and the assessment of utilization of ANC services in the five\r\n provinces of Zambia. Preliminary results from the study on Assessment of utilization of ANC services in the project areas will be disseminated in\r\n December 2017 while the results for the NHA and Rational Drug Use Studies are expected in March 2018.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRisks\r\n\r\n Systematic Operations Risk-rating Tool\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 2 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Risk Category Rating at Approval Previous Rating Current Rating\r\n\r\n Political and Governance  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Macroeconomic  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n Sector Strategies and Policies  --  Substantial  Moderate\r\n Technical Design of Project or Program  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Institutional Capacity for Implementation and\r\n Sustainability\r\n  --  Substantial  Moderate\r\n Fiduciary  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Environment and Social  --  Low  Low\r\n Stakeholders  --  Moderate  Moderate\r\n Other  --  --  --\r\n Overall  --  Substantial  Substantial\r\n\r\n\r\nResults\r\n\r\n Project Development Objective Indicators\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Deliveries attended by skilled health providers (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 27.00 45.10 48.00 57.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-Mar-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Under-2 children received monthly growth monitoring and promotion (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 62.50 74.60 48.00 82.80\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health Centers offering integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 44.00 44.00 64.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 3 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health Centers with essential medicines and commodities in stock (percent) (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 33.30 28.10 28.10 53.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2015 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDPDOTBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Children 0-11 months fully immunized (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 80.00 83.00 83.00 90.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-Mar-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Intermediate Results Indicators\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health workers trained in MNCH and nutrition competencies (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 419.00 933.00 2,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 4 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Percentage of trained health workers deployed to facilities in the five provinces. (Percentage, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 48.20 48.20 85.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities (health centers and district hospitals) using electronic inventory control and logistics management system\r\n (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 10.00 60.00 734.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Regional hubs and staging posts equipped in target areas (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2.00 2.00 8.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Protocols and guidelines at community and primary care levels updated and disseminated (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 3.00 3.00 4.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 5 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Districts with community information system integrated DHIS-2 (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health facilities (health centers and district hospitals) implementing the RBF approach (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 70.00 219.00 621.00 545.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Health policy analysis conducted and results disseminated (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Direct project beneficiaries (Number, Custom)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 2,288,231.00 2,963,536.00 3,300,000.00\r\n\r\n Date 31-Dec-2013 31-May-2017 30-Nov-2017 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 6 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n PHINDIRITBL\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n  Female beneficiaries (Percentage, Custom Supplement)\r\n\r\n Baseline Actual (Previous) Actual (Current) End Target\r\n\r\n Value 0.00 50.00 70.00 55.00\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Overall Comments\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Data on Financial Performance\r\n\r\nDisbursements (by loan)\r\n\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Currency Original Revised Cancelled Disbursed Undisbursed Disbursed\r\n\r\n P145335 IDA-53940 Effective USD 52.00 52.00 0.00 15.29 32.25 29%\r\n\r\n P145335 TF-16639 Effective USD 15.00 15.00 0.00 2.83 12.17 19%\r\n\r\n\r\nKey Dates (by loan)\r\n Project Loan/Credit/TF Status Approval Date Signing Date Effectiveness Date Orig. Closing Date Rev. Closing Date\r\n\r\n P145335 IDA-53940 Effective 21-Mar-2014 11-Feb-2015 31-Mar-2015 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n P145335 TF-16639 Effective 11-Feb-2015 11-Feb-2015 31-Mar-2015 30-Jun-2019 30-Jun-2019\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCumulative Disbursements\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 7 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\r\n The World Bank Implementation Status & Results Report\r\n Health Services Improvement Project (P145335)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Restructuring History\r\n\r\n There has been no restructuring to date.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Related Project(s)\r\n\r\nThere are no related projects.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1/3/2018 Page 8 of 8\r\n Public Disclosure Copy\r\n\f" }, "D29517801": { "id": "29517801", "admreg": "Africa,Africa", "count": "Southern Africa", "docty": "Working Paper", "theme": "Natural disaster management,Nutrition and food security,Global food crisis response,Climate change", "docdt": "2018-01-01T00:00:00Z", "majdocty": "Publications & Research", "pdfurl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/454781516290787924/pdf/122857-ESW-P161298-PUBLIC.pdf", "txturl": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/454781516290787924/text/122857-ESW-P161298-PUBLIC.txt", "url_friendly_title": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/454781516290787924/Assessment-of-food-security-early-warning-systems-for-East-and-Southern-Africa", "projectid": "P159853,P161298", "url": "http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/454781516290787924/Assessment-of-food-security-early-warning-systems-for-East-and-Southern-Africa", "doc-text": " AFRICA REGION\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAssessment of Food Security\r\nEarly Warning Systems for\r\nEastŸand Southern Africa\r\n Africa Climate Business Plan Series\r\n January 2018\r\n\f\fAssessment of Food Security\r\nEarly Warning Systems for\r\nEast and Southern Africa\r\n\f\fAFRICA REGION\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAssessment of Food Security\r\nEarly Warning Systems for\r\nEast and Southern Africa\r\nAdemola Braimoh, Bernard Manyena, Grace Obuya, and Francis Muraya\r\n\f© 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank\r\n\r\n1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433\r\nTelephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org\r\n\r\nSome rights reserved\r\n\r\nThis work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations,\r\nand conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of\r\nExecutive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the\r\ndata included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in\r\nthis work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory\r\nor the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.\r\n\r\nNothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and\r\nimmunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved.\r\n\r\nRights and Permissions\r\n\r\nThis work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO)\r\nhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo. Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are\r\nfree to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following\r\nconditions:\r\n\r\nAttribution—Please cite the work as follows: Braimoh, Ademola; Manyena, Bernard; Obuya, Grace; and Muraya,\r\nFrancis. 2018. Assessment of Food Security Early Warning Systems for East and Southern Africa. Africa Climate\r\nBusiness Plan series. World Bank, Washington, DC. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO.\r\n\r\nTranslations—If you create a translation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the\r\nattribution: This translation was not created by The World Bank and should not be considered an official World\r\nBank translation. The World Bank shall not be liable for any content or error in this translation.\r\n\r\nAdaptations—If you create an adaptation of this work, please add the following disclaimer along with the\r\nattribution: This is an adaptation of an original work by The World Bank. Views and opinions expressed in the\r\nadaptation are the sole responsibility of the author or authors of the adaptation and are not endorsed by The\r\nWorld Bank.\r\n\r\nThird-party content—The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the content contained\r\nwithin the work. The World Bank therefore does not warrant that the use of any third-party-owned individual\r\ncomponent or part contained in the work will not infringe on the rights of those third parties. The risk of claims\r\nresulting from such infringement rests solely with you. If you wish to re-use a component of the work, it is your\r\nresponsibility to determine whether permission is needed for that re-use and to obtain permission from the\r\ncopyright owner. Examples of components can include, but are not limited to, tables, figures, or images.\r\n\r\nAll queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818\r\nH Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org.\r\n\r\nCover photo: Woman walking. Photo: © Curt Carnemark/World Bank (Top left); Terraced fields: © A’Melody\r\nLee/World Bank (Top right); A Kenyan farmer uses a mobile phone in the field. Photo: Neil Palmer, CIAT\r\n(Bottom left); Vegetables store: © Ademola Braimoh/World Bank (Bottom right).\r\n\r\nFurther permission required for reuse. (This will depend on the final arrangement of the photos)\r\n\r\nCover design: Progressive Publishing Services\r\n\fContents\r\n\r\nPreface ix\r\nAcknowledgments xi\r\nAcronyms and Abbreviations xiii\r\nExecutive Summary xvii\r\n Institutional Challenges xviii\r\n Technical Challenges xviii\r\n Sustainability and Financial Challenges xix\r\n Recommendations xix\r\nChapter 1: The Imperative of Early Warning Systems in East\r\nand Southern African Regions 1\r\n Background 1\r\n Four Elements of an Effective People-Centered Early Warning 9\r\n Purpose and Scope of the Report 11\r\nChapter 2: Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 15\r\n Introduction 15\r\n Seasonal Climate and Weather Forecasting Methods 17\r\n Crop Forecasting and Monitoring Methods 24\r\n Vulnerability and Capacity Assessments 27\r\n Methods for Grain, Market, Cross-Border,\r\n Price, and Commodity Monitoring 31\r\nChapter 3: Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 41\r\n Introduction 41\r\n Performance of EWSs at the National Level 42\r\n Performance of Food Security EWS at the Regional Level 64\r\nChapter 4: Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\non Early Warning Systems 75\r\n Introduction 75\r\n The Costs and Benefits of Investing in an EWS 75\r\n Cost-Effective Strategies for Improving Agrometeorological\r\n Observation Systems 84\r\n Strengthening Food Security Information Systems\r\n at the Regional Level 87\r\n Operational Models and PPPs 88\r\nChapter 5: Best Practices and Recommendations for\r\nInstitutional Strengthening 93\r\n Introduction 93\r\n Innovations for Improving Food Security EW: Role\r\n of the Private Sector 93\r\n ASEAN Food Security Information System 96\r\n Participatory Scenario Planning for Coproducing\r\n User-Based Climate Services 100\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nContents v\r\n\f Quality Assurance Measures and Service Improvements\r\n through Producer-User Interface Forums 100\r\n Summary of Findings and Recommendations 103\r\n Recommendations 105\r\nReferences 111\r\nAppendix A—Early Warning Systems and Their Attributes 117\r\n\r\n\r\nBoxes\r\n Box 1.1 Projected Climate Change Impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa 4\r\n Box 2.1 Technical Insight: Functions of the GDPFS 18\r\n Box 2.2 ICPAC Recommends Early Action Following\r\n GHACOF’s Rainfall Outlook for March–May 2017 20\r\n Box 2.3 Technical Insights of GIEWS 25\r\n Box 2.4 FAW Monitoring, Impact Assessment, and the EWS 26\r\n Box 2.5 VAA Challenges 30\r\n Box 3.1 “We’ve No Options but to Rely on Indigenous Knowledge” 48\r\n Box 3.2 Seasonal Forecasts Not Packaged according\r\n to Language of Users 48\r\n Box 3.3 Risk Assessments Led by International Agencies 56\r\n Box 4.1 Benefits of Early Action 76\r\n Box 4.2 Operating Models of Climate Information\r\n Services Providers 90\r\n Box 5.1 Good Practice from EARS 94\r\n Box 5.2 Application of Climate Information through PSP 101\r\n\r\n\r\nFigures\r\n Figure 1.1 Number of Reported Disasters and People Affected\r\n by Disaster Type in Sub-Saharan Africa 2\r\n Figure 1.2 Summary of Climate Impacts and Risks\r\n in Sub-Saharan Africa 3\r\n Figure 1.3 Rainfall Anomalies in ESA 4\r\n Figure 1.4 Food Security IPC Crisis Phase 3 and Above (January 2017) 5\r\n Figure 1.5 Known and Suspected Distribution of FAW\r\n in Africa (April 2017) 7\r\n Figure 1.6 Elements of an EWS 10\r\n Figure 2.1 Characteristic Spatial Scales of Weather Phenomena 17\r\n Figure 2.2 Good Practice from the SADC RVAA System 29\r\n Figure 2.3 IPC Predicts Famine in Somalia (IPC Phase 5) 32\r\n Figure 2.4 Cereal Deficits in the SADC, 2011–16 35\r\n Figure 3.1 Organizational Structure of the EWS in Zambia 53\r\n Figure 3.2 Uganda National Integrated Early Warning System\r\n Information Flow 55\r\n Figure 5.1 Contents of AFSIS Database and Benefits to Users 99\r\n Figure B5.2.1 Five Major Steps of the PSP Process 101\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nvi Contents\r\n\fTables\r\n Table 1.1 Estimated Economic Impact of the FAW 7\r\n Table 1.2 Participating Countries in the Assessment 12\r\n Table 2.1 Common Methods for Generating Risk Information\r\n for an EWS 16\r\n Table 2.2 Hydrometeorological Observation Network Density 22\r\n Table 2.3 WMO-Recommended Minimum Densities of Stations\r\n (Area in km2 per Station) 23\r\n Table 2.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of AWSs 23\r\n Table 2.5 Actors in ESA Food Security EWS 28\r\n Table 2.6 NVAA Reports Consolidated into RVAA (2012–16) 29\r\n Table 2.7 Progress in Adopting the IPC Tool in East Africa 30\r\n Table 2.8 IPC Phase Descriptions 31\r\n Table 2.9 The SADC Regional Cereal Production (Tonnes) 2010–16 34\r\n Table 2.10 Good Practice on Processes Leading to the NFBS\r\n Production in Zambia 35\r\n Table 2.11 Market Performance for February 2017\r\n for Taita Taveta County, Kenya 37\r\n Table 2.12 Role of the SGR in Grain and Price Monitoring 38\r\n Table 3.1 Effectiveness of Risk Assessments at the National Level 42\r\n Table 3.2 Effectiveness of Monitoring and Warning Services\r\n at the National Level 44\r\n Table 3.3 Dissemination and Communication of EWS Information\r\n at the National Level 47\r\n Table 3.4 Applying EWS Information in Response\r\n at the National Level 49\r\n Table 3.5 Performance of EWS Governance and Investment\r\n at the National Level 52\r\n Table 3.6 Effectiveness of Risk Assessments at the Regional Level 65\r\n Table 3.7 Effectiveness of Monitoring and Warning Service\r\n at the Regional Level 67\r\n Table 3.8 Effectiveness of EWS Dissemination and Communication\r\n at the Regional Level 69\r\n Table 3.9 Effectiveness of Response to Regional Warnings\r\n at the Regional Level 70\r\n Table 3.10 Institutional Arrangements and Investment\r\n at the Regional Level 72\r\n Table 3.11 ESA RECs and Their Member States Overlaps 73\r\n Table 3.12 Regional EWS Institutional Summary 74\r\n Table B4.1.1 Cost Estimates for Drought Responses in Horn of Africa,\r\n Discounted over 20 Years 76\r\n Table 4.1 Examples of Triple Bottom Benefits of Investing\r\n in Hydrometeorological Services 77\r\n Table 4.2 Illustrative Economic Assessments of Meteorological/\r\n Hydrometeorological Services 78\r\n Table 4.3 Benefits of Investing in Climate Information and EWSs 79\r\n\r\n\r\nContents vii\r\n\f Table 4.4 Financing for Strengthening Hydrometeorological and\r\n Climate Services in the Democratic Republic of Congo 80\r\n Table 4.5 Estimated Costs for National Action Plan for Improvement\r\n of Hydrometeorological Services (NAPIHMS) Project in\r\n Madagascar (US$) 81\r\n Table 4.6 Estimated Costs of the Food Security EWS in Zambia 82\r\n Table 4.7 Options for Investing in Observation Networks 83\r\n Table 4.8 Estimated Annual Costs of an Advanced Network 86\r\n Table 4.9 IGAD RIIS: Estimated Budget for the Formulation\r\n Process of the RIIS 88\r\n Table 4.10 Roles of Regional and National Funding Mechanisms 88\r\n Table B4.2.1 Operating Models 90\r\n Table 4.11 Potential for NMHSs to Develop PPPs in Weather\r\n Products in Some ESA Countries 91\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nviii Contents\r\n\fPreface\r\n\r\nDisasters caused by climate extremes such as tropical cyclones and severe\r\nstorms, floods, heat waves, and droughts are jeopardizing Africa’s hard-won\r\ndevelopment achievements toward further growth, food security, and pov-\r\nerty reduction. In 2016 the food security situation deteriorated sharply in\r\nAfrica—especially in East and Southern Africa—as a result of droughts and\r\nfloods linked in part to El Niño/La Niña–related phenomena. The impacts\r\nare particularly felt in countries with the least capacity to respond because of\r\noverreliance on rain-fed agriculture, high levels of poverty, inadequate access\r\nto financial capital, and poor infrastructure.\r\n Since the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action in 2005, evidence\r\nsuggests that early warning systems have generally been effective in alerting\r\ncountries and stakeholders to impending hazards. However, the recurrence\r\nand magnitude of food crises in East and Southern Africa (ESA) underscore\r\nthe need to improve prevention and response mechanisms in order to address\r\nthe determinants and the dynamic nature of food insecurity, at both national\r\nand regional levels. Many countries in ESA have national platforms, legisla-\r\ntion and policies on disaster risk reduction, but few address agriculture, food\r\nsecurity, and nutrition with sector-specific disaster risk reduction policies and\r\nobjectives. Reducing risks and building resilience within agriculture requires\r\na policy environment that is conducive to the full mainstreaming of disaster\r\nrisk reduction within the sector.\r\n There have been cases where inadequate analysis, together with poor\r\ncommunication and ineffective coordination and response mechanisms, has\r\ncontributed to acute food security emergencies that might have been pre-\r\nvented. There are also concerns about the accuracy and reliability of some\r\ndata, links of food security information to trade policy, and private sector\r\nparticipation. Informing stakeholders and building consensus on the severity\r\nof food insecurity is vital, particularly in crisis situations to proactively reduce\r\ndisaster losses in the sector, enable sector growth and protect the food secu-\r\nrity and nutrition of vulnerable populations. In-depth and regular informa-\r\ntion and analysis of food security vulnerability and resilience help countries\r\nto make better decisions and apply measures to protect and enhance their\r\nlivelihoods.\r\n In order to fulfill the commitments made toward Sendai Framework for\r\nDisaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, it is critical that countries, regional orga-\r\nnizations, development partners, and private sector focus their collaborative\r\nefforts on creating and strengthening institutional mechanisms that guide\r\nthe development of the EWS. This will enable EWS to more effectively meet\r\nthe decision-making needs of their primary users and evolve in a dynamic\r\nand sustainable manner. EWS for food security programs should not be per-\r\nceived as part of the emergency response activities. They should become part\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPreface ix\r\n\fof an expanded food security information and analysis system that can pro-\r\nduce viable, relevant, and credible information necessary for responding to\r\nshort-term emergencies as well as contributing to longer-term development\r\nprogramming.\r\n\r\n Makhtar Diop\r\n Vice President, Africa Region\r\n The World Bank\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nx Preface\r\n\fAcknowledgments\r\n\r\nThis work drew from the contributions of a range of experts working in\r\nagriculture, food security, climate change, and disaster risk management. We\r\nthank everyone who contributed to its richness and multidisciplinary outlook.\r\nThe analytical work was carried out by a team comprising Ademola Braimoh,\r\nBernard Manyena, Grace Obuya, and Francis Muraya. The report was pre-\r\npared under the overall direction of Juergen Voegele, Ethel Sennhauser, and\r\nMustapha Ndiaye, and under the guidance of Mark Cackler, Dina Umali-\r\nDeininger, and Preeti Ahuja.\r\n We are grateful for the contribution of the following colleagues: Stephen\r\nNjoroge (WMO), Ahmed Habbane (IGAD Secretariat), Bradwell Garanganga,\r\n(CSC/SADC), Peter Ambenje (Kenya Meteorological Department), Bruno\r\nSekoli (Meteorological Association of Southern Africa), AbdiShakur Othowai\r\n(IGAD/ICPAC), Elliot Vhurumuku (WFP), Emily Massawa-Ojo (USAID/\r\nPREPARED), Gideon Galu (FEWS NET), Kim Mhando (East Africa Grain\r\nCouncil), MaryLucy Oronje (Centre for Agriculture and Biosciences\r\nInternational), Nigist Biru (FEWS NET), Peter Muhangi (IFRC), Priscilla\r\nMuiruri (Kenya Agricultural Productivity & Agribusiness Project), Stanley\r\nChabvunguma, (Department of Climate Change and Meteorological Services,\r\nMalawi), Susan Chomba (World Agroforestry Center), Venty Thierry (National\r\nBureau for DRR, Madagascar), Yazan Elhadi (Adaptation Consortium),\r\nWagayehu Bekele (Agricultural Transformation Agency, Ethiopia), Walter\r\nNganyi (Kenya Meteorological Department), Birhanu Woldemikael (Ministry of\r\nAgriculture and Food Security, Ethiopia), Titus Ng’andu (Disaster Management\r\nand Mitigation Unit, Zambia), Generose Nziguheba (International Institute of\r\nTropical Agriculture), David Nyamai (Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and\r\nFisheries, Kenya), John Mulenga (Ministry of Agriculture, Zambia), Joseph\r\nIntsiful (African Climate Policy Centre), and all those who provided substan-\r\ntive feedback to the EWS questionnaire. We also acknowledge the input of\r\nthose who attended the workshop to deliberate on the findings of the field\r\nsurveys.\r\n The report benefited greatly from invaluable suggestions from peer review-\r\ners. We would like to thank Makoto Suwa and Vikas Choudhary (World\r\nBank), and Jasper Mwesigwa (IGAD/ICPAC) for their insightful comments\r\nand suggestions. We thank Yisgedullish Amde, Deo Ndikumana, Holger\r\nKray, and Stephen D’Alessandro for their assistance, and Pauline Zwaans, Joab\r\nOsumba, Rhoda Rubaiza, Alex Mwanakasale for their inputs toward a success-\r\nful validation workshop. We also acknowledge the efforts of Priya Thomas,\r\nTabrez Ahmed, Damalie Nyanja, Sophie Rabuku, Marie Lolo Sow, and Srilatha\r\nShankar (World Bank) for assistance rendered at various stages of the project.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAcknowledgments xi\r\n\f\fAcronyms and Abbreviations\r\n\r\nACCRA Africa Climate Change Resilience Alliance\r\nAFSIS ASEAN Food Security Information System\r\nAGRHYMET Agriculture, Hydrology, and Meteorology\r\nARC African Risk Capacity\r\nASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations\r\nASFR ASEAN Food Security Reserve\r\nAU African Union\r\nAWS automatic weather station\r\nBCR benefit-cost ratio\r\nCAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program\r\nCFSAM Crop and Food Security Assessment Mission\r\nCILSS Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought in the Sahel\r\nCOMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa\r\nCSC Climate Services Centre\r\nDEWS Karamoja Drought Early Warning System\r\nDGM General Directorate of Meteorology (Direction Generale de\r\n la Meteorologie)\r\nDMMU Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit\r\nDRF Disaster Risk Financing\r\nDRR disaster risk reduction\r\nEAC East African Community\r\nEAGC East African Grain Council\r\nEARS Environmental Analysis and Remote Sensing\r\nECCAS Economic Community of Central African States\r\nECMWF European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts\r\nENSO El Niño-Southern Oscillation\r\nEOC emergency operation center\r\nESA East and Southern Africa\r\nEU European Union\r\nEW early warning\r\nEWS early warning system\r\nFAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN\r\nFAW fall armyworm\r\nFEWS NET Famine Early Warning Systems Network\r\nFPM focal point meeting\r\nFPMA Food Price Monitoring and Analysis\r\nFRA Food Reserve Agency\r\nFSNWG Food Security and Nutrition Working Group\r\nGDP Gross domestic product\r\nGDPFS Global Data Processing and Forecasting System\r\nGFCS Global Framework for Climate Services\r\nGFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAcronyms and Abbreviations xiii\r\n\fGHACOF Greater Horn of Africa Climate Outlook Forum\r\nGIEWS Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and\r\n Agriculture\r\nGLOFAS Global Flood Awareness System\r\nGMB Grain Marketing Board\r\nHDI Human Development Index\r\nHEWS Humanitarian Early Warning Service\r\nICPAC IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre\r\nIFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent\r\n Societies\r\nIGAD Intergovernmental Authority for Development\r\nINFORM Index for Risk Management\r\nIOC Indian Ocean Commission\r\nIPC Integrated Food Security Phase Classification\r\nKI key informant\r\nKII key informant interview\r\nMAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries and Fisheries\r\nMAM March, April, and May\r\nMIS Market Information System\r\nMoU memorandum of understanding\r\nMSD Meteorological Service Department\r\nNDVI Normalized Difference Vegetation Index\r\nNECOC Uganda National Emergency Coordination and Operations\r\n Centre\r\nNFBS national food balance sheet\r\nNGO nongovernmental organization\r\nNMHS National Meteorological and Hydrological Service\r\nNHS National Hydrological Service\r\nNMS National Meteorological Service\r\nNPV net present value\r\nNVAA National Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis\r\nNVAC National Vulnerability Assessment Committee\r\nO&M operation and maintenance\r\nODK Open Data Kit\r\nPAD Project Appraisal Document\r\nPPP public-private partnership\r\nPSP participatory scenario planning\r\nRATIN Regional Agriculture Trade Intelligence Network\r\nREC Regional Economic Community\r\nRFBS regional food balance sheet\r\nRIIS Regional Integrated Information System\r\nRVAA Regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis\r\nRVAC Regional Vulnerability Assessment Committee\r\nSACU Southern African Customs Union\r\nSADC Southern African Development Community\r\nSARCOF Southern African Regional Climate Outlook Forum\r\n\r\n\r\nxiv Acronyms and Abbreviations\r\n\fSDG sustainable development goal\r\nSFDRR Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction\r\nSGR strategic grain reserve\r\nSOP standard operating procedure\r\nSMS Short Message Service\r\nSWC Severe Weather Consult\r\nTAHMO Trans-African Hydro-Meteorological Observatory\r\nTOT terms of trade\r\nUNDP United Nations Development Programme\r\nUNECA United Nations Economic Commission for Africa\r\nUNMA Uganda National Meteorological Authority\r\nUNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster\r\n Reduction\r\nUSAID U.S. Agency for International Development\r\nVAA Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis\r\nVAC Vulnerability Assessment Committee\r\nWFP World Food Programme\r\nWMO World Meteorological Organization\r\nZFU Zimbabwe Farmers’ Union\r\nZMD Zambia Meteorological Department\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAcronyms and Abbreviations xv\r\n\f\fExecutive Summary\r\n\r\nThe risk1 of the El Niño-induced food insecurity in southern Africa in 2016;\r\nthe recent risk of famine in northern Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, and South\r\nSudan; and the recent outbreak of the fall armyworm (FAW) in East and\r\nSouthern Africa (ESA) all demonstrate that responses are still largely reactive\r\nthan proactive. Inadequate early warning systems (EWSs), coupled with lim-\r\nited investment and weak institutional and technical capacity, are implicated\r\nin contributing to food insecurity–related emergencies in ESA. Yet over the\r\nyears, strong evidence has emerged on the benefits of investing in EWSs. In\r\nEthiopia, investing in a drought EWS, which would reduce livelihood losses\r\nand dependence on assistance, has a benefit-cost ratio (BCR) of between 3:1\r\nand 6:1. Similarly, the BCR of improving national hydrometeorological ser-\r\nvices in developing countries ranges from 4:1 to 36:1. Consistent with one\r\nof the goals of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR),\r\nincreasing investment in EWSs would contribute to a substantial increase in\r\nthe availability of, and access to multihazard2 and disaster risk information,\r\none of the key inputs in achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs).\r\n In supporting these efforts, an assessment of food security EWSs was con-\r\nducted to improve food security and resilience3 in East and Southern Africa.\r\nThe study aimed at assessing “bottlenecks” and opportunities for improving\r\nfood security EWSs for enhanced resilience in ESA. The performance and\r\ncapacity of EWSs at the Regional Economic Cooperation level and at sampled\r\nmember states were assessed. The study drew lessons from the Association of\r\nSoutheast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, particularly in relation to EWS pol-\r\nicies, investments, and technical capacities. Because the assessment attempted\r\nto be as comprehensive as possible, it was essential to also draw lessons from\r\nprograms and projects being piloted on EWSs, including those being imple-\r\nmented by the World Bank in Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Somalia,\r\nTanzania, and Mozambique.\r\n Although progress has been made, there are challenges that recur across\r\nthe Regional Economic Communities (RECs) and member states, and these\r\nchallenges fall into three main categories:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n1 Risk is used here to mean the potential for consequences where something of value is at stake and where\r\nthe outcome is uncertain, recognizing the diversity of values. Risk is often represented as the probability of\r\noccurrence of hazardous events or trends multiplied by the consequences if the events occur. Risk results\r\nfrom the interaction of vulnerability, exposure, and hazard (IPCC 2014).\r\n2 Hazard is the potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend, or physical\r\n\r\nimpact, that may cause loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property,\r\ninfrastructure, livelihoods, service provision, and environmental resources (IPCC 2014).\r\n3 Resilience means the capacity of a social-ecological system to cope with a hazardous event or disturbance,\r\n\r\nresponding or reorganizing in ways that maintain its essential function, identity, and structure, while also\r\nmaintaining the capacity for adaptation, learning, and transformation (IPCC 2014).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nExecutive Summary xvii\r\n\fInstitutional Challenges\r\n• Lack of EWS working groups in both RECs to coordinate EWS activities.\r\n In the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) region, the\r\n institutionalization of the Food Security and Nutrition Working Group\r\n (FSNWG) has been slow because the FSNWG has yet to be endorsed as\r\n an institution of IGAD.\r\n• Policies that outline roles and responsibilities for EWS actors at both\r\n regional and national levels are generally weak. Although many ESA coun-\r\n tries have sector policies, the sectors still operate in silos because of lack\r\n of overarching EWS policies. In addition, although several tools such as\r\n the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) have manuals that\r\n guide users, these have not been endorsed by regions and member states\r\n to provide guidance on systematic data collection, data sharing, monitor-\r\n ing, and agreed action triggers.\r\n• Although the Greater Horn of Africa Climate Outlook Forum (GHACOF)\r\n report focuses more on the actions that users need to consider compared\r\n with the Southern African Regional Climate Outlook Forum (SARCOF)\r\n reports, which are still expressed in probabilities, some users such as pas-\r\n toralists are still excluded because the reports are in English, which they\r\n do not understand. Whereas the start and end dates for the season are\r\n useful, there is still a gap in intensity and frequency of the information\r\n and it has yet to reach some of the intended users.\r\n• There is a lack of regular updates of the regional food balance sheets\r\n (RFBSs) and national food balance sheets (NFBSs) and weak monitoring\r\n of grain markets, cross-border trade, and commodity price monitoring.\r\n Although the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) and\r\n the World Food Programme (WFP) actively monitor these activities, inte-\r\n gration of some of these into regional and national systems is still limited.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTechnical Challenges\r\n• Although the SARCOF and GHACOF processes are well established in\r\n providing regional climate forecasts, there are still challenges to down-\r\n scaling these forecasts to local levels, such as districts or villages. Another\r\n limitation of GHACOF and SARCOF is that they tend to focus on rain\r\n and pay little attention to other weather parameters.\r\n• Limited coverage of the weather observation networks and challenges in\r\n crop production forecasts make agrometeorology data less reliable. The\r\n capacity of national meteorological and hydrological services4 (NMHSs)\r\n in Africa is not adequate and has considerably degraded in some countries\r\n during the past 20 to 25 years.\r\n\r\n4National Meteorological and Hydrological Service refers to a National Meteorological Service (NMS)\r\nor National Hydrological Service (NHS), or an organization that combines the functions of both (WMO\r\n2012a). The plural, NMHSs, refers to multiple organizations (NMHS, NMS, and NHS).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nxviii Executive Summary\r\n\f• In some countries, there is a lack of technically qualified professionals\r\n such as meteorologists, agrometeorologists, and hydrometeorologists to\r\n ensure quality hydrometeorological products.\r\n• Although the Vulnerability Assessment Committee (VAC) system has\r\n become one of the most useful and reliable EWS tools in the Southern\r\n African Development Community (SADC), there are multiple method-\r\n ologies that need harmonization. Similarly, the IPC, which continues to\r\n gain currency there, has challenges in the comparability of outcome indi-\r\n cators because some countries use actual food security outcome indica-\r\n tors whereas others make inferences without using the actual data.\r\n• Weak food security information systems and absence of a framework for\r\n sharing data at both the regional and national levels make EWS informa-\r\n tion slow to reach users.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSustainability and Financial Challenges\r\n• There are no clear funding mechanisms for EWSs because EWS programs\r\n take a reactive rather than a proactive approach. Consequently, because\r\n early warning (EW) is considered an emergency response activity, the\r\n funding tends to be ad hoc and therefore competes with development\r\n funds during an emergency response. In addition, because EWSs rely\r\n on international assistance, which tends to be project based, they often\r\n face the problem of financial sustainability once external funding ceases.\r\n Instead, EWSs should be considered as part of regular development\r\n because EWS data are used for planning interventions.\r\n• There is limited public-private partnership (PPP) with private climate\r\n services providers, yet such partnerships would reduce reliance on\r\n donors. There is uncertainty over the nature of the relationship between\r\n the NMHSs and the private sector. There is also a perception that the pri-\r\n vate sector may be a threat to job security, data security and ownership,\r\n and government obligations to supply public goods5 such as EWs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRecommendations\r\nKey priority recommendations for targeted investment are outlined as fol-\r\nlows:\r\n• Develop and strengthen the food security information system at both\r\n national and regional levels to meet the RECs’, African Union’s (AU), and\r\n member states’ agendas, including the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture\r\n\r\n\r\n5 A public good is a good that no consumer can be excluded from using if it is supplied and for which\r\nconsumption by one consumer does not reduce the quantity available for consumption by any other. The\r\nfirst property is referred to as nonexcludability, whereas the latter is termed nonrivalry (Black, Hashimzade,\r\nand Myles 2017).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nExecutive Summary xix\r\n\f Development Program (CAADP). The information should contribute to\r\n ongoing development programs, as well as to improving the effectiveness\r\n of the EWSs, emergency preparedness, and response capacity. The RECs\r\n in the ESA region should consider establishing a food security informa-\r\n tion system, taking into consideration lessons learned from similar initia-\r\n tives, including the ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS)\r\n to strengthen food security EWSs. This effort should be supported by a\r\n data-sharing framework and a one-stop food security information hub\r\n such as an emergency operation center (EOC) that is accessible to rele-\r\n vant stakeholders, including government agencies, and the international\r\n community. The regional food security information system should also\r\n be replicated in each of the member states.\r\n• Support the strengthening of the EWS legal, regulatory, and institu-\r\n tional frameworks as well as improving coordination and ensuring\r\n clarity of roles and responsibilities within and across the four compo-\r\n nents of effective EWSs. This will include developing common methodol-\r\n ogies and procedures for data collection, management, and data sharing\r\n across geographical borders, as well as developing effective strategies for\r\n the timely dissemination of actionable warnings.\r\n• Promote south-south knowledge exchanges, for example, exchange of\r\n information between AFSIS and RECs in the process of developing their\r\n food security information systems. Inter-REC knowledge exchanges such\r\n as Agriculture, Hydrology, and Meteorology (AGRHYMET) Regional\r\n Centre of the countries of the Permanent Inter-State Committee for\r\n Drought in the Sahel (CILSS) could also be considered.\r\n• Invest in technical capacity development to enable the collection of\r\n high-quality agrometeorological crop production forecasts and vulner-\r\n ability data. EWSs require (a) improved capacity to downscale global\r\n and regional climate forecasts to high resolution for the forecasts to be\r\n meaningful at the local level; (b) strong weather observation networks\r\n with a wider coverage; and (c) improved data collection for crop assess-\r\n ments, livestock assessments, and vulnerability assessments. The SADC’s\r\n Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (VAA) as well as the IPC method-\r\n ologies should be harmonized or at least agree on minimum indicators to\r\n ensure quality assurance and comparison between countries.\r\n• Strengthen public commitment and mainstream EWS considerations\r\n into agricultural/food security policies, budgetary allocations, and plan-\r\n ning frameworks. This will require evidence-based advocacy to national\r\n and regional leaders and cooperation development partners on the eco-\r\n nomic benefits of EWSs.\r\n• Support the development of tools to support vulnerable households\r\n and communities to establish household community systems that can\r\n respond to emergencies.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nxx Executive Summary\r\n\fCHAPTER 1\r\nThe Imperative of Early Warning6\r\nSystems in East and Southern\r\nAfrican Regions\r\n\r\nBackground\r\nA common understanding has emerged over the decades, particularly since\r\n2000, that disasters mainly triggered by hydrometeorological hazards have\r\nbecome a constant occurrence in Sub-Saharan Africa (figure 1.1). These hazards\r\nare manifested in the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the largest mode\r\nof interannual variability in the climate system (Murphy et al. 2001), whose\r\nfrequency has increased in the countries of East and Southern Africa (ESA).7\r\n There is strong evidence that higher temperatures, droughts, floods, and\r\nchanging weather8 patterns expected from climate change will exacerbate\r\nthe disaster risks associated with hydrometeorological hazards (figure 1.2\r\nand box 1.1). The adverse impact of ENSO events is exacerbated by chronic\r\nenvironmental and socioeconomic conditions that compound to worsen\r\nfood  insecurity conditions across ESA. Improved regional and national\r\nweather, water, and climate-related monitoring and forecasting capabilities\r\n\r\n6 Early warning (EW) is the provision of timely and effective information, through identified institutions,\r\n\r\nthat allows individuals exposed to a hazard to take action to avoid or reduce their risk and prepare for\r\neffective response (UNISDR 2009). In this study, although EWSs are adopted, experience shows that EWSs\r\nalone do not prevent hazards from turning into disasters. Early action is essential, particularly given the\r\nincreasing accuracy of seasonal forecasts. However, even with timely EWs and planned early action, people\r\nsuffer the disastrous consequences of natural hazards.\r\n7 The east African countries, under the IGAD region, are Burundi, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Kenya,\r\n\r\nRwanda, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda. The southern African countries under the SADC\r\nare Angola, Botswana, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius,\r\nMozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.\r\n8 Weather refers to atmospheric phenomena that have timescales that range from hours to days to 1 or\r\n\r\n2 months, whereas climate refers to atmospheric conditions that have timescales that range from a few\r\nmonths to a season to a year to a decade or more, or even longer. In this sense, the terms weather and cli-\r\nmate identify regions along a continuous spectrum of atmospheric conditions, weather describing rapidly\r\nchanging events, and climate describing slowly changing ones. Climate can be represented in terms of nor-\r\nmal, long-term average, and year-to-year fluctuations—the interannual variability—on which that average\r\nwhen viewed over a period of a few hundreds of years has fallen within a bounded “range” of values.\r\nCommon drivers of climate variability are the oscillations that occur in Earth’s coupled ocean-atmosphere\r\nsystem. An example is the El Niño and La Niña (ENSO) events, shifts of warm, tropical Pacific Ocean cur-\r\nrents that can dramatically affect world seasonal weather patterns. Other drivers include volcanic eruptions\r\nand solar phenomena. Sometimes climate varies in ways that suggest a component of randomness being\r\ninherent in Earth’s climate system. Climate change is a long-term continuous change (either increase or\r\ndecrease) in a climate normal (for example, an increase in the long-term average temperature) and/or the\r\nrange of climate variability (for example, more frequent, more intense thunderstorms together with fewer\r\nsmall showers). As the range increases, the year-to-year variations in a variable such as temperature or\r\nprecipitation should be expected to be greater, and so new extreme values are likely.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 1\r\n\fFIGURE 1.1 Number of Reported Disasters and People Affected by\r\nDisaster Type in Sub-Saharan Africa\r\n\r\n 40 140\r\n\r\n 35\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Total no. disaster events per year\r\n 120\r\nPeople affected (millions)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 30\r\n 100\r\n 25\r\n 80\r\n 20\r\n 60\r\n 15\r\n 40\r\n 10\r\n\r\n 5 20\r\n\r\n 0 0\r\n 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010\r\n\r\n Drought Flood Storms Earthquake Volcano No of events\r\n\r\nSource: GFDRR 2016, 1.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ncontribute to enhancing EWSs, including those focused on food security.\r\nAdverse weather and climate conditions, such as those triggered by ENSO\r\nevents, can affect entire regions. Governments can use improved monitor-\r\ning and forecasting for improving and protecting agricultural productivity\r\nand production, contributing to protecting lives and the livelihoods of those\r\nhouseholds engaged in agriculture and other climate-sensitive sectors.\r\n The observed shifting patterns in weather and climate have caused rainfall\r\nanomalies in ESA countries (figure 1.3), with these shifts having their impact\r\non agriculture, health, migration, and conflict, exacerbating existing vulner-\r\nabilities. Weather- and climate-related hazards combined with social vulner-\r\nability9 drivers pose a threat to lives, livelihoods, economic activities, and\r\nsocioeconomic assets. The major agricultural vulnerability drivers include\r\npoor agricultural production, loss of livestock, high food prices, cross-border\r\ntrade barriers, growing economic interdependence, poverty, and civil con-\r\nflict. The drought and floods of the 2015–16 El Niño phenomenon crippled\r\nagricultural production in a number of ESA countries, exacerbated chronic\r\nfood insecurity in some regions, and triggered acute food insecurity in others,\r\nthreatening millions of vulnerable households (figure 1.4).\r\n The climate anomalies have wide-ranging impacts in ESA. Although glob-\r\nally 108 million people from 18 countries faced crises-level food insecurity\r\nor worse in 2016 (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification [IPC] Phase\r\n3 and above), 10 of these countries were from ESA (figure 1.4). What distin-\r\nguishes the ESA countries from the rest of the world is the extent to which\r\n\r\n\r\n9Vulnerability is the propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. It encompasses a variety of con-\r\ncepts, including sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt (IPCC 2014).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n2 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\fFIGURE 1.2 Summary of Climate Impacts and Risks in Sub-Saharan Africa\r\n\r\n\r\n Observed Approximately\r\n vulnerability 1.5°Ca,b Approximately Approximately Approximately\r\n Risk/impact or change (≈2030sc) 2°C (≈2040s) 3°C (≈2060s) 4°C (≈2080s)\r\nHeat Unusual heat Virtually 20–25 percent 45 percent of 70 percent of >85 percent of\r\nextremed (in extremes absent of land land land land\r\nthe Southern Unprecedented absent <5 percent of 15 percent of 35 percent of >85 percent of\r\nHemisphere heat extreme land land land land\r\nsummer)\r\nDrought Increasing Likely risk of Likely risk of Likely risk of Likely risk of\r\n drought risk severe drought severe extreme extreme drought\r\n in Southern, in Southern drought in drought in in Southern\r\n Central and and Central Southern and Southern Africa Africa and\r\n West Africa, Africa, Central Africa, and severe severe drought\r\n decrease in increased risk increased risk drought in in Central Africa,\r\n East Africa, in West Africa, in West Africa, Central Africa, increased risk\r\n but West decrease in decrease in increased risk in West Africa,\r\n and East East Africa but East Africa but in West Africa, decrease in\r\n African West Africa West Africa decrease in East Africa,\r\n projections and East and East East Africa, but but West and\r\n are African African West and East East African\r\n uncertain. projections are projections are African projections are\r\n uncertain uncertain projections are uncertain\r\n uncertain\r\nAridity Increased Less change Area of Area of\r\n drying expected hyper-arid and hyper-arid and\r\n arid regions arid regions\r\n grows by grows by 10\r\n 3 percent percent. Total\r\n arid and\r\n semi-arid area\r\n increases by\r\n 5 percent\r\nSea-level rise above present About 21cm 30 cmf by 30 cm – 2040s 30 cm by 30 cm by 2040s\r\n(1985–2005) to 2009e 2040s 2040s\r\n 50 cm by 2070 50 cm – 2070 50 cm by 2060 50 cm by 2060\r\n 70 cm by 70 cm by 90 cm by 105 cm by\r\n 2080–2100 2080–2100 2080–2100 2080–2100\r\nSource: UNDP, 2016, 6.\r\na Refers to the global mean increase above pre-industrial temperatures.\r\nb Years indicate the decade during which warming levels are exceeded in a business-as-usual scenario exceeding 4°C by\r\nthe 2080s.\r\nc Years indicate the decade during which warming levels are exceeded with a 50 percent or greater change (generally at the start\r\n\r\nof the decade) in a business-as-usual scenario (RCP8.5 scenario). Exceedance with a likely chance (>66 percent) generally\r\noccurs in the second half of the decade cited.\r\nd Mean heat extremes across climate model projections are given. Illustrative uncertainty range across the models (minimum to\r\n\r\nmaximum) for 4°C warming are 70–100 percent for unusual extremes, and 30–100 percent for unprecedented extremes. The\r\nmaximum frequency of heat extreme occurrence in both cases is close to 100 percent, as indicator values saturate at this level.\r\ne Above 1880 estimated global mean sea level.\r\nf Add 20 cm to get an approximate estimate above the pre-industrial sea level.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 3\r\n\f BOX 1.1 Projected Climate Change Impacts in Sub-Saharan Africa\r\n With an increase of 4°C of global warming by the end of the century, sea levels are projected to rise up\r\n to 100 cm, droughts are expected to become increasingly likely in central and southern Africa, and\r\n never-before-experienced heat extremes are projected to affect increasing proportions of the region.\r\n Projections also show a growing probability of increased annual precipitation in the Horn\r\n of Africa and parts of east Africa, which is likely to be concentrated in heavy downpours and,\r\n thereby, increase the risk of flooding.\r\n Sub-Saharan Africa is particularly vulnerable to impacts on agriculture. Most of the region’s\r\n agricultural crop production is rain fed and therefore highly susceptible to shifts in precipitation\r\n and temperature. A net expansion of the overall area classified as arid or hyperarid is projected for\r\n the region as a whole, with likely adverse consequences for crop and livestock production.\r\n Savannah grasslands may be reduced in area, with potential impacts on livelihoods and pasto-\r\n ral systems. By the time global warming reaches 3°C, savannahs are projected to decrease from\r\n about a quarter at present to approximately one-seventh of the total land area, reducing the avail-\r\n ability of food for grazing animals.\r\n Source: UNDP 2016, 5–6.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFIGURE 1.3 Rainfall Anomalies in ESA\r\n\r\n October 2015–February 2016 Rainfall Anomalies October–December 2016 Rainfall Anomalies\r\n (Percentage of the 1982–2011 Average) (Percentage of the 1981–2010 Average)\r\n for Southern Africa for East Africa\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: FEWS NET 2016, 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n4 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\fFIGURE 1.4 Food Security IPC Crisis Phase 3 and Above (January 2017)\r\n\r\n\r\n 15\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Percentage of population in IPC phase 3+\r\nPopulation in IPC phase 3+ in millions\r\n 12\r\n\r\n 50%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 49%\r\n 48%\r\n 46%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 41%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 40%\r\n 38%\r\n 9\r\n\r\n\r\n 32%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 25%\r\n 22%\r\n 6\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 15%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 15%\r\n 12%\r\n 3\r\n 9%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 9%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 8%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n 8%\r\n 4%\r\n 0\r\n Yemen\r\n\r\n Ethiopia\r\n\r\n Afghanistan\r\n North Nigeria\r\n including northeast\r\n Nigeria\r\n\r\n Syria\r\n\r\n Malawi\r\n\r\n DRC\r\n\r\n South Sudan\r\n\r\n Sudan\r\n\r\n Zimbabwe\r\n\r\n Somalia\r\n\r\n Burundi\r\n\r\n CAR\r\n\r\n Mozambique\r\n\r\n Iraq\r\n\r\n Haiti\r\n\r\n Chad\r\n Southern\r\n Madagascar\r\nSource: FSIN 2017, 17.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n food security10 has been undermined by a combination of El Niño-induced\r\n drought conditions and conflict. Climate variability and change, along with\r\n weather extremes and conflict, have put pressures on food production, mar-\r\n keting, and humanitarian systems at a time when resources and capacity are\r\n already strained.\r\n Projections for early 2017 indicated an increase in the severity of food\r\n insecurity in these regions, particularly in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia. In\r\n Ethiopia, parts of the Somali Region are expected to remain in Emergency\r\n (IPC Phase 4) through January 2018—particularly Dollo, Korahe, and Afder\r\n zones—in the absence of humanitarian assistance. In Somalia, an estimated\r\n 2.5 to 3 million people will remain in need of humanitarian assistance through\r\n the end of 2017, with large areas expected to be in Emergency (IPC Phase 4)\r\n in the absence of assistance. According to the findings of the July 2017 Long\r\n\r\n\r\n 10 For consistency with the global conceptualization of food security, the 1996 World Food Summit defi-\r\n nition of food security is adopted as the following: “Food security at the individual, household, national,\r\n regional and global levels [is] when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient,\r\n safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”\r\n (FAO 1996). In this case, food security is the absence of, among others, food insecurity, hunger, starva-\r\n tion, and nutrition insecurity. Food security metrics, which also form the basis for EWSs, should at mini-\r\n mum consider understanding the hazards vulnerabilities, which affect food availability, access, utilization,\r\n or some combination of these metrics, considering social and cultural dimensions. For this assessment,\r\n a combination of food balance sheet approaches, physical and economic access, utilization (in terms of\r\n nutrition), and the social and cultural aspects (in terms of governance) are considered.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 5\r\n\fRains Assessment carried out by the Kenya Food Security Steering Group\r\n(KFSSG), 800,000 people are in Stressed (IPC Phase 2) and 2.6 million are in\r\nCrisis (IPC Phase 3) and in need of urgent humanitarian assistance. KFSSG\r\nindicated that the Stressed (IPC Phase 2) population is likely to move to Crisis\r\n(IPC Phase 3) over the next few months.\r\n The recent food crisis in ESA demonstrates that responses are still largely\r\nreactive rather than proactive. In 2016, the southern African region experi-\r\nenced a historic El Niño-induced drought, which triggered a food crisis that\r\nhas been described as the worst in 35 years. Approximately 40 million people\r\nwere in need of humanitarian assistance, and about 2.7 million children were\r\nsuffering from malnutrition in the subregion. There was a cereal production\r\nshortfall of approximately 9.3 million tons. As a result, the South African\r\nDevelopment Community (SADC) declared a state of regional disaster in\r\nJune 2016 and appealed for US$2.4 billion for the support of the humanitar-\r\nian needs of the affected population (SADC 2016a).\r\n The pressure on food security in Sub-Saharan Africa is likely to be further\r\nexacerbated by the recent threats of the fall armyworm (FAW) (Spodoptera\r\nfrugiperda) outbreak (figure 1.5), which may be related to warmer global tem-\r\nperatures over the past few years (CIMMYT 2017). Environmental and cli-\r\nmatic analyses of Africa show that the FAW is likely to build permanent and\r\nsignificant populations in west, central, and southern Africa and spread to\r\nother regions when weather or temperatures are favorable. Prediction mod-\r\nels so far present much uncertainty because scientific institutions are still\r\nlearning of the pest’s habits and environmental suitability on the continent\r\n(Abrahams et al. 2017).\r\n Notwithstanding the limited scientific knowledge on the FAW in Africa, in\r\n2016 the FAW was identified in 11 countries and was suspected in at least 14\r\nother countries. The economic impact of the FAW on maize, sorghum, rice,\r\nand sugarcane in Africa is estimated to be approximately US$13,383 million\r\n(table 1.1). This does not consider up to 80 other crops the insect has been\r\nknown to feed on, as well as subsequent seeds lost for future growing seasons.\r\nIf the FAW threat materializes, this will likely put further pressure on food\r\nsecurity.\r\n The observed and projected impacts of a changing climate on food security\r\nin the ESA countries, exacerbated by evolving threats, for example, pest infes-\r\ntations such as FAW, are projected to worsen existing social vulnerabilities,\r\nhighlighting the urgent need for improving the effectiveness and efficiency\r\nof early warning systems (EWSs). Inadequate EWSs and existing gaps in the\r\neffective flow of information across agencies and between levels of govern-\r\nment administration hinder the governments’ capacity to prepare for and\r\nrespond to food insecurity-related emergencies in ESA countries (Tadesse\r\net al. 2008). It is hypothesized that had there been effective EWS and adequate\r\ncommunication systems in place for the dissemination of actionable warn-\r\nings to the targeted audiences, the impact of the El Niño-induced drought\r\ncould have been less severe in the ESA region. A growing body of evidence\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n6 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\fFIGURE 1.5 Known and Suspected Distribution of FAW in Africa (April 2017)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: Abrahams et al. 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTABLE 1.1 Estimated Economic Impact of the FAW\r\n FAW affected crops Total production (million tons) Yield loss Estimated/predicted loss\r\n in all countries assuming no FAW (million tons) (US$, million)\r\n Maize 67.0 13.5 3,058\r\n Sorghum 25.5 1.9 827\r\n Rice, paddy 17.1 9.6 6,699\r\n Sugarcane 90.1 46.0 2,799\r\n Total 13,383\r\nSource: Abrahams et al. 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 7\r\n\fshows that effective EWSs not only save lives but also help protect livelihoods\r\nand enhance national development gains (United Nations 2006).\r\n Only a few cost-benefit analyses11 of EWSs have been carried out in devel-\r\noping countries. However, those so far completed provide strong evidence on\r\nthe benefits of investing in establishing and improving EWSs. For instance,\r\nHallegatte’s 2012 study, although focused on the hydrometeorological infor-\r\nmation production element of EWSs, without the social vulnerability informa-\r\ntion, postulates that if hydrometeorological and early warning (EW) capacities\r\nin all developing countries were upgraded to the level of developed country\r\nstandards, such investments would result in at least three potential benefits:\r\n• Avoidable asset losses of between US$300 million and US$2 billion per\r\n year because of natural hazards;\r\n• Avoidable human losses of about 23,000 per year, estimated between\r\n US$700 million and US$3.5 billion per year; and\r\n• Economic benefits between US$3 billion and US$30 billion per year with\r\n benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) between 4 and 35 with cobenefits\r\n Although the ESA countries and their regional bodies have made efforts in\r\ndeveloping EWSs,12 there is still a gap in investing in EWSs to enhance pre-\r\nventive, anticipatory, and absorptive capacity to food insecurity.\r\n Investing in EWSs, including cost-benefit analysis, is explored in further\r\ndetail in chapter 4.\r\n Similarly, a number of studies have been conducted on the status of food\r\nsecurity EWSs, for example, Tefft, McGuire, and Maunder (2006) and the\r\nUnited Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) (2011). Their\r\nassessment of food security EWSs in Sub-Saharan Africa took note of the well-\r\nknown challenges of effective food security EWSs that were also highlighted by\r\nnumerous studies related to an overly technical approach, externally imposed\r\nmethods and institutional models, and short-term project horizons. They,\r\nhowever, attribute the primary cause of lack of progress in EWSs to insuf-\r\nficient attention to, and inadequate investment in, developing institutional\r\nmechanisms and capacity for an effective, sustainable, and demand-driven\r\nEWS. The UNECA study that focused on enhancing the effectiveness of food\r\nsecurity information systems in the SADC region recommended the need for\r\nstrengthening as well as integrating food security information systems, harmo-\r\nnizing methodologies, strengthening partnerships, building capacity, creating\r\n\r\n\r\n11 Benefit-cost analysis or cost-benefit analysis is the quantification of the total social costs and social benefits\r\n\r\nof a policy or a project, usually in monetary terms. The costs and benefits concerned include not only direct\r\npecuniary costs and benefits, but also externalities, meaning external effects not traded in markets. These\r\ninclude external costs, for example, pollution, noise, and disturbance to wildlife, and external benefits such\r\nas reductions in traveling time or traffic accidents. Benefit-cost analysis is often used to compare alterna-\r\ntive proposals. If the total social benefits of an activity exceed total social costs, this can justify subsidizing\r\nprojects that are not privately profitable. If the total social costs exceed total social benefits, this can justify\r\npreventing projects even when these would be privately profitable (Black, Hashimzade, and Myles 2017).\r\n12 This includes the Regional Agriculture Trade Intelligence Network (RATIN) in east Africa and Regional\r\n\r\nVulnerability Assessment and Analysis (RVAA).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n8 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\ffinancial and institutional sustainability, and strengthening communication\r\nand dissemination, all of which are critical to an effective EWS. The findings\r\nof these studies are by no means less important. With increasing exposure\r\nand susceptibility of the agriculture systems to climate change and variabil-\r\nity, it is critical to regularly update the EWS knowledge base to appropriately\r\nrespond to the changing nature of risk. Besides, the 2014 Malabo Declaration\r\nof the African Union (AU), which recommitted the member states to adopt\r\nthe Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program process and to\r\nending hunger and take action of improving nutrition by 2025, recognizes the\r\nimportance of EWSs. The Malabo Declaration encourages the member states\r\nto commit budget lines within their national budgets for strengthening EWSs\r\nto facilitate advanced and proactive responses to disasters and emergencies\r\nwith food and nutrition security implications.13 More important, an increase\r\nin the availability of and access to multihazard EWSs and disaster risk infor-\r\nmation and assessments to the communities by 2030 is one of the key inter-\r\nventions needed for achieving the goals of the Sendai Framework for Disaster\r\nRisk Reduction (SFDRR) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This\r\nrecommendation has been further supported by the Yaoundé Declaration\r\non the Implementation of the Sendai Framework in Africa of 2015 and the\r\nMauritius Declaration on the Implementation of the Sendai Framework in\r\nAfrica of 2016.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFour Elements of an Effective People-Centered\r\nEarly Warning\r\nTo comprehensively analyze the data from the stakeholders’ consultations,\r\nthe four commonly cited elements of EWSs (Basher 2006; IFRC 2009) were\r\nadopted (figure 1.6). United Nations International Strategy for Disaster\r\nReduction (UNISDR) (2006) argues that a complete and effective EWS\r\ncomprises four interrelated elements, spanning knowledge of hazards and\r\nvulnerabilities to preparedness and capacity to respond: risk knowledge, a\r\nmonitoring and warning service, dissemination and communication, and\r\nresponse capability.\r\n\r\nRisk Knowledge\r\n\r\nUnderstanding risk and the risk drivers, as emphasized by the SFDRR, is\r\nthe first step toward building effective EWSs. Risks arise from the combi-\r\nnation of hazards, exposure, and vulnerabilities at a location. Assessments\r\nof risk require systematic, standardized collection and analysis of data and\r\nshould consider the dynamic nature of hazards and vulnerabilities that arise\r\nfrom processes such as urbanization, rural land-use change, environmental\r\n\r\n\r\n13More details on the Malabo Declaration can be found at https://www.au.int/web/sites/default/files\r\n/documents/31247-doc-malabo_declaration_2014_11_26.pdf.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 9\r\n\fFIGURE 1.6 Elements of an EWS\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n MONITORING &\r\n RISK KNOWLEDGE\r\n WARNING SERVICE\r\n Systematically collect data and Develop hazard monitoring and\r\n undertake risk assessments early warning services\r\n Are the hazards and the Are the right parameters\r\n vulnerabilities well known? being monitored?\r\n What are the patterns and Is there a sound scientific\r\n trends in these factors? basis for making forecasts?\r\n Are risk maps and data Can accurate and timely\r\n widely available? warnings be generated?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n DISSEMINATION &\r\n RESPONSE CAPABILITY\r\n COMMUNICATION\r\n Communicate risk information Build national and community\r\n and early warnings response capabilities\r\n Do warnings reach all Are response plans up\r\n of those at risk? to date and tested?\r\n Are the risks and Are local capacities and\r\n warnings understood? knowledge made use of?\r\n Is the warning information Are people prepared and\r\n clear and useable? ready to react to warnings?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: UNISDR 2006.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\ndegradation, and climate change. Risk assessments and maps help motivate\r\npeople, prioritize EWS needs, and guide preparations for disaster prevention\r\nand responses.\r\n\r\nMonitoring and Warning Service\r\n\r\nWarning services lie at the core of the system. There must be a sound scien-\r\ntific basis for predicting and forecasting hazards and a reliable forecasting\r\nand warning system that operates 24 hours a day. Continuous monitoring of\r\nhazard parameters and precursors is essential to generate accurate warnings\r\non time. Warning services for different hazards should be coordinated where\r\npossible to gain the benefit of shared institutional, procedural, and commu-\r\nnications networks.\r\n\r\nDisseminaƟon and CommunicaƟon\r\n\r\nWarnings must reach those at risk. Clear messages containing simple, useful\r\ninformation are critical to enable proper responses that will help safeguard\r\nlives and livelihoods. Regional-, national-, and community-level communi-\r\ncation systems must be identified beforehand and appropriate authoritative\r\nvoices established. The use of multiple communication channels is necessary\r\nto ensure as many people as possible are warned, to avoid failure of any one\r\nchannel, and to reinforce the warning message.\r\n\r\n10 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\fResponse Capability\r\n\r\nIt is essential that communities understand their risks, respect the warning ser-\r\nvice, and know how to react. Education and preparedness programs play a key\r\nrole. It is also essential that disaster management plans are in place, well practiced,\r\nand tested. The community should be well informed on options for safe behavior,\r\navailable escape routes, and how best to avoid damage and loss to property.\r\n Best practice EWSs also have strong interlinks and effective communica-\r\ntion channels between all the elements. The four elements of EWSs need to\r\nbe coordinated across many agencies at national to local levels for the system\r\nto work. Failure in one element or lack of coordination across them could\r\nlead to the failure of the entire system. The issuance of warnings is a national\r\nresponsibility; thus, roles and responsibilities of various public and private\r\nsector stakeholders for implementation of an EWS should be clarified and\r\nreflected in the national to local regulatory frameworks, planning, budgetary,\r\ncoordination, and operational mechanisms.\r\n\r\n\r\nPurpose and Scope of the Report\r\nThis report presents the findings and recommendations of the regional\r\nassessment of the EWSs for enhancing food security in ESA. The objective\r\nof the assignment was to assess “bottlenecks” and opportunities for improv-\r\ning food security EWSs to enhance resilience in ESA, which comprises 25\r\ncountries and 5 African Union Regional Economic Communities (RECs).14\r\nEWS producers and users, drawn from governmental and nongovernmental\r\nagencies as well as local communities, were consulted in 7 out of 25 countries\r\nin eastern (includes members of the East African Community [EAC] and\r\nIntergovernmental Authority for Development [IGAD]) and southern Africa\r\n(includes member states from the SADC and Indian Ocean Commission\r\n[IOC]). All members of these RECs are also members of the Common Market\r\nfor East and Southern Africa (COMESA). The country selection criterion was\r\nbased on the level of disaster risk, according to the Index for Risk Management\r\n(INFORM) classification.15 The INFORM index is a measure based on an\r\nassessment of the countries’ hazard exposure, vulnerability, lack of coping\r\ncapacity, and the level of development using the Human Development Index\r\n(HDI) (table 1.2). This assessment also drew on lessons learned from initia-\r\ntives across the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region, par-\r\nticularly in relation to EWS policies, investments, and technical assistance.\r\n For this purpose, the following activities were undertaken:\r\n• Map the EWS methods and assess their suitability and the extent to which\r\n the technical skills and capacity and operating models of regional and\r\n\r\n\r\n14 There are seven RECs in ESA. Of these, five are recognized by the AU: EAC, SADC, IGAD, COMESA,\r\nand Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS). In addition, there are two RECs that are\r\nnot recognized by the AU: Southern African Customs Union (SACU) and IOC.\r\n15 Index for Risk Management, INFORM, available at http://www.inform-index.org/.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 11\r\n\fTABLE 1.2 Participating Countries in the Assessment\r\n Reason for selection Regional membership\r\nCountry HDI Risk class EAC COMESA IGAD IOC SADC\r\nEthiopia Low High X X X\r\nKenya Medium High X X X\r\nMalawi Low Medium X X\r\nMadagascar Low Very high X X X\r\nMozambique Low High X X\r\nZambia Medium Medium X X\r\nZimbabwe Low Medium X X\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n national organizations address user needs and adverse weather (El Niño)\r\n preparedness.\r\n• Evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of existing EWSs in terms of\r\n grain markets, cross-border trade, commodity price monitoring, and\r\n seasonal-scale climate events.\r\n• Evaluate EWS policies and their alignment to meeting the needs of\r\n various users.\r\n• Evaluate the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of EWSs in the two\r\n subregions.\r\n The remainder of this report is structured into four major thematic chapters:\r\n• Chapter 2 maps out the EWS methods, the technical skills and capacity\r\n for weather and seasonal forecasting, weather observation, crop forecast-\r\n ing, vulnerability assessments, and grain, market, price, and commodity\r\n monitoring at the national and regional levels. The chapter assesses the\r\n suitability, effectiveness, and efficiency, as well as the strengths and weak-\r\n nesses and sustainability of these methods in addressing the user needs\r\n and their importance in informing preparedness and response.\r\n• Chapter 3 evaluates the performance of EWSs in meeting users’ needs\r\n using the elements of the people-centered framework (figure 1.6), namely,\r\n the production of risk information, risk monitoring and warning service,\r\n early warning (EW) communication and dissemination, response capa-\r\n bility, and EW governance at both the national and regional levels. This\r\n includes the assessment of the ability and capacity of the national meteo-\r\n rological and hydrological services (NMHSs), IGAD Climate Prediction\r\n and Applications Centre (ICPAC), the SADC Climate Services Centre\r\n (CSC), the involvement of the private sector, and resource mobilization\r\n to ensure the sustainability of EW programs.\r\n• Chapter 4 discusses the rationale for investing in food security EWSs\r\n and draws some examples of such investment from World Bank projects.\r\n Cost-effectiveness approaches and operating models and public-private\r\n partnerships (PPPs) are explored for future guidance that informs the\r\n food security EWSs in ESA.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n12 CHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning\r\n\f• Chapter 5 provides selected best practices drawn from within and outside\r\n the region. The highlights include the potential role of the private sec-\r\n tor in providing climate information services; the ASEAN Food Security\r\n Information System (AFSIS); the application of climate and vulnerabil-\r\n ity information in local planning, which also provides opportunities to\r\n integrate indigenous EW information; and the use of climate information\r\n forums to help improve the quality of EW information and services. The\r\n chapter concludes by providing recommendations to guide future policy\r\n approaches and investments in food security EWS at both the national\r\n and regional levels in ESA.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 1—The Imperative of Early Warning 13\r\n\f\fCHAPTER 2\r\nEarly Warning Methods, Technical\r\nSkills, and Capacity\r\n\r\n\r\nIntroduction\r\nRegional and national food security EWS in ESA are supported by a diversity\r\nof internationally recognized methodologies (table 2.1). These methodolo-\r\ngies and approaches are generally consistent with the Global Information and\r\nEarly Warning System on Food and Agriculture (GIEWS) of the Food and\r\nAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and Humanitarian\r\nEarly Warning Service (HEWS) developed by the World Food Programme\r\n(WFP). The FAO-GIEWS, developed in the 1970s following the world food\r\ncrisis, provides information on countries facing food insecurity through\r\nmonthly briefing reports on crop and food prospects, including drought\r\ninformation, together with an interactive map of countries in crisis. The ques-\r\ntions addressed include the following:\r\n• What EW methods are used to assess the risk to food insecurity?\r\n• Are technical skills and capacities adequate and suitable to address user\r\n needs as well as the potential to reduce the adverse impact of weather-\r\n related hazards?\r\n• To what extent are the EW methods for grain markets, commodity price,\r\n and cross-border trade effective and efficient?\r\n• Are the methods cost effective and sustainable?\r\n In response to these questions, the common EW methods in the ESA\r\ncountries can be divided into two broad categories. First are those related to\r\nunderstanding the nature of the hazard, such as an in situ observation system\r\nfor weather and climate data, hydrological data (runoff data), and topological\r\ndata (for example, elevation database to link runoff forecast with flood exten-\r\nsion). These data are obtained from two main sources: weather stations and\r\nweather satellites. Usually owned and run by the NMHSs, weather stations\r\nrecord a range of physical measurements of the environment and produce\r\naccurate, fine-scale data that are useful for informing and calibrating weather\r\nprediction models. Most datasets are generated by weather satellites, pro-\r\nviding nowcasting16 information on rain, lightning, temperature, and wind\r\nand are freely available to the NMHSs on online platforms such as SAT2420.\r\n\r\n\r\n16 Nowcasting is the detailed description of the current weather along with forecasts obtained by extrapola-\r\ntion for 0 to 6 hours in the future (WMO 1992).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 15\r\n\f TABLE 2.1 Common Methods for Generating Risk Information for an EWS\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n16\r\n Theme Purpose Methods Indicators Coverage/users Impact Challenges\r\n Meteorology (drought, Weather and climate Weather prediction Average rainfall, National and Inform planting Resource constraints,\r\n floods, thunderstorms, forecasting models, satellite data, and average temperature, regional levels; and harvest dates, weak observation network,\r\n and so on) global circulation and climate forecasts commercial and off-farm activities, downscaling forecasts to\r\n subsistence and disaster high resolution, and\r\n producers (scenario) dissemination language\r\n preparedness not tailored to users\r\n plans\r\n Hydrology (water) Hydrological Collection of river flow and Annual rainfall pattern, National and Inform warning on Resource constraints,\r\n information and dam levels dam monthly capacity, regional levels; energy production weak observation network,\r\n information on dam and water supply commercial and and water and weak transboundary\r\n capacities subsistence management agreements\r\n producers\r\n Pest infestations (for Information on pest Crop monitoring and Climate forecasts and National level; Informs Limited information on the\r\n example, locusts and infestations surveillance assessment and surveys leaf tissue commercial and contingency plans FAW, weak institutional\r\n the FAW) subsistence and pesticide capacity, resources\r\n producers stockpiles constraints, and weak\r\n transboundary agreements\r\n Agriculture production Provides information on Crop forecasts (planting Crop/livestock National and Update food Human resource and\r\n (cereal and livestock) crop and livestock and preharvest surveys) production, yields regional levels; balance sheets financial constraints,\r\n estimates and cereal and postharvest surveys estimates, grain prices, commercial and livestock particularly at regional\r\n balance sheets import and export farmers, grain levels and trigger level and focus biased\r\n parity prices silo owners, imports and toward crops and less on\r\n millers and exports livestock\r\n processors, and\r\n exporters/\r\n importers\r\n Markets (cereal and To regularly collect Market surveys and Commodity/product National and Triggers imports No clear communication\r\n livestock) market information for analysis prices, agriculture regional levels and exports and between farmers’ unions,\r\n monitoring and decision input costs, and food destocking marketing authorities,\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n making price/trade monitoring millers, and traders\r\n Vulnerability (social, To provide information Vulnerability assessment Agricultural production, VAA mostly Triggers Harmonization of VAA\r\n economic, health, and on vulnerability to food and analysis and IPC climate/weather used in southern interventions to methodology, training on\r\n nutrition; food insecurity and a information, Africa while the prevent food the IPC, and reliance on\r\n availability, access, and broader range of socioeconomic, IPC is common insecurity and external resources\r\n utilization) vulnerabilities anthropometry, and in east Africa; famine (for\r\n market prices data users—national example, safety\r\n and regional net programs and\r\n agencies humanitarian aid)\r\n\fFIGURE 2.1 Characteristic Spatial Scales of Weather Phenomena\r\n\r\n\r\n PAST CLIMATE WEATHER FUTURE CLIMATE\r\n\r\n\r\n Global scale\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Medium-range weather forecasting\r\n Short-range weather forecasting\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Long-range weather forecasting\r\n10 000 km\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Decadal climate prediction\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Climate change crojection\r\n Continental/\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Seasonal to interannual\r\n regional\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n climate prediction\r\n “Normal” climate\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Current weather\r\n Recent weather\r\n Recent climate\r\n scale\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Nowcasting\r\n 1 000 km\r\n Synoptic\r\n scale\r\n 100 km\r\n\r\n Mesoscale\r\n 10 km\r\n\r\n Local scale\r\n 1 km\r\n Last Last Last Last Next Next Next Next Next Next\r\n Yesterday Now Tomorrow\r\n decade year month week week month year decade century millennium\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Other data sources include methods focused on vulnerabilities that incorpo-\r\n rate socioeconomic information such as population density, poverty maps,\r\n access to markets, and commodity prices.\r\n Relevant datasets are usually obtained using generally accepted methodol-\r\n ogies from the social sciences for assessing targeted populations’ vulnerability\r\n and resilience to natural hazards. Altogether, these hazard and vulnerability\r\n assessment methods constitute the first step in the design of an effective food\r\n security information and EW system.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Seasonal Climate and Weather Forecasting17\r\n Methods\r\n Providing information and advice on the past, present, and future state of the\r\n atmosphere is a central role of the NMHSs, supported by global and regional\r\n climate forecasting and prediction centers. This includes information on\r\n temperature, rainfall, wind, cloudiness, and other atmospheric variables and\r\n their influence on weather- and climate-sensitive activities and communities.\r\n The physical phenomena responsible for the weather and climate conditions\r\n are manifested at particular spatial and temporal scales (figure 2.1), which\r\n have important implications on observability, predictability, and service\r\n design. The Global Data Processing and Forecasting System (GDPFS) of the\r\n World Meteorological Organization (WMO) supports the NMHSs and the\r\n regional climate centers mainly through global numerical weather prediction\r\n (box 2.1). The GDPFS prepares and makes available meteorological analyses\r\n\r\n 17 A forecast is a statement of expected meteorological (or hydrological) conditions for a specific period and\r\n\r\n for a specific area or portion of air space (WMO 1992).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 17\r\n\f BOX 2.1 Technical Insight: Functions of the GDPFS\r\n The real-time functions of the GDPFS include:\r\n\r\n • Preprocessing of data (such as retrieval, quality control, decoding, and sorting of data stored\r\n in a database for use in preparing output products);\r\n • Preparing analyses of the three-dimensional structure of the atmosphere with up-to-global\r\n coverage;\r\n • Preparing forecast products (fields of basic and derived atmospheric parameters) with up-to-\r\n global coverage;\r\n • Preparing ensemble prediction system products;\r\n • Preparing specialized products (such as limited-area, very fine mesh short-, medium-,\r\n extended-, and long-range forecasts and tailored products for marine, aviation, environmen-\r\n tal quality monitoring, and other purposes);\r\n • Monitoring observational data quality; and\r\n • Postprocessing numerical weather prediction data using workstation and personal com-\r\n puter–based systems to produce tailored value-added products and to generate weather and\r\n climate forecasts directly from model output.\r\n\r\n The non-real-time functions of the GDPFS include:\r\n\r\n • Preparing special products for climate-related diagnosis (that is, 10-day or 30-day means,\r\n summaries, frequencies, and anomalies) on a global or regional scale;\r\n • Comparing analysis and forecast products; monitoring observational data quality; and ver-\r\n ifying the accuracy of prepared forecast fields, diagnostic studies, and numerical weather\r\n prediction model development;\r\n • Storing long-term Global Observing System data and GDPFS products, as well as verifying\r\n results for operational and research use;\r\n • Maintaining a continuously updated catalogue of data and products stored in the system;\r\n • Exchanging ad hoc information through distributed databases between GDPFS centers; and\r\n • Conducting workshops and seminars on the preparation and use of GDPFS output products.\r\n Source: Rogers and Tsirkunov 2013, 38.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nand forecasting products, which are generated at a few specialized centers\r\n(for example, Pretoria, Melbourne, Moscow, and Washington, DC). With the\r\ncomputing power and technical staff to run these models, in many centers, the\r\nmodels now run at such high spatial resolution (better than 15 km horizontal\r\nresolution) that they can be used directly, or downscaled, by the NMHSs in\r\ntheir own forecast production systems.\r\n Seasonal forecasting is well developed in ESA. The Greater Horn of Africa\r\nClimate Outlook Forum (GHACOF) in eastern Africa and the Southern\r\nAfrican Regional Climate Outlook Forum (SARCOF) in southern Africa are\r\namong the renowned global institutions that provide seasonal climate ser-\r\nvices and EW information (see appendix A). GHACOF and SARCOF bring\r\ntogether representatives of national and regional meteorological services and\r\n\r\n\r\n18 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fusers to construct a consensus forecast for the region each year. This involves\r\nexpressing rainfall occurrence for the coming season as probabilities of below\r\nnormal, normal, and above normal. The positive impact of both GHACOF\r\nand SARCOF on food security is recognized, particularly in informing agri-\r\nculture production, processing, and marketing (box 2.2). Through the sea-\r\nsonal forecasts, subsistence farmers in Zimbabwe are able to make decisions\r\non the type of crop to plant, put in place some measures in dam manage-\r\nment, and also plan for the malaria season. In Mozambique, the national con-\r\ntingency plan for floods, drought, cyclones, and thunderstorms is based on\r\nSARCOF, which is downscaled to the national context.\r\n Some of the challenges GHACOF and SARCOF face include:\r\n• Limited capacity to downscale seasonal forecasts to high resolution;\r\n• Seasonal climate forecasts information not packaged according to user\r\n needs; and\r\n• Resource constraints.\r\n First, providing forecast information that is specific to particular users’\r\nneeds, as shown in box 2.1, helps users to make appropriate decisions and\r\ntake appropriate actions. Improvements are still required in the way the cli-\r\nmate information is packaged and delivered to rural people or nontechnical\r\npeople, such as pastoral communities, who tend to rely on their traditional\r\nknowledge and systems of weather forecasting rather than that of the govern-\r\nment (see box 2.2). Thus, there is still a need across most ESA countries to\r\ntransform the technical information into actionable recommendations that\r\nare provided in a timely and a culturally sensitive manner to the targeted audi-\r\nences. Reaching the targeted communities along the “last mile” of an end-to-\r\nend EWS shall be the goal of all relevant stakeholders. Effective “end-to-end”\r\nearly warning systems include four interrelated key elements: (1) disaster risk\r\nknowledge based on the systematic collection of data and disaster risk assess-\r\nments; (2) detection, monitoring, analysis, and forecasting of the hazards and\r\npossible consequences; (3) dissemination and communication, by an official\r\nsource, of authoritative, timely, accurate, and actionable warnings and asso-\r\nciated information on likelihood and impact; and (4) preparedness at all lev-\r\nels to respond to the warnings received. These four interrelated components\r\nneed to be coordinated within and across sectors and multiple levels for the\r\nsystem to work effectively and to include a feedback mechanism for continu-\r\nous improvement. Failure in one component or a lack of coordination across\r\nthem could lead to the failure of the whole system.\r\n Second, while replicating GHACOF and SARCOF seasonal forecasts to\r\nnational contexts has become institutionalized, there is limited technical\r\ncapacity to downscaling the seasonal forecasts to local levels to support local\r\ndecision making. However, even if the climate forecasts are downscaled to a\r\nhigh resolution there is no guarantee that the predictions will be more precise,\r\nbecause the climate forecasts are based on probabilities. Transforming techni-\r\ncal information, including making sense of what the probability of the materi-\r\nalization of an event really means shall be factored in in the communications\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 19\r\n\f BOX 2.2 ICPAC Recommends Early Action Following GHACOF’s\r\n Rainfall Outlook for March–May 2017\r\n According to the March, April, and May (MAM) 2017 rainfall outlook, the average onset of rains\r\n over the equatorial sector was predicted for the second week of March and April 2017 while the\r\n southern sector was already in its seasonal rains. Several dry spells were to be experienced in the\r\n season. The mean cessation dates was forecast to be in the third and fourth week of May 2017.\r\n These could, however, change if tropical cyclones developed along the western Indian Ocean.\r\n The MAM 2017 rainfall forecast had implication for droughts, floods, and other associated haz-\r\n ards such as natural resource–based conflicts and disease outbreak for both human and livestock\r\n populations over the Greater Horn of Africa. The MAM 2017 seasonal forecast reinforced the\r\n existing risk and vulnerability that would lead to serious negative impacts if not attended to. The\r\n following mitigation measures were, therefore, recommended.\r\n Mitigation measures for Disaster Risk Management (DRM):\r\n • Strengthen regional and national coordination mechanisms.\r\n • Strengthen mitigation and response interventions.\r\n • Strengthen communication and advocacy campaign.\r\n Agriculture and Food Security Sector:\r\n • Ensure diversification of livelihoods.\r\n • Plant early maturing and drought-tolerant crops.\r\n • Maximize crop production during good rains to boost production volumes.\r\n • Increase agronomy and establish plantation farms.\r\n • Avoid planting crops in flood- and landslide-prone zones.\r\n Water Sector:\r\n • Ministries of water or water agencies to carry out work related to closing open river banks/\r\n dykes and strengthening weak ones.\r\n • Reservoir management authorities encouraged to carry out effective reservoir management\r\n suitable for above-normal inflows.\r\n • Ministries of water or water agencies to intensify rainwater harvesting.\r\n For a zone that was forecast to receive near-normal to below-normal rainfall, it was advisable that\r\n • Ministries of water or water agencies intensify rainwater harvesting and identify and main-\r\n tain strategic borehole for pastoralists;\r\n • Reservoir management authorities carry out effective reservoir management suitable for\r\n below-normal inflows;\r\n • Municipal water management authorities take water conservation and demand management\r\n actions; and\r\n • DRM institutions and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) carry out conflict manage-\r\n ment in known hot spots in this zone.\r\n Livestock Sector should focus on the following:\r\n • Desilting of water pans\r\n • Production and storage of fodder\r\n • Livestock vaccination\r\n • Restoration and reseeding of degraded lands\r\n • Awareness campaign\r\n • Livestock insurance\r\n Source: ICPAC 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n20\r\n\fstrategy when interacting with particular audiences, including government\r\nnontechnical authorities, and the members of local communities, who rely on\r\ntheir traditional knowledge to understand and adapt to their environment.\r\n Third, understaffing needs to be addressed, especially in the CSC so that\r\nit can sustain its mandate, including SARCOF. The stakeholders’ consulta-\r\ntion reveals that the CSC needs about 10 staff in administration, computing,\r\ndata management, climate science and specialized applications, research and\r\ndevelopment, and generation and dissemination of products.\r\n Although the Monitoring for Environment and Security in Africa (MESA)\r\nproject funded by the European Union (EU) has enhanced access to reliable,\r\ntimely, and accurate land, marine, and climate data and information in ESA\r\nby providing high-speed computers, these would need to be complemented\r\nby data centers, with an appropriate data storage capacity. Besides challenges\r\nin downscaling climate forecasts to high resolution, most ESA countries also\r\nhave limited capacity to merge and formulate weather data into final products,\r\nweak observation network density (table 2.2), lack of equipment to observe\r\nconvective weather, such as Doppler radars, and weak human resource capac-\r\nity to support operations.\r\n Although adequate instrumentation is one important component for effec-\r\ntive monitoring and forecasting, the technical and financial resources needed\r\nfor operations and maintenance are critical for ensuring the sustainability of\r\nthe investments in hydromet modernization.\r\n The majority of countries in ESA are operating far below the WMO’s rec-\r\nommended minimum density of weather and hydro-observation stations\r\nshown in table 2.3.\r\n The need to expand the observational networks has increased the demand\r\nand preference for AWSs and telemetric gauging stations in the ESA coun-\r\ntries. However, most of the NMHS staff consulted as part of this study reiter-\r\nated their concerns regarding existing technical and human capacity within\r\ntheir organizations, particularly the need for additional training, as well as\r\ntaking into consideration the advantages and disadvantages of using AWSs in\r\nlow capacity environments (see table 2.4).\r\n The Trans-African Hydro-Meteorological Observatory (TAHMO) proj-\r\nect provides an opportunity to improve Sub-Saharan Africa’s capacity for\r\nhydrometeorological monitoring. In particular, the TAHMO project aims\r\nto build a dense network of hydrometeorological monitoring stations—one\r\nevery 30 km—in Sub-Saharan Africa by installing 20,000 stations on school\r\ngrounds. TAHMO is currently collaborating with the Kenya Meteorological\r\nService (KMS) to develop a network of AWSs in schools in Kenya. To pro-\r\nmote the sustainability of the project, the use and maintenance of the weather\r\nstations will be integrated into the educational curriculum. These objectives\r\nalign with the mission of KMS to\r\n• Facilitate accessible meteorological information and services; and\r\n• Infuse scientific knowledge to foster socioeconomic growth and\r\n development.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 21\r\n\f TABLE 2.2 Hydrometeorological Observation Network Density\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n22\r\n Country Technical capacity Enabling policy environment Financial capacity\r\n Ethiopia 1,200 meteorological stations; 2,000–5,000 Limited Limited government funding to cover costs;\r\n weather stations; 25 automatic weather stations charging for services is not permitted by law.\r\n (AWSs); upper air observation unit; and AWSs at\r\n airports\r\n Kenya 39 synoptic stations, 14 agrometeorological Mandate of Kenya Meteorological Department There is limited funding to cover costs; charging\r\n stations, 72 AWSs; 3 airport weather observation revised 2007 and enabled for services is required by law.\r\n systems; 17 hydrometeorological AWSs; about\r\n 1,000 rainfall stations; 1 upper air station; and 1\r\n global atmospheric watch\r\n Madagascar 19 active stations operated by the Directorate- Decree No. 2002-803 of August 7, 2002, provides There is limited government funding to meet\r\n General for Meteorology (DGM) and 4 stations for the organization of the Ministry of Transport human resources, equipment, and transport\r\n operated by the Agency for Arial Navigation and Meteorology. expenses.\r\n Safety in Africa and Madagascar (ASECNA);a 250\r\n more technicians required.\r\n Malawi 12 out of 28 districts need weather stations; 21 The enabling environment has limited integration There is limited government funding.\r\n main meteorological stations are spread across of meteorology in national development plans.\r\n the remaining 16 districts; 63 AWSs\r\n Mozambique 90 stations and needs 150 more stations; has 2 Regulation No. 6 of 2010 enables the Institute of There is limited government funding; charging for\r\n radars but not functioning effectively; needs 7 Meteorological Services to implement cost services, for example, aviation and private\r\n radars; 300 hydrometeorological networks need recovery measures. companies; lack of enforcement on timely\r\n upgrading to telemetric; lack of payments.\r\n agrometeorological professionals\r\n Tanzania 26 operational surface synoptic stations; 5 AWSs; There is a 5-year plan for the enhancement of Funding is primarily provided by the government,\r\n 16 operational agrometeorological stations; 60 meteorological services for sustainable, but the NMHS does derive nominal income from\r\n operational meteorological stations; 500 socioeconomic development in Tanzania. the aviation sector.\r\n operational weather stations; 1 upper air station;\r\n limited professional staff\r\n Zambia Zambia has a network of 108 weather stations (40 National Meteorology Policy (2013) and the The total budget of Zambia Meteorological\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n manual and 68 automatic). These weather stations Meteorological Bill (2015) allow sustainability of Department (ZMD) is ~US$5,000, with less than\r\n are concentrated in 45 out of 107 districts; lack of the NMHS through cost recovery on some 10 percent of this funding derived from NGOs.\r\n professional staff selected products and services.\r\n Zimbabwe 65 meteorological stations out of 150 required; 2 The Met Services Act 8 of 2003 enables the The Met Services Department has limited\r\n radars out of 4; >2,300 rain gauges needed provision of public services and cost recovery on government funding.\r\n some products.\r\n Note: a. ASECNA is an air traffic control agency based in Dakar, Senegal. It operates in the following 17 African countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros,\r\n Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, the Republic of Congo, Senegal, and Togo.\r\n\fTABLE 2.3 WMO-Recommended Minimum Densities of Stations (Area in km2 per Station)\r\n Precipitation\r\n Water\r\n Physiographic unit Non-lending Recording Evaporation Streamflow Sediments quality\r\n Coastal 900 9,000 50,000 2,750 18,300 55,000\r\n Mountains 250 2,500 50,000 1,000 6,700 20,000\r\n Interior plains 575 5,750 5,000 1,875 12,500 37,500\r\n Hilly/undulating 575 5,750 50,000 1,875 12,500 47,500\r\n Small islands 25 250 50,000 300 2,000 6,000\r\n Urban areas - 10–20 - - - -\r\n Polar/arid 10,000 100,000 100,000 20,000 200,000 200,000\r\nSource: WMO 2012b.\r\n\r\n\r\nTABLE 2.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of AWSs\r\n Advantages Disadvantages\r\n Standardization of observations, both in time and There is a high initial cost of instrumentation and\r\n quality associated equipment and then ongoing costs of\r\n operation, such as for maintenance, electrical power,\r\n Greater reliability: real-time continuous measuring of\r\n communications, and security.\r\n parameters on a 24/7 basis\r\n It is not possible to observe all desirable parameters\r\n Improved accuracy (eliminates reading errors and\r\n automatically; at key locations, it may be necessary to\r\n subjectivity)\r\n augment automatic observations with a human\r\n Collection of data in a greater volume, for example, observer to obtain information such as cloud coverage\r\n 1-minute or 5-minute data as opposed to hourly or and cloud types.\r\n once per day\r\n If solar panels are used to power a station, this may\r\n Automatic adjustment of sampling intervals of different limit the amount and type of instrumentation, local\r\n parameters in response to changing weather events computing, and telecommunication equipment that\r\n Automatic quality control/quality assurance during can be used.\r\n collection and reporting stages, including automatic Final quality control is best carried out by a staff of\r\n alerts to users and maintenance personnel when trained operators working on a 24/7 basis.\r\n errors are detected\r\n The high volume of data generated requires the\r\n Automatic message generation and transmission, development of a data archival system that can be\r\n including alerts when critical thresholds are crossed costly and will require periodic forward migration as\r\n Automatic data archiving software changes.\r\n\r\n Access to data, both real-time and archived, locally or Routine preventive and as-required corrective\r\n remotely maintenance, together with periodic sensor\r\n calibrations, requires a staff of trained maintenance\r\n Collection of data in remote, harsh, or dangerous\r\n technicians.\r\n climates\r\nSource: World Bank 2015, 20–21.\r\n\r\n\r\n For these climate and weather forecasting methods to deliver timely, accu-\r\n rate, and reliable warnings, there is a need to invest in\r\n • Strengthening national capacity to downscale seasonal forecasts beyond\r\n national levels to the local levels because of limited equipment and tech-\r\n nical capacity;\r\n • Developing capacity to ensure the EWS products are packaged according\r\n to user needs;\r\n • Strengthening data collection systems and network coverage of the\r\n hydrometeorological observation stations; and\r\n • Strengthening data sharing arrangements because sectors still work in\r\n silos.\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 23\r\n\f It is worth noticing that although TAHMO has a great potential for making\r\na substantial contribution to ongoing efforts for improving hydromet modern-\r\nization across regions that are confronted with inadequate coverage of monitor-\r\ning stations, there are also potential risks to the entire hydromet modernization\r\nenterprise at the national level. Particularly, there is the risk that, in the mid-\r\nand long terms, TAHMO and other similarly well-intentioned hydromet\r\ninstrumentation efforts, financed by nongovernmental sources, could become\r\nanother disincentive to the national governments for committing to provide\r\nadequate support to their own NMHS. Thus, an unintended consequence of\r\nsuch initiatives could potentially result in less government support, reflected\r\nin inadequate budget allocation, to their own specialized agencies. This situa-\r\ntion would, in turn, exacerbate the vicious cycle of underperforming NMHSs\r\nbecause of lack of adequate funding that leads to even less government sup-\r\nport, compelling governments to rely more on nongovernmental sources for\r\nhydromet information needs to support decision-making processes. In addi-\r\ntion, the proliferation of monitoring weather stations does not necessarily\r\ncontribute toward ensuring their compatibility with national and international\r\nmonitoring efforts (that is, it may not be compatible with WMO’s standards and\r\nprocedures), which could undermine ongoing efforts for improving regional\r\nweather and climate monitoring and forecasting capabilities.\r\n\r\n\r\nCrop Forecasting and Monitoring Methods\r\nIn most ESA countries, crop production estimates are well established in\r\nagriculture ministries and supported by the FAO’s GIEWS, where countries\r\ncan access various tools and support (box 2.3). However, delays in regular\r\ncrop production forecast18 updates render them less useful as an EWS tool.\r\nIdeally, observations and measurements of crops (on parameters including\r\narea planted, percentage of damage from pests, and weed infestations) should\r\nbe made throughout the crop-growing season on a monthly basis.\r\n Some stakeholders who were interviewed attributed the weaknesses in\r\nproducing timely updates of crop production forecasts to at least three chal-\r\nlenges. First, the paper-based data collection systems were deemed inefficient\r\nin providing real-time or near-real-time data for effective decision making.\r\nAlthough migrating to mobile technology-based systems is gaining momen-\r\ntum across the ESA countries, Internet costs to upload the data to the system\r\nare still prohibitive. Second, there are delays in conducting postharvest sur-\r\nveys; for example, in southern Africa, these are conducted in about June or\r\nJuly with the report available usually in August, which in most cases is late\r\nfor decision making. Third, limited funding for field logistics means there is\r\ninadequate follow-up for data quality assurance.\r\n With respect to pest infestations and the FAW, there are gaps in surveillance\r\nsystems, contingency plans, and management approaches (box 2.4).\r\n\r\n18 Crop production forecasts fall into three categories: soon after planting (early forecasts), during the\r\n\r\ngrowing season (mid-season forecasts), and some weeks before harvesting (final forecasts).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n24 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fBOX 2.3 Technical Insights of GIEWS\r\nThe FAO’s GIEWS provides information on countries facing food insecurity through various\r\ntools, including the following:\r\nCrop Prospects and Food Situation. This is published four times a year by the Trade and Markets\r\nDivision of the FAO under GIEWS and focuses on developments affecting the food situation\r\nof developing countries and in particular the Low-Income Food-Deficit Countries. The report\r\nprovides a review of the food situation by geographic region, a section dedicated to the Low-\r\nIncome Food-Deficit Countries, and a list of countries requiring external assistance for food. It\r\nalso includes a global cereal supply and demand overview to complement the biannual analysis in\r\nthe Food Outlook publication.\r\nFood Outlook. This is a biannual publication (May/June and November/December) focusing\r\non developments affecting global food and feed markets. It provides comprehensive assessments\r\nand forecasts on a commodity-by-commodity basis and  maintains a close synergy with Crop\r\nProspects and Food Situation.\r\nThe Food Price Monitoring and Analysis (FPMA) tool. Since 2009 when the FPMA tool went\r\nonline, the database includes over 1,400 monthly domestic retail and/or wholesale price series of\r\nmajor foods consumed in 94 countries and weekly/monthly prices for 85 internationally traded\r\nfoods. The FPMA tool provides easy access to the data, allowing users to do the following: quickly\r\nbrowse and analyze trends of single price series; create comparisons between countries/markets/\r\ncommodities; and download charts, data, and basic statistics such as maximum and minimum\r\nlevels, averages, percentage changes, and standard deviations over different periods.\r\nSpecial Alerts. These short reports describe an alarming food security situation that is developing in\r\ncountries or subregions. They also alert the international community on measures to be taken.\r\nSpecial Reports. These short reports describe the food supply and agricultural situation in coun-\r\ntries or subregions experiencing particular food supply difficulties. They also alert the interna-\r\ntional community on measures to be taken. Special Reports are often the result of Crop and Food\r\nSecurity Assessment Missions (CFSAMs) or rapid evaluation missions.\r\nCountry Briefs. These provide up-to-date information on the food security situation of mon-\r\nitored countries, including information on the current agricultural season and the harvest\r\nprospects for the main staple food crops and livestock situation. In addition, the briefs provide\r\nestimates and forecasts of cereal production and imports together with food price and policy\r\ndevelopments. Other topical information may be included when relevant. The briefs are updated\r\nno less than four times per year.\r\nCountry Cereal Balance Sheet (CCBS). The CCBS system is a unique database created and con-\r\ntinuously kept up to date by GIEWS with data since 1980. It contains annual supply and utiliza-\r\ntion balances for the main cereals produced and consumed in all countries of the world.\r\nEarth Observation for Crop Monitoring. To support its analysis and supplement ground-based\r\ninformation, GIEWS uses remote sensing data that can provide a valuable insight on water avail-\r\nability and vegetation health during cropping seasons. In addition to rainfall estimates and the\r\nNormalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), GIEWS and FAO Climate and Environment\r\nDivision have developed the Agricultural Stress Index, a quick-look indicator for early identifica-\r\ntion of agricultural areas probably affected by dry spells or drought in extreme cases.\r\nSource: FAO 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n 25\r\n\f BOX 2.4 FAW Monitoring, Impact Assessment, and the EWS\r\n FAW monitoring in some countries in Africa appears to be effective, especially where systematic\r\n field surveys have been happening. Specific gaps include the following:\r\n\r\n • Some countries do not yet have a monitoring system in place.\r\n • Systematic assessment of economic impacts (present and potential) of the FAW has yet to be\r\n undertaken, although many countries are planning to do so.\r\n • Almost all countries are currently responding to the outbreak, rather than pursuing EW.\r\n\r\n Contingency Planning and Awareness Creation about the FAW between Farming\r\n Communities\r\n Most of the countries that were affected by or at risk of the FAW have put in place contingency\r\n plans through their respective ministries of agriculture/national plant protection organizations,\r\n although some of these efforts are more advanced than others. Challenges include the following:\r\n\r\n • There is lack of financial and human resources to effectively implement the plans.\r\n • There is limited knowledge about the FAW control options to guide the farming communities.\r\n • There is lack of adequate and effective control options in the local markets.\r\n • Contingency plans are not always anchored in the national laws and regulations.\r\n • Awareness about contingency plans appears limited to a few institutions in some countries.\r\n • There is lack of regional and continental contingency plans to effectively counter transbound-\r\n ary/invasive insect-pests/pathogens.\r\n\r\n Development and Dissemination of the FAW Management Options\r\n The FAW management approaches in several countries affected by the pest were weak because of\r\n the following:\r\n\r\n • The FAW management approaches were limited to synthetic pesticides (especially organo-\r\n phosphates, synthetic pyrethroids, a few neonicotinoids, and in some cases cocktails of pes-\r\n ticides).\r\n • In most countries, the pesticide applications were mainly emergency responses, but not\r\n based on any efficacy evaluation (except in a few countries such as South Africa and\r\n Uganda).\r\n • In some countries, botanical pesticides such as Neem and Tephrosia were tested and were\r\n reported to be effective. In most countries, the use of pesticides in terms of the FAW control\r\n was not so effective.\r\n • As of April 2017, South Africa has fast-tracked registration of 15 synthetic pesticides and 4\r\n biopesticides for FAW control. Some information/observations on the efficacy of cultural\r\n control options, such as handpicking (for example, Rwanda), early planting (in many coun-\r\n tries), and management of crop residues were also presented. Very few countries have iden-\r\n tified indigenous natural enemies against the FAW and have used biopesticides against the\r\n FAW. Except South Africa, no other country in Africa has the option of testing Bt maize\r\n (MON89034), which was reported as effective against the FAW in the United States.\r\n Source: Stakeholders Consultation Meeting on “Fall Armyworm in Africa: Status and Strategy for Effective Management,”\r\n April 27–28, 2017, Nairobi, Kenya\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n26 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\f Looking ahead, the following actions need consideration:\r\n• An effective EWS should be in place for a smooth and timely flow of infor-\r\n mation on the FAW outbreak, coupled with predictive modeling based\r\n on relevant factors. A scale of early warning (for example, alarm levels)\r\n needs to be designed (backed by quality monitoring data), informed with\r\n lessons derived from the U.S., Brazilian, and African armyworm and\r\n locust control.\r\n• Early warning/alerts to countries outside Africa: There is an immi-\r\n nent danger of the FAW moving to North Africa, and outside, including\r\n the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, either through the pest migration or\r\n trade. It is very important for these high-risk countries/continents to be\r\n alerted in time to put in place proper contingency plans.\r\n• Impact assessments: There needs to be an array of cost-effective, clear,\r\n and harmonized impact assessment protocols for the FAW outbreak,\r\n building on the existing pre- and post-survey and systems. The impact\r\n assessments must take into account physical and socioeconomic/liveli-\r\n hood factors, covering the broad spectrum of agro-ecologies and crop-\r\n ping systems Africa embeds.\r\n• However, the FAW EWS information should be conceptualized within\r\n the broad food security information system to leverage on the institu-\r\n tional, technical, and financial resources and preclude any risk of frag-\r\n mentation of efforts.\r\n\r\n\r\nVulnerability and Capacity Assessments\r\nAs the conceptualization of food security evolves, new metrics for measuring\r\nfood security have also evolved. The conceptualization of food security has\r\ngone beyond “food availability at all times of adequate world food supplies”\r\nand “physical and economic access to basic food” (Sen 1981) to include “utili-\r\nzation” as well as the ability to acquire socially and culturally acceptable foods\r\n(Jones et al. 2013, 443). Emerging out of the shifts in food security concep-\r\ntualization are composite indicators, which are underpinned by sustainable\r\napproaches and participatory approaches (Chambers 1996; Scoones 1998).\r\nThese are approaches that have emerged under vulnerability and capacity\r\nassessments and have increasingly gained currency in the ESA countries. The\r\nmajor actors and some of the common tools and approaches used for moni-\r\ntoring vulnerability, including price and commodity, and cross-border trade\r\nmonitoring are summarized in table 2.5.\r\n Evidence from the Regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis\r\n(RVAA) reports 2012–16 illustrates that most of the countries in southern\r\nAfrica conduct National Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (NVAA)\r\nannually (table 2.6).\r\n Informed by qualitative information derived from participatory tech-\r\nniques such as interviews, focus group discussions, and mapping, the\r\nVAAs allow for a contextual understanding of food security and livelihood\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 27\r\n\fTABLE 2.5 Actors in ESA Food Security EWS\r\n Name Organization setup Information format and frequency\r\n FEWS NET FEWS NET and network members Special reports and food security alerts (depending on\r\n severity), Food Assistance Outlook (monthly), price watch\r\n (monthly) in ESA\r\n Food Security Group of NGOs, United Nations FSNWG update on central and east Africa (approximately\r\n and Nutrition (UN) agencies, Red Cross/Red monthly)\r\n Working Crescent Movement, food security\r\n Group information systems; technically\r\n (FSNWG) supported by FAO\r\n IPC National and regional (at each Maps with current situation and trends (biannual) for\r\n level multiagency and national Kenya, Somalia, Uganda, and east Africa and special\r\n governments and forums). In east/ briefs/updates on Uganda (irregular), Somalia (quarterly);\r\n central Africa region, the IPC is for information on east Africa as a region, it supports the\r\n supported by the IPC steering FSNWG.\r\n committee of the FSNWG.\r\n GIEWS FAO Crop Prospects and Food Situation (trimestral), special\r\n reports (dependent on emerging crisis, often after\r\n CFSAMs), Food Outlook (biannual), and Global Food\r\n Price Monitor (monthly)\r\n HEWS Inter-Agency Standing Committee Maps on website, specific tools/reports and links to\r\n and WFP (WFP is responsible for organizations dealing with specific hazards; various\r\n the coordination/management of website tools related to hazards such as locust\r\n content.) infestation, flooding, weather, and storms; seasonal and\r\n hazards calendar including seasonal calendar with\r\n marked food security-related hazards\r\n VAA Led by the SADC and the SADC The VAA database provides a regional snapshot of the\r\n member states supported by the SADC humanitarian situation, food insecure population by\r\n Regional Inter-Agency Standing country, regional food balance sheet (RFBS), malnutrition\r\n Committee and NGOs rates, and socioeconomic context and recommends\r\n actions.\r\n East African The EAGC is mandated by the Through the Regional Agriculture Trade Intelligence\r\n Grain Council EAC to coordinate the private Network (RATIN), the EAGC provides updates on daily\r\n (EAGC) sector and looks at two systems on price information, monthly cross-border trade, real-time\r\n Market Information System (MIS). warehouse volumes, food balance sheets, trends and\r\n projections of trade, and bids and offers for market\r\n access.\r\nSource: Ververs 2012, 132 and authors.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nvulnerability in specific settings. In particular, the VAAs delineate geo-\r\ngraphic patterns of shared livelihoods, groups of households based on\r\nwealth and assets, and categorize livelihood strategies, including coping\r\nstrategies. The NVAA data are consolidated into a regional VAA database\r\nusually in June each year to provide a regional overview, and a bulletin\r\n(figure 2.2) is issued, which provides a snapshot of the SADC humanitarian\r\nsituation, food insecure population by country, RFBS, malnutrition rates,\r\nsocioeconomic context, and recommendations. The success of VAAs hinges\r\non the following:\r\n• The VAAs are multisectoral surveys conducted annually, usually in May.\r\n• There are guidelines for the VAA processes.\r\n• The multisectoral approach helps build trust across both data producers\r\n and users.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n28 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fTABLE 2.6 NVAA Reports Consolidated into RVAA (2012–16)\r\n Year\r\n Country 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016\r\n Angola — X — — X\r\n Botswana X X X X X\r\n Congo, Dem. Rep. — X X X X\r\n Lesotho X X X X X\r\n Madagascar — — — — X\r\n Malawi X X — X X\r\n Mauritius — — — — —\r\n Mozambique X X X X X\r\n Namibia X X X X X\r\n Seychelles — — — — —\r\n South Africa X — — — X\r\n Swaziland X X X X X\r\n Tanzania X X X X X\r\n Zambia X X X X X\r\n Zimbabwe X X X X X\r\n Total 10 11 9 10 13\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nFIGURE 2.2 Good Practice from the SADC RVAA System\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: SADC 2016b, 40.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 29\r\n\f BOX 2.5 VAA Challenges\r\n The VAA reports are usually produced in June, which is late if the tool is to be effective for the\r\n EWS. Although the information is made available to users at the regional and national levels, the\r\n data are not made available to stakeholders at the subnational levels and it is not in the language\r\n that is understood by communities.\r\n Local people believe that VAAs are not a useful tool because they block them from accessing\r\n food aid.\r\n There is a need to harmonize the VAA methodologies or at least to agree on the minimum\r\n indicators.\r\n In some countries, the VAA reports do not recommend actions to be considered, suggesting\r\n that the report does not trigger action.\r\n In the majority of countries, VAAs rely on funding from partners.\r\n Source: Authors.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTABLE 2.7 Progress in Adopting the IPC Tool in East Africa\r\n Year\r\n Country introduced Location of the IPC\r\n Burundi 2008 Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock\r\n Ethiopia — —\r\n Eritrea — —\r\n Djibouti 2011 Ministry of Agriculture\r\n Kenya 2007 National Drought Management Authority, supported by Kenya Food Security Steering Group\r\n Somalia 2004 Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit and governments of Somaliland and Puntland\r\n South 2007 National Bureau of Statistics chaired by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry,\r\n Sudan Cooperatives, and Rural Development\r\n Sudan 2007 Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation through its Food Security Technical Secretariat\r\n Tanzania 2008 Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security, and Cooperatives\r\n Uganda 2007 Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry, and Fisheries\r\nSource: IPC 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n• The governments in the SADC own VAA results and officials access them\r\n for public use.19\r\n The VAA challenges are summarized in box 2.5.\r\n Developed by FAO in Somalia in 2004, and conceptually complementary to\r\nthe VAAs, the IPC is used by almost all IGAD countries, except Ethiopia and\r\nEritrea (table 2.7), to classify food security outcomes (table 2.8 and figure 2.3).\r\nThe advantage of the IPC is that it provides guidelines for data collection and\r\n\r\n19 In some countries, during the early ages of NVAAs, the results were often delayed, mainly caused by\r\n\r\npolitical sensitivity concerning food security. To address the political challenges, the VAC reports present\r\nplain facts, with analysis and judgments left to the users in a way that is neutral to avoid contentious issues.\r\nThese descriptive reports are readily accepted by the governments. However, in terms of the EWS, such\r\nVAC reports provide important inputs to the risk knowledge component of such EWSs. However, VAC\r\nreports are not intended to be vehicles for providing recommendations on the specific actions to be taken.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n30 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fTABLE 2.8 IPC Phase Descriptions\r\n Priority response\r\n Phase Name Phase description\r\n objective\r\n\r\n\r\n Household (HH) group is able to meet essential Resilience building and disaster risk\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Phase 1\r\n food and non-food needs without engaging in reduction.\r\n atypical, unsustainable strategies to access food\r\n Minimal\r\n and income, including any reliance on\r\n humanitarian assistance.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Even with humanitarian assistance, HH group Disaster risk reduction, protection of\r\n livelihoods.\r\n Phase 2\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n has minimally adequate food consumption but\r\n Stressed is able to afford some essential non-food\r\n expenditures without engaging in irreversible\r\n coping strategies.\r\n\r\n\r\n Even with humanitarian assistance,\r\n HH group has food consumption gaps Protect livelihoods, reduce food\r\n consumption gaps and reduce\r\n Phase 3\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n with high or higher than usual acute\r\n Crisis malnutrition; OR HH group is marginally acute malnutrition.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Food-insecure people (Phase 3 or higher)\r\n able to meet minimum food needs only\r\n with accelerated depletion of assets that\r\n will lead to food consumption gaps.\r\n\r\n Even with humanitarian assistance,\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Urgent action required\r\n HH group has large food consumption Save lives and livelihoods.\r\n gaps resulting in very high levels of acute\r\n Phase 4\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Emergency malnutrition and excess mortality OR\r\n HH group has extreme loss of livelihood\r\n assets that will lead to large food\r\n consumption gaps in the short term.\r\n\r\n\r\n Even with humanitarian assistance,\r\n HH group has an extreme lack of food Prevent widespread death and\r\n Phase 5\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Famine/ and/or basic needs even with full total collapse of livelihoods.\r\n Catastrophe employment of coping strategies.\r\n Starvation, death and destitution are\r\n evident.\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: FAO 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n dissemination of information, and its results can be compared with other neigh-\r\n boring countries or regions and can identify action triggers.\r\n There are, however, some important considerations regarding the way in\r\n which the IPC protocols are implemented in different countries, attributable\r\n in part to differences in the manner in which some countries use specific food\r\n security outcome indicators. Other countries may make inferences based on\r\n proxies to compensate for data gaps. Another important consideration is the\r\n timing of the IPC analyses. Seasonal factors can affect the outcomes of the\r\n IPC analysis. Although the adoption of the IPC protocols continues to grow,\r\n several countries as well as regional organizations have yet to endorse them.\r\n\r\n\r\n Methods for Grain, Market, Cross-Border,\r\n Price, and Commodity Monitoring\r\n Grain, market, cross-border, price, and commodity monitoring are among the\r\n key components of an effective food security EWS. Monitoring these compo-\r\n nents helps to track food security conditions and trends at the regional, national,\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 31\r\n\fFIGURE 2.3 IPC Predicts Famine in Somalia (IPC Phase 5)\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCaseloads Trends (IPC Phase 3 & Above/Require Humanitarian Assistance)\r\n GHA food insecurity trends: Main source & validity of current\r\n Country IPC 3-5 (require humanitarian assistance, in millions) caseloads\r\n Sept 2016 Dec 2016 Feb 2017 May 2017\r\n Djibouti 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 IPC November 2016\r\n Ethiopia 9.7 5.6 5.6 7.8 DRMTWG, April 2017\r\n Kenya 1.3 1.3 2.2 2.2 IPC/NDMA, Feb 2017\r\n Somalia 1.1 1.3 2.9 3.2 Joint FSNAU-FEWSNET Somalia Food\r\n Security Alert, May 2017\r\n S. Sudan 4.8 4.6 4.9 5.5 IPC May – June 2017 Projection\r\n Sudan 4.4 3.6 3.0 2.8 IPC April 2017 Update\r\n Uganda 0.4 0.4 1.6 1.6 IPC Jan – March 2017\r\n Burundi 1.5 1.5 1.5 2.6 IPC April – May 2017\r\n Tanzania - - 1.2 1.2 IPC Feb 2017\r\n Total 23.5 18.5 23.1 27.1\r\n\r\nSource: Compiled from FSNWG reports available at http://www.fao.org/disasterriskreduction/east-central-\r\nafrica/fsnwg/en/.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n32 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fsubnational, community, and household levels. If the monitoring finds unusual\r\npatterns or behaviors, this information becomes useful in forecasting food secu-\r\nrity conditions and makes recommendations on the expected type of responses.\r\n\r\nProducƟon Monitoring: The NaƟonal Food Balance Sheet\r\n\r\nThe national food balance sheet (NFBS) is a globally tried and tested method\r\nand primarily used to present a comprehensive picture of the pattern of a coun-\r\ntry’s food supply during a specified reference period. In particular, the NFBS\r\nestimates the total domestic foodstuffs production added to the total quantity\r\nimported and adjusted to any change in stocks that may have occurred since\r\nthe beginning of the reference period. This information is compared with the\r\naverage national demand for consumption and other uses, such as feeding live-\r\nstock and seed, as well as losses during storage and transportation (FAO 2001;\r\nJacobs and Sumner 2002). Consequently, the NFBS is one of the common tools\r\nused for food security EWSs across the ESA countries (Tefft, McGuire, and\r\nMaunder 2006). In southern Africa, the NFBSs are well established, institu-\r\ntionalized within government structures, and updated annually. Table 2.9 and\r\nfigure 2.4 show the food production deficits for 13 SADC countries between\r\n2011 and 2016, which informed the SADC’s appeal for humanitarian aid in\r\nJune 2016 (SADC 2016a), following the El Niño-induced drought.\r\n Similarly, in east Africa, the EAC identifies the RFBS as a critical tool for\r\nenhancing intraregional trade because it provides policy makers with the data\r\nthey need to make informed decisions on policies that affect regional food\r\nsecurity. Supported by the East Africa Trade Hub and the five EAC countries\r\n(Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda), and through the minis-\r\ntries of agriculture, the National Food Balance Sheet Committees feed the\r\ndata into the RFBS Portal.\r\n The EAGC is mandated by the EAC to coordinate the private sector and\r\nlooks at two systems on MIS:\r\n• The RATIN, which monitors prices and volumes\r\n• The EAGC RFBS, which monitors actual food stock. Currently, the EAGC\r\n monitors 14 borders regionally and 41 markets focusing on six staples:\r\n wheat, maize, sorghum, beans, rice, and green grams.\r\n The Market Access Subgroup that includes FEWS NET, EAGC, WFP, and\r\nFAO contributes data from the informal arrangement and consolidates them\r\ninto one quarterly report for monitoring food security. This is one of the tools\r\nused by relief agencies to apply for humanitarian assistance.\r\n Notwithstanding their invaluable contribution to the EWSs, the NFBSs face\r\nnumerous challenges, including:\r\n• Delays in regular crop production forecasts (as stated) and\r\n• Lack of clear guidelines for agencies involved in developing the NFBSs.\r\n The Zambia Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) provides\r\nstandard operating procedures (SOPs) on the steps that the responsible sec-\r\ntors need to take to produce the NFBS (table 2.10).\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 33\r\n\f34\r\n TABLE 2.9 The SADC Regional Cereal Production (Tonnes) 2010–16\r\n 2015–16 vs 2015–16 vs 5 yr\r\n Country 2010–11 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 2014–15 percent avg percent\r\n Angola 1,367,429 505,795 1,672,184 1,820,348 2,016,566 2,374,208 18 61\r\n Botswana 61,796 52,607 33,756 260,000 90,317 5,610 −94 −94\r\n Congo, Dem. Rep. 2,537,145 2,602,074 2,583,228 2,797,317 3,127,252 3,257,829 4 19\r\n Lesotho 103,170 58,162 120,094 103,526 89,035 26,747 −70 −72\r\n Madagascar 4,729,495 4,998,597 3,989,872 4,344,037 4,051,671 4,530,365 12 2\r\n Malawi 3,895,181 3,623,924 3,639,866 3,978,123 3,001,730 2,531,703 −16 −30\r\n Mozambique 2,934,591 3,715,000 2,371,190 2,509,788 2,845,000 2,388,806 −16 −17\r\n Namibia 127,600 168,500 81,500 131,900 67,800 80,000 18 −31\r\n South Africa 13,084,335 14,764,619 14,502,889 16,940,000 12,206,315 9,323,455 −24 −35\r\n Swaziland 88,502 76,091 81,934 118,871 93,653 33,860 −64 −63\r\n Tanzania 7,033,498 7,435,957 7,806,580 9,828,540 8,918,999 10,139,108 14 24\r\n Zambia 3,367,182 3,195,355 2,890,045 3,643,877 2,898,054 2,943,807 2 −8\r\n Zimbabwe 1,648,404 1,129,845 943,620 1,718,630 868,017 637,843 −27 −49\r\n SADC 41,197,438 42,425,504 40,840,506 48,321,075 40,398,477 38,273,341 −5.3 −10.2\r\n Source: SADC 2016b.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fFIGURE 2.4 Cereal Deficits in the SADC, 2011–16\r\n\r\n 80%\r\n\r\n 60%\r\n\r\n 40%\r\n\r\n 20%\r\n\r\n 0%\r\nCereal deficit\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n a\r\n\r\n a\r\n\r\n C\r\n\r\n o\r\n\r\n r\r\n\r\n i\r\n\r\n e\r\n\r\n ia\r\n\r\n Sw ica\r\n\r\n nd\r\n\r\n\r\n ia\r\n\r\n a\r\n\r\n e\r\n\r\n C\r\n aw\r\n ca\r\n ol\r\n\r\n an\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n qu\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n bi\r\n\r\n bw\r\n th\r\n R\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n D\r\n ib\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n an\r\n ila\r\n fr\r\n ng\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n D\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n m\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n SA\r\n as\r\n so\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n al\r\n sw\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n am\r\n bi\r\n –20%\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n ba\r\n nz\r\n A\r\n\r\n az\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Za\r\n M\r\n ag\r\n A\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n am\r\n Le\r\n ot\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n h\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Ta\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n m\r\n N\r\n\r\n ut\r\n ad\r\n B\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Zi\r\n oz\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n So\r\n M\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n M\r\n –40%\r\n\r\n –60%\r\n\r\n –80%\r\n\r\n –100%\r\n\r\n –120%\r\n 2015/16 vs 2014/15 average 2015/16 vs 5 year average\r\n\r\nSource: SADC 2016b.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTABLE 2.10 Good Practice on Processes Leading to the NFBS Production in Zambia\r\n Activity Due date and responsible body\r\n Seasonal rainfall forecast By the end of September, forecasts are generated by the Zambia\r\n Meteorological Department (ZMD) and submitted to the DMMU and\r\n other relevant departments and authorities.\r\n Hydrological conditions By the end of every month, information on hydrological conditions is\r\n generated and submitted by the Department of Water Affairs and\r\n submitted to the DMMU and other relevant departments and\r\n authorities.\r\n Preliminary crop forecast By January 31 each year, the Ministry Responsible for Agriculture\r\n and Livestock (National Early Warning Unit), the agency responsible\r\n for national statistics, and the ZMD will generate the preliminary crop\r\n forecast report and submit to the DMMU and other relevant\r\n departments and authorities.\r\n Final crop forecast By April 30 each year, the National Early Warning Unit in the\r\n Ministry Responsible for Agriculture and Livestock, the agency\r\n responsible for national statistics, and the ZMD will generate the\r\n final crop forecast report and submit to the DMMU and other\r\n relevant departments and authorities.\r\n NFBS The NFBS will be published by May 15 each year.\r\n Comprehensive needs assessment By June 15 each year, the DMMU in collaboration with other\r\n multisectoral agencies will publish a report on the impact of drought\r\n and vulnerabilities.\r\nSource: DMMU 2015.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 35\r\n\fMarkets and Price Monitoring for Food Security\r\n\r\nMarkets are critical for informing food security early warning analysis because\r\nthey help shed light on two of the three elements of food security: availabil-\r\nity and access. Markets will highlight signs of deterioration or improvement\r\nin food availability and access such as production shortfalls, nonseasonal\r\nincreases in the prices of food and inputs, falling agricultural output prices,\r\ndistress sales of livestock, and uncharacteristically early or large migration of\r\npeople in search of casual employment.\r\n Most of the ESA countries have established marketing and price monitor-\r\ning systems, most of them being housed in their Ministry of Agriculture’s\r\neconomics, marketing, or agribusiness department. In addition to these\r\ndepartments, some countries, such as Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, Zimbabwe,\r\nand Zambia, have agriculture-marketing authorities, boards, centers, or cor-\r\nporations. Table 2.11 shows market analysis for Taita Taveta County in Kenya,\r\nwhich helps determine when prices are prohibitively high for some house-\r\nholds and/or when particular events or conditions prevent participants of\r\nmarket networks from responding by releasing stocks or moving commodi-\r\nties from one location to another. Labor market conditions that result in low\r\nwages or insufficient labor opportunities also affect household food access\r\n(FEWS NET 2009).\r\n Although in most ESA countries commodity price monitoring is conducted\r\non a monthly and weekly basis, in some countries there are no specific recom-\r\nmendations to help users take action. The market report in table 2.11 provides\r\nobjective information that helps end users decide on the action to be taken.\r\nIn contrast, while the example from Zimbabwe provides a list of prices for the\r\nweek, it is not analytic and does not elicit action. However, providing infor-\r\nmation without analysis and recommendation is a deliberate process because\r\nthis allows users to make their own analysis and decisions. In this way, the\r\nreports are neutral to avoid contentious political issues.\r\n There are also institutional challenges in commodity price monitoring that,\r\naccording to study participants, tend to be more problematic than resource\r\nconstraints. The liberalized nature of cereals marketing has brought a pau-\r\ncity of players in market and commodity price monitoring. Although in the\r\nsampled ESA countries there are strategic grain reserves (SGRs), with some\r\nlevel of government control over its use, there is little information exchange\r\nbetween the players. In Zambia, there are at least five sets of players in com-\r\nmodity and price monitoring data. The government collects data through the\r\nAgricultural Marketing Information Centre and shares with the Food Reserve\r\nAgency and the National Early Warning Unit, whereas the Zambia National\r\nFarmers’ Union and FEWS NET each collect their own data. The same applies\r\nin Zimbabwe where the Agriculture Marketing Authority shares data with\r\nthe Grain Marketing Board (GMB), whereas the Zimbabwe Farmers’ Union\r\n(ZFU) and FEWS NET each produce their own data. Although the data are\r\ncollected for different purposes, for example, the government and FEWS\r\nNET use the data for food security monitoring whereas the farmers tend to\r\n\r\n\r\n36 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fTABLE 2.11 Market Performance for February 2017 for Taita Taveta County, Kenya\r\n Cattle prices Goat prices\r\n The average price of a 3-year-old bull from 210 The average price of a 3-year-old goat from 210\r\n sampled households decreased to K Sh 16,800 from K sampled households remained at K Sh 3,800, as in\r\n Sh 17,000 in the previous month. the previous month.\r\n The drop in price could be attributed to deteriorating The low price could be attributed to fair goat body\r\n cattle body condition. condition.\r\n Compared with the long-term mean, the average price Compared with long-term mean, the average price is\r\n is the same. higher by 6.1 percent.\r\n Livelihood variations were notable; in the horticulture/ No significant variations in prices of goats were\r\n dairy livelihood zone, cattle prices range from K Sh observed across livelihood zones.\r\n 25,000 to K Sh 40,000, while in hotspot areas, mainly in\r\n food crops/livestock livelihood zone, prices ranged\r\n from K Sh 8,000 to K Sh 10,000.\r\n Maize Beans\r\n Compared with the previous month, average price of Compared with the previous month, the average price\r\n maize per kg at household level remained at K Sh of beans per kg at the household level remained at K\r\n 41.80. Sh 91.80.\r\n Lowest prices ranged from K Sh 30 to K Sh 35 in the Lowest prices were recorded in mixed farming:\r\n mixed farming: irrigated cropping/livestock livelihood irrigated cropping/livestock/food crops livelihood\r\n zone, areas of Challa and Eldoro in Taveta subcounty. zone, Challa at K Sh 60 to K Sh 70 because of\r\n incoming beans from Tanzania, while high prices were\r\n Highest price was recorded in mixed farming: food\r\n recorded in mixed farming: food crops/livestock\r\n crops/livestock livelihood zone, Mwakajo, Rukanga,\r\n livelihood zone, Mwakajo, Mwachawaza, and\r\n and Mwachawaza at K Sh 40.00 to K Sh 45.00 in Voi\r\n Rukanga at K Sh 90 to K Sh 110.\r\n and Mwatate subcounties.\r\n Compared with the long-term mean, bean prices are\r\n Compared with the long-term mean, the price is higher\r\n almost equal.\r\n by 4.2 percent.\r\n Income Terms of trade (TOT)\r\n Analyzed income from 210 sampled households show TOT remained favorable from sampled households in\r\n that sale of charcoal, casual labor, and remittances the month under review.\r\n rose by 3 percent, 3 percent, and 1 percent The sale of 1 goat at K Sh 3,800 resulted in the\r\n respectively. purchase of 90.9 kg of maize at K Sh 41.80 per kg.\r\n Petty trading dropped by 4 percent while formal This is a drop compared with 95.12 kg posted in the\r\n employment, sale of livestock products, and sale of previous month.\r\n crops decreased by 1 percent each compared with the Though TOT remained the same as in the previous\r\n previous month. month, the trend is decreasing because of increasing\r\n Most households are now depending on charcoal prices of maize as a result of poor harvest and\r\n burning and remittances. decreasing prices of goat emanating from\r\n deteriorating body condition.\r\nSource: Compiled from Kenya National Drought Management Authority.\r\n\r\n\r\n focus on marketing their commodities, there is no real information exchange\r\n between the government departments and the stakeholders.\r\n In relation to the SGR, its primary function is to help a country cope with\r\n food emergencies and stabilize grain prices (table 2.12). The reserves can be\r\n in physical grain or financial reserves. For example, in addition to the buffer\r\n stock of 500,000 tonnes in Zimbabwe’s GMB, there is a cash reserve equiva-\r\n lent of 436,000 tonnes. The physical stock aims at meeting Zimbabwe’s food\r\n shortfalls for 3 months, and assuming the financial reserve equivalent is avail-\r\n able to import the grain, then grain will be available for another 3 months.\r\n Oftentimes, countries do not have adequate financial reserves to import food.\r\n Properly managed SGRs contribute to price stabilization. SGRs are replen-\r\n ished during times of normal or above-normal production to be used when\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 37\r\n\fTABLE 2.12 Role of the SGR in Grain and Price Monitoring\r\n Zimbabwe Zambia Kenya Malawi\r\nAgency GMB Food Reserve Agency National Cereal Agricultural\r\n (FRA) and Produce Development and\r\n Board Marketing\r\n Corporation (ADMAC)\r\nFunctions Operates as parastatal Operates as a Parastatal with a Commercial and\r\n with a commercial and semiautonomous commercial and social roles\r\n social role body on commercial social role\r\n and social lines\r\nStrategic reserve 936,000 tonnes 500,000 million tons Stock of up to 8 100,000 million tons\r\n (500,000 physical to give at least three million bags for\r\n stock and 436,000 months of buffer stock food security and\r\n tonnes, backed by facilitates\r\n cash reserve of logistics for\r\n equivalent) famine relief food\r\nPricing Premium prices for Premium price for Premium price for Premium price for\r\n maize maize maize—among maize, suggested by\r\n the highest in government\r\n Africa\r\nPrice monitoring Weekly by ZFU, FEWS National Farmers’ Kenya National ADMAC, Ministry of\r\n NET, and Agriculture Union, Food Reserve Farmers’ Union Agriculture, FEWS\r\n Marketing Authority Agency, National and FEWS NET NET, and National\r\n Early Warning Unit, Small Holder Farmers\r\n and FEWS NET Association of Malawi\r\nChallenges Getting information Farmers expect FRA Information not Prices offered below\r\n from private sector as at premium price but easily accessible production costs;\r\n the GMB is a stocked maize from private challenges in\r\n competitor; it is difficult offloaded at sector obtaining real-time\r\n to get information from subsidized prices data because of\r\n the millers during times of food Internet costs; weak\r\n insecurity coordination\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nmarkets are not able to meet the demand, increasing the risk of vulnerable\r\nhouseholds and communities to fall into a food insecurity situation. Under\r\nsuch conditions, tapping into the SGRs to meet the demand of struggling\r\npopulations makes a lot of sense, and it is part of the government’s tools for\r\naddressing its contingent liabilities. Governments have the authority and the\r\nresponsibility for intervening, even by distorting market prices, when there is\r\nan urgent need for protecting vulnerable populations.\r\n Governments, communities, and/or farmers are the main targeted audi-\r\nence in the development of EWS information. To meet the expectations of\r\neach user group, it is best practice to have analysts with in-depth knowledge\r\nanalyze the data and present the minimum of information needed, concisely,\r\nwith narrative and in context. Additionally, the level of confidence in the pro-\r\njections being made must be made clear.\r\n Collecting, compiling, and presenting data in tables and graphs isn’t\r\nenough. Data need to be analyzed, interpreted, and placed in context, with\r\nappropriate perspective provided. It is essential to know who the audiences\r\nare and what their perspectives and needs are to design information products\r\nthat will be useful and used. Users should not be overwhelmed with data. The\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n38 CHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity\r\n\fanalyst should select the minimum set of data required to explain and sub-\r\nstantiate conclusions. Perspective should be provided that helps the user to\r\nunderstand whether the situation and trends observed are usual or represent\r\nanomalies. In this case, if the target audience is composed of farmers, they\r\nneed weather forecasts that are precise but contain no technical language, are\r\ninterpreted in local languages, and are presented in an easy-to-understand\r\nform, for example, scripts to be streamed as videos on television and broad-\r\ncast over FM radio.\r\n Policy and decision makers (government) need to understand why specific\r\npieces of data are being presented to them, and why they are important. This\r\ninformation should be disaggregated geographically and illustrate condi-\r\ntions for populations typically vulnerable to a given disaster risk (FEWS NET\r\n2009). Communities and farmers need to understand the extent of the anom-\r\nalies arising from the situation (in form of warnings or alerts) and the cor-\r\nresponding sufficient coping capacities (responses) in relation to the locally\r\naffordable coping options—what ought to be done within their capacities to\r\nmitigate the disaster.\r\n Concisely, although it may seem self-evident, an EWS that monitors with-\r\nout forecasting and provides warnings or alerts without being linked to a\r\nwell-thought-through plan and range of response options will not meet its\r\nobjectives. Therefore, it is imperative for the analysts to link early warning to\r\nresponse and link information flows to decision-making processes.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 2—Early Warning Methods, Technical Skills, and Capacity 39\r\n\f\fCHAPTER 3\r\nPerformance of EWSs in East and\r\nSouthern Africa\r\n\r\n\r\nIntroduction\r\nThe effectiveness of food security EWSs depends on the level of capabilities\r\nof national and regional bodies in terms of risk knowledge, monitoring and\r\nwarning service capacity, dissemination and communication, and response\r\ncapability. For these elements to produce a positive impact on food secu-\r\nrity EWSs, coordination of national and regional agencies, appropriate legal\r\nframeworks, clear roles and responsibilities, involvement of the private sector,\r\nand predictable funding mechanisms are critical. This chapter is guided by\r\nfive key questions (themes):\r\n• Are systems that are regularly updated and accessible in place at national\r\n and regional levels for key hazard and vulnerability identification and\r\n analysis, supported by integrated maps for areas and communities that\r\n could be affected by natural hazards?\r\n• Does an effective national and regional hazard monitoring and warning\r\n service with a sound scientific and technological basis, language, and\r\n communication protocols exist?\r\n• Is there an established system for organizational and decision-making\r\n processes with a strong warning dissemination and communication\r\n chain, with the messages tailored to the specific needs of those at risk?\r\n• To what extent does the EW information inform preparedness and\r\n response plans, and what measures are in place for public awareness and\r\n education?\r\n• Are roles and responsibilities of various public and private sector EW\r\n stakeholders clarified and reflected in the national and regional regu-\r\n latory frameworks, planning, budgetary, coordination, and operational\r\n mechanisms?\r\n In response to these questions, this chapter is based on the questionnaire\r\nsurvey that was administered to 46 producers and users of food security EW\r\ninformation in 15 countries.20 Responses to thematic subjects under each\r\ntheme were scored based on a hierarchy of perception on a 5-point Likert scale\r\nwith 1 point awarded to Strongly Disagree and 5 points awarded to Strongly\r\n\r\n\r\n20Responses to the questionnaires were further supplemented by consultation with at least 50 stakeholders\r\nin seven countries.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 41\r\n\fTABLE 3.1 Effectiveness of Risk Assessments at the National Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\n Subjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\n Agencies have clear roles and responsibility in 32 53 5 5 5\r\n risk assessments.\r\n National standards for risk assessments exist. 15 50 20 5 10\r\n Hazards are regularly analyzed and evaluated. 24 47 14 10 5\r\n Integrated risk and hazard maps are regularly 14 42 10 24 10\r\n developed.\r\n Community vulnerability assessments are 10 24 28 28 10\r\n conducted annually with disaggregated results.\r\n Affected communities and industry are consulted 10 29 19 32 10\r\n in risk assessments.\r\n Risk assessment results are integrated in local 0 50 19 19 12\r\n risk management plans.\r\n A central database for risk assessments exists. 0 33 9 29 29\r\n Average 13 41 16 19 11\r\nSource: Authors.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nAgree. The frequencies of perceptions of the thematic subjects21 on the 5-point\r\nscale were calculated by dividing the number of respondents with a score by\r\nthe total number of respondents available and expressing them as a percentage.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPerformance of EWSs at the National Level\r\nEWSs and Risk Knowledge at the NaƟonal Level\r\n\r\nNational risk assessments form the backbone of an effective EWS. Risk\r\nassessments require systematic, standardized collection and analysis of data,\r\nsupported by legal and institutional frameworks that clarify roles and respon-\r\nsibilities for agencies involved in risk assessments, and the affected com-\r\nmunities. Table 3.1 shows that risk assessments are regularly conducted in\r\nmost ESA countries. About 85 percent of the respondents agree that agencies\r\ninvolved in risk assessments are identified and their roles and responsibilities\r\nclarified. About 65 percent felt the national standards for risk assessments\r\nexist, whereas about 71 percent opined that hazards were regularly evalu-\r\nated. However, 66 percent disagreed that risk assessment results were disag-\r\ngregated to the social demographics, whereas the lack of involvement of the\r\nprivate sector and local communities in risk assessment received a score of\r\n61 percent. Most participants (67 percent) also felt that a central database did\r\nnot exist, yet such an information system is one of the critical elements of an\r\neffective EWS.\r\n\r\n\r\n21 Thematic subjects refer to statements used to measure the five key questions.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n42 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\f Across all studied countries, respondents agreed that responsible agencies\r\nhave clear roles and responsibilities in risk assessments; however, it was only\r\nin Rwanda, Djibouti, Sudan, and Swaziland where respondents were fully\r\nconfident that national standards for risk assessment exist. With the excep-\r\ntion of Ethiopia (0 percent), Somalia (0 percent), and Zimbabwe (28.5 per-\r\ncent), other respondents confirmed that hazards are regularly analyzed and\r\nevaluated, with integrated risk and hazard maps developed as appropriate.\r\nOnly respondents from Djibouti (100 percent) and Rwanda (100 percent)\r\nnoted that vulnerability assessment maps were prepared annually with disag-\r\ngregated results. Consultation of affected communities and industries while\r\nconducting risk assessment is done sufficiently only in Djibouti (100 percent)\r\nand Swaziland (100 percent); however, it is only in Kenya (33.3 percent) and\r\nSudan (100 percent) that risk assessment results are integrated in local risk\r\nmanagement plans. With the exception of Somalia (0 percent), respondents\r\nin all other countries were confident of the existence of a national central risk\r\nassessment database.\r\n\r\nEW Monitoring and Warning Services at the NaƟonal Level\r\n\r\nCredible regional hazard and vulnerability monitoring, in addition to being\r\nsupported by science and technology, also needs strong regional coordination\r\nin order to leverage limited resources and interagency capabilities. Table 3.2\r\nsummarizes the responses to the subject on the effectiveness of hazard mon-\r\nitoring and warning services. Hazard monitoring and warning systems at the\r\nnational level are well established. At least 75 percent of the respondents felt\r\nthat agencies with a hazard monitoring and warning remit were clearly iden-\r\ntified and their roles were clarified in legal and policy frameworks. However,\r\nalthough 75 percent of the responses indicate food security information sys-\r\ntems are in place in most countries, the field consultations established that\r\nthese information systems tend to be fragmented along sector lines, which\r\nposes difficulties for users to access information. Even though an information\r\nsystem was established, it was noted that government departments were not\r\naccustomed to sharing their data with other departments.\r\n To address data-sharing challenges, respondents suggested the conve-\r\nnience of developing memoranda of understanding (MoUs) between the\r\nrelevant agencies. Through establishing MoUs, it is possible to specify\r\ntypes of data, their format, and the frequency in which datasets should be\r\nshared. Key informants’ (KIs) opinions were split on their perception of\r\ntopics regarding hazard monitoring and warning services provided at the\r\nnational level.\r\n Agency roles and responsibilities in monitoring and issuing warnings are\r\nclear and well elaborated in Djibouti (100 percent), Sudan (100 percent),\r\nand Swaziland (100 percent), supported with binding agreements for con-\r\nsistency in warning language and communication channels. However, only\r\nrespondents from Rwanda, Sudan, and Swaziland were fully aware of the\r\nexistence of a national food security system. In Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya,\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 43\r\n\fTABLE 3.2 Effectiveness of Monitoring and Warning Services at the National Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\n Subjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\n Agencies have clear roles and responsibilities 20 55 10 10 5\r\n in monitoring and issuing warnings.\r\n Agreements are in place for consistency in 15 15 35 15 20\r\n warning language and communication\r\n channels.\r\n Food security information system is in place. 40 35 0 20 5\r\n EWSs are subjected to regular tests. 15 25 20 30 10\r\n Warnings are verified to check they have 5 30 20 30 15\r\n reached recipients.\r\n Warning centers are staffed 24 hours. 0 25 10 50 15\r\n Hazard measurement parameters and 10 30 20 35 5\r\n specifications are regularly documented.\r\n Equipment for hazards and vulnerability 5 55 20 15 5\r\n monitoring is suitable, and personnel trained\r\n in operation and maintenance (O&M).\r\n Hazards and food security data from regional 16 42 16 5 21\r\n networks, adjacent territories, and\r\n international sources are accessible.\r\n Data are received and processed and 15 25 15 35 10\r\n warnings disseminated timely, in meaningful\r\n formats, and in real or near-real time.\r\n Data analysis, prediction, and warning are 10 65 15 5 5\r\n based on accepted scientific and technical\r\n methodologies.\r\n Average 14 37 16 23 11\r\nSource: Authors.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nRwanda, and Sudan, 100, 50, 60, 100, and 100 percent of the respondents,\r\nrespectively, noted that EW systems are subjected to regular tests but only in\r\nKenya (80 percent) and Sudan (100 percent) was verification done to ascer-\r\ntain whether warnings had reached intended recipients. In Kenya, Sudan,\r\nSwaziland, and Zimbabwe, 100, 50, 100, and 83.3 percent of the respon-\r\ndents, respectively, agreed that equipment for hazard and vulnerability\r\nmonitoring is suitable, as is personnel trained in O&M. With the exception\r\nof Somalia and Rwanda, respondents from other countries noted that haz-\r\nards and food security data from regional networks, adjacent territories,\r\nand international sources are accessible. It is only in Djibouti (100 percent),\r\nKenya (80 percent), and Zimbabwe (50 percent) that respondents had con-\r\nfidence that data are received and processed and warnings are disseminated\r\nin timely, meaningful formats, in real or near-real time. With the exception\r\nof Djibouti and Somalia, respondents in other countries noted that data\r\nanalysis, prediction, and warning are based on accepted scientific and tech-\r\nnical methodologies.\r\n Of concern is the absence of 24/7 warning services in most countries,\r\nwith 75 percent of the respondents stating that warning centers were not\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n44 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fstaffed for 24 hours; however, this is one of the important requirements of\r\nan effective EWS. With the exception of Rwanda and Swaziland where a 24/7\r\nEWS service exists, in other countries, warning centers operate for 12 hours\r\nmainly because of limited staff and funds to pay for overtime. This is prob-\r\nably because disaster profiles for Rwanda (MIDIMAR 2013) and Swaziland\r\n(Swaziland 2011) are dominated by many short lead time events such as fire,\r\nfloods, earthquakes, landslides, hail storms with strong winds, lightning and\r\nthunderstorms, traffic accidents, diseases, and epidemics that disrupt peo-\r\nple’s lives and livelihoods, destroy the infrastructure, and interrupt economic\r\nactivities and retard development.\r\n Therefore, it is worth noting that food security EWS 24/7 services are most\r\nimportant for short lead time events such as lightning, storms, earthquakes,\r\ntropical cyclones, floods, pests, and diseases but not as critical for long lead time\r\nevents such as droughts. For example, drought is a slow onset disaster, thus allow-\r\ning time for food security reduction and mitigation measures to be undertaken.\r\n In some countries (for example, Malawi), the weather services operate only\r\nduring regular working hours because of staff shortages. Although some coun-\r\ntries have emergency operation centers (EOCs), these do not operate 24/7\r\nthroughout the week and do not operate outside working hours and during\r\nholidays, unless there is an emergency. Nonetheless, several countries surveyed\r\naspired to develop their EOCs along the lines of Mozambique’s national EOC,\r\nwhich received extremely favorable reviews during the stakeholders’ consulta-\r\ntion. Although these are likely to develop in slightly different ways depending on\r\nthe context, there was a strong sense among the stakeholders interviewed that\r\nEOCs would have many functions beyond the activation of emergency response\r\nand they would serve as the EWS information hubs. If this suggestion is to come\r\nto fruition, then there will be a need to mobilize resources for the establishment\r\nof EOC infrastructure and technical expertise to support the EOC functions.\r\n\r\nEW InformaƟon DisseminaƟon and CommunicaƟon\r\nat the NaƟonal Level\r\nEffective EWS communication rests on the credibility and trustworthiness of\r\nthe sender, format and wording of the warnings, dissemination methods, edu-\r\ncation and preparedness of stakeholders, and their understanding of the risks\r\nthey face (WMO 2010). Almost all EW information providers will have, as a\r\nbasic public task, the provision of forecast and warning services to the general\r\npublic. EDS developers should ask themselves the following questions:\r\n• Is the EW information tailored to the needs of users?\r\n• How is this information communicated?\r\n• Is it communicated directly to the public by the EW information service\r\n provider through its own staff or through partner organizations such as\r\n emergency management agencies and the media?\r\n• Are online channels of communication (ranging from the traditional\r\n websites to social media) being used?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 45\r\n\f Except in Somalia, respondents from all other studied countries revealed\r\nthat communication and dissemination of warnings are tailored to the\r\nneeds of individual communities through multiple communication media.\r\nInterestingly, only in Kenya and Swaziland are warning alerts and messages\r\ntailored to the specific needs of those at risk. The understanding of the values,\r\nconcerns, and interests of those who will need to take action is incorporated\r\ninto warning messages in Sudan, Swaziland, and, to some extent, Kenya and\r\nZimbabwe. Additionally, only in Djibouti, Kenya, Rwanda, Swaziland, and\r\nZimbabwe are private sector resources used in dissemination of warnings.\r\nOnly in Kenya and Ethiopia, 50 and 100 percent of the respondents, respec-\r\ntively, noted that consistent warning dissemination and communication\r\nsystems are used for all hazards. In Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, and Zimbabwe,\r\n100, 75, 100, and 33.3 percent of the respondents, respectively, noted that\r\nequipment maintenance is implemented with backup systems fully installed\r\nand  operational in the event of a failure. Specificity about the nature of\r\nthreat and impacts is well elaborated in warnings issued in Kenya, Rwanda,\r\nSudan, and Zimbabwe.\r\n Table 3.3 shows that in most countries in the ESA region, warnings are\r\ngenerally specific to the hazard, such as drought and floods. Most of the\r\nrespondents (76 percent) were of the impression that warnings were specific\r\nto the hazard, whereas 64 percent believed multiple communication channels\r\nwere used to disseminate the EW information. KIs confirmed that many users\r\nregard warnings to be credible and trustworthy because they are enforced\r\nthrough government channels and passed to affected communities.\r\n The major criticisms were the following:\r\n• Some 71 percent of participants felt the warning messages and alerts are\r\n still generic and not clearly tailored to the needs of the users to trigger\r\n action.\r\n• Key informant interviews (KIIs) revealed that the traditional forms of dis-\r\n seminating the EWS information (radio, telephone, sirens, visual warn-\r\n ings, drums, and messenger runners for some remote locations) are still\r\n dominant. The uneven coverage of these traditional forms of communi-\r\n cation, especially in remote areas, means that warnings are not received\r\n on time. However, the coverage in some countries has improved because\r\n of the RANET radios, for example, in Kenya and some parts of Zambia.\r\n• The use of social media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp\r\n is still in its infancy because of poor mobile network coverage as well\r\n as prohibitive Internet costs. Interestingly, these are the areas where the\r\n EWS information is needed most (see box 3.1).\r\n Part of the solution to increasing the use of social technologies in remote\r\nareas is to strengthen collaboration and partnerships between the public and\r\nprivate sectors. In many countries, there is increasing collaboration between\r\ntelecommunications regulators, mobile phone providers, and the national\r\ndisaster management authorities in the dissemination and communication\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n46 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.3 Dissemination and Communication of EWS Information at the National Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nCommunication and dissemination of warnings 6 41 23 12 18\r\nare tailored to the needs of individual\r\ncommunities.\r\nMultiple communication media are used for 23 41 12 18 6\r\nwarning dissemination.\r\nPrivate sector resources are used in 6 18 29 41 6\r\ndisseminating warnings.\r\nConsistent warning dissemination and 6 35 35 18 6\r\ncommunication systems are used for all hazards.\r\nEquipment maintenance is implemented and 0 17 41 18 24\r\nbackup systems are in place in the event of a\r\nfailure.\r\nWarning alerts and messages are tailored to the 0 29 24 35 12\r\nspecific needs of those at risk.\r\nMessages incorporate the understanding of the 6 41 23 24 6\r\nvalues, concerns, and interests of those who will\r\nneed to take action.\r\nWarnings are specific about the nature of threat 6 70 12 12 0\r\nand impacts.\r\nAverage 7 37 25 22 10\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n of the EWS information. In Zimbabwe, for instance, the Department of\r\n Civil Protection and ECONET Wireless, one of the mobile phone providers,\r\n have developed partnerships in EWS information dissemination. Before the\r\n message is sent out to subscribers, the Department of Civil Protection and\r\n ECONET Wireless agree on the message to be disseminated. The role of the\r\n Department of Civil Protection is to craft the messages in three main lan-\r\n guages (English, Shona, and Ndebele), whereas the role of ECONET Wireless\r\n is to disseminate the message to the subscribers. Many stakeholders, however,\r\n strongly feel these public-private collaborations and partnerships are less\r\n developed in the food security EWS.\r\n Some EWS users in Mbeta Island would not use social media because\r\n of illiteracy issues. If EWS information is about generating action of users,\r\n then the EWS stakeholders should find appropriate means of communicat-\r\n ing, including the use of the language understood by users. Along these lines,\r\n many EWS users, ranging from those in Mbeta Island to top officials, crit-\r\n icized the EWS producers for communicating their products in a language\r\n that is not clearly and widely understood (box 3.2).\r\n\r\n EWS Response Planning at the NaƟonal Level\r\n\r\n Although the effectiveness of dissemination and communication of EWS\r\n information plays a critical role for users to take action, it is important to\r\n translate this information to mitigation and preparedness and response plans\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 47\r\n\f BOX 3.1 “We’ve No Options but to Rely on Indigenous Knowledge”\r\n In Mbeta Island, Namakusi Village, people have observed climate changes over the years. The\r\n rains used to start in October, following which planting would commence. This is no longer the\r\n case. In 2016–17 rainy season, the rains commenced on December 15 instead of October. The\r\n farming season has shortened, and yields have declined as a result. The floods and water have\r\n become less, and fish stock has dwindled to unprecedented levels. Droughts have increased over\r\n the years. Animals are affected by lack of grass, and some natural vegetable species have disap-\r\n peared. Pests have increased because of high temperatures.\r\n Based on their indigenous knowledge, inhabitants can tell when the wet season is approach-\r\n ing. This includes abundant clouds, no winds in September or winds that are south-easterly, and\r\n whether there are tumbimbi birds, usually in October. They can also tell when an outbreak of pests\r\n is imminent. Although they recognize that indigenous knowledge can sometimes be misleading,\r\n they have no other options. Mbeta Island has poor TV and radio signals. They cannot watch\r\n TV or listen to the radio. However, they were not using social media (Facebook and WhatsApp)\r\n because they do not have the financial resources to buy data bundles. In any case, social media are\r\n for children who are literate and not for adults (who may be illiterate). When days are good and\r\n people receive radio signals, they access weather information. However, this information is not\r\n always correct; it is sometimes misleading. One time the radio informed that the wind would be\r\n blowing from north to south and the opposite happened, affecting the fishermen.\r\n Inhabitants also felt excluded from development programs compared with people on the main-\r\n land. Of primary importance for them were seeds and farming tools, which need to be delivered\r\n no later than August in preparation for the rainy season.\r\n Source: Focus group discussion.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n BOX 3.2 Seasonal Forecasts Not Packaged according to\r\n Language of Users\r\n Although the Meteorological Service Department (MSD) information is scientifically sound, it is\r\n not packaged in the language that is useful to farmers. When they say, “below normal,” “normal,”\r\n or “above normal,” what does this mean? These are vague phrases and so are not useful for farm-\r\n ers. The MSD should disseminate information in a language that is understandable to ordinary\r\n farmers. They should clarify climate change words such as El Niño, La Niña, and variability and\r\n relate these to the local setting. Using technical jargon that is not understood by farmers and\r\n drawing examples from China are not useful to Zimbabwean farmers. Information should be\r\n properly packaged to suit its users. Sending graphs or maps with colors from the MSD is not suit-\r\n able for local people. Something easy to understand such as dates when people will receive or not\r\n receive rain and how much rain will be received will be more useful.\r\n The information needs to be translated into the local language: Shona to Shona farmers,\r\n Ndebele to Ndebele farmers, and so on to cover all the 16 languages in Zimbabwe. If the MSD\r\n does not have resources to do so, farmers could translate the materials. In any case, the informa-\r\n tion disseminated by the MSD should be quality checked by farmers themselves.\r\n Source: Member, ZFU.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n48 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.4 Applying EWS Information in Response at the National Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nHazard and vulnerability maps are used to 29 47 6 18 0\r\ndevelop national emergency preparedness\r\nand response plans.\r\nTarget communities respond effectively to 12 18 40 24 6\r\nearly warnings.\r\nEWS information is built in school/university 0 24 29 12 35\r\ncurricula.\r\nRegular public awareness/education 18 47 0 29 6\r\ncampaigns are conducted.\r\nRegular simulation exercises are undertaken 0 26 26 16 32\r\nto test the effectiveness of the EWS systems.\r\nAverage 12 32 20 20 16\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n because these strongly affect the livelihood options, safe behavior, and how\r\n best to avoid damage and loss to property. This requires four critical inputs:\r\n 1. Preparedness and response planning\r\n 2. Public education and awareness\r\n 3. Simulation exercises\r\n 4. EOC.\r\n In terms of preparedness and response planning, table 3.4 shows 76 percent\r\n of the respondents believe that the majority of the ESA countries have some\r\n kind of system for translating the EW information into preparedness and\r\n response plans, with contingency plans being the most popular. KI interview-\r\n ees, however, criticized the quality of contingency plans, stating that some\r\n of the contingency plans are not based on plausible scenarios that precisely\r\n identify vulnerable communities, livelihoods, critical infrastructure, and gaps\r\n in resources, capacities, and roles and responsibilities. Most worrying was\r\n that the national contingency plans were rarely informed by sector and sub-\r\n national plans, because the systems for these plans were either less developed\r\n or nonexistent. These criticisms call the attention to the following:\r\n • The importance of building sector and subnational capacity in developing\r\n contingency plans\r\n • The need to develop a generic contingency plan template to guide the\r\n ESA countries in developing multihazard and multisectoral contingency\r\n plans. This might require the ESA countries to consider their participa-\r\n tion in the African Risk Capacity (ARC),22 which has the technical exper-\r\n tise in contingency planning.\r\n\r\n 22The African Risk Capacity (ARC) was established as a Specialized Agency of the African Union (AU) to\r\n help member states improve their capacities to better plan, prepare, and respond to extreme weather events\r\n and natural disasters, therefore protecting the food security of their vulnerable populations. The ARC pro-\r\n vides member states access to disaster risk finance that can be deployed in times of natural disasters and\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 49\r\n\f• The need to make contingency plans appealing and engaging reading, not\r\n voluminous sets of directives that are often barely understood by busy\r\n decision makers and therefore remain as “decorations” on shelves, often\r\n considered useless when the time comes to address evolving adverse\r\n situations. One way of realizing the value of these as a tool of contin-\r\n gency planning is through regular simulation exercises, involving all key\r\n stakeholders.\r\n With respect to public education and awareness, 65 percent of the par-\r\nticipants felt that the public education programs were appropriate. KIs also\r\nstated that interest has grown in the education sector concerning the intro-\r\nduction of disaster education, particularly following the Hyogo Framework\r\nfor Action 2005–15. At the higher education level, a substantial number\r\nof universities in the ESA countries have introduced disaster studies. This\r\nprogress is partly attributed to the advocacy in building local disaster\r\nrisk–related capacity by the Periperi U, a partnership of African universi-\r\nties established in 2006. At least 12 universities in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya,\r\nMadagascar, Mozambique, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and\r\nZimbabwe offer disaster studies. In contrast, the progress of introducing\r\ndisaster education at primary and secondary education levels has been\r\nslower, although doing so has the potential of wider and timely dissemina-\r\ntion of EWS products, particularly considering children’s large appetite for\r\nthe use of social technologies.\r\n With the exception of Djibouti, Ethiopia, and Somalia, in all other studied\r\ncountries, development of national emergency preparedness and response\r\nplans is informed by hazard and vulnerability maps; across the board, target\r\ncommunities appropriately respond to issued early warnings. Surprisingly,\r\nEW information is built into school/university curricula only in Djibouti (100\r\npercent), Kenya (50 percent), and Rwanda (100 percent), with regular pub-\r\nlic awareness/education campaigns being conducted only in Rwanda, Sudan,\r\nand Zimbabwe. Regular simulation exercises are undertaken to test the effec-\r\ntiveness of the EW systems in all studied countries except Somalia.\r\n In terms of public awareness, this is well established in most ESA coun-\r\ntries, although these tend to be biased toward rapid onset events such as\r\nfloods and cyclones. Strengthening public awareness requires the develop-\r\nment of broad-based public education strategies, involving multiple stake-\r\nholders across the public sector, private sector, NGOs, civil society, and\r\ncooperating partners.\r\n Some 74 percent of the respondents indicated that simulation exercises were\r\nregularly conducted to test the EWS. The added value of simulation exercises\r\nis their role in testing and validating the planning assumptions. Exercising\r\n\r\n\r\nextreme weather events. This financing, coupled with predefined contingency plans, enables governments\r\nto respond to affected households on time thereby preventing household loss of livelihoods and building\r\nresilience. The ARC provides a link between early warnings through its advanced satellite-based software,\r\nAfrica Risk View, and contingency planning for early action with objective and predictable financing\r\nthrough its insurance payouts.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n50 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fenhances the awareness of the roles and responsibilities of responders and\r\ntests SOPs, and action triggers and builds morale in responders. The recent\r\narmyworm outbreak in southern Africa has underscored the importance\r\nof simulation exercises to develop coherence in responders. In Zambia, the\r\narmyworm outbreak exposed weakness in preparedness and contingency\r\nplanning at the national, subnational, and sector levels. The “bottlenecks”\r\nin information sharing, coordination, communication, and logistics could\r\nhave been identified and possibly addressed during simulation exercises. The\r\ncontribution of simulation exercises is their potential to creating demand for\r\nEWS information to meet the needs of the users. The simulation exercises are\r\nlikely to influence the way information is packaged from the producer to the\r\nend user. If simulation exercises should become a constitutive element of the\r\nEWS in ESA, then the capacity for developing simulation exercises requires\r\ndevelopment. This will require developing and utilizing skills in universities,\r\nNGOs, the private sector, and cooperating partners.\r\n Although simulation exercises are fairly well developed in some ESA\r\ncountries, these tend to focus on rapid onset events such as floods and\r\ncyclones (for example, in Mozambique) and dam failure (for example,\r\nKariba Dam in the Kariba Gorge of the Zambezi river basin between\r\nZambia and Zimbabwe). Simulation exercises are rare for slow onset events\r\nsuch as drought and insect infestations. For drought, for example, a simu-\r\nlation exercise involving responders, transporters, warehouse authorities,\r\nand distribution centers would reveal the gaps in the efficient distribution\r\nof humanitarian aid.\r\n\r\nEWS Governance Mechanisms at the NaƟonal Level\r\n\r\nAlthough the ESA countries have witnessed remarkable progress in EWSs\r\nsince the adoption of the Hyogo Framework for Action in 2005, there are also\r\nglaring gaps and shortcomings that should be addressed. On the positive side,\r\ntable 3.5 shows that 55 percent of the participants indicated that a legal or pol-\r\nicy framework that had an EWS element existed in their countries. Along these\r\nlines, 50 percent agreed that a national committee with an EWS remit existed,\r\nsuggesting that in some countries, the institutional arrangements are fairly\r\ndeveloped from the production of EWS information to activation of response\r\nplans. This was corroborated by data from sampled countries (Ethiopia,\r\nKenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), where\r\nkey agencies involved in the EWS are clearly identified and their roles clarified\r\nin legal and policy frameworks. The most relevant sectors and agencies include\r\nmeteorological services, hydrological services (water), agriculture, health, and\r\nfood and nutrition. Most of these sectors have legal frameworks that outline\r\ntheir mandates on the EWS. However, the absence of an overarching legal or\r\npolicy framework that brings together the EWS stakeholders means the EWSs\r\nin some countries are fragmented along sectoral lines.\r\n Only Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, and Swaziland have a national all-hazards\r\nEW committee with a remit on food security that highlights economic\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 51\r\n\fTABLE 3.5 Performance of EWS Governance and Investment at the National Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nNational all-hazards EWS 20 30 30 5 15\r\ncommittee is in place with a remit\r\non food security.\r\nEconomic benefits of EW are 24 18 18 34 6\r\nhighlighted to senior government\r\nand political leaders.\r\nEW is integrated into national 12 29 24 29 6\r\neconomic planning.\r\nLocal decision making and 6 29 29 12 24\r\nimplementation of EWS is in\r\nplace and resourced.\r\nRegional and cross-border 0 35 24 12 29\r\nagreements are established to\r\nensure EWS are integrated.\r\nCapacities of agencies are 6 29 18 29 18\r\nassessed and capacity-building\r\nplans developed and resourced.\r\nGovernment funding 0 46 24 24 6\r\nmechanisms for EWS are\r\ndeveloped and institutionalized.\r\nPPPs are utilized for EWS system 6 29 24 29 12\r\ndevelopment.\r\nStrategy is in place for obtaining, 5 25 35 30 5\r\nreviewing, and disseminating\r\ndata on vulnerabilities.\r\nEWS legal or policy framework 10 45 15 25 5\r\nexists.\r\nAverage 9 32 24 23 13\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nbenefits of early warning to senior government and political leaders. However,\r\nit is only in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Rwanda that capacities of agencies are\r\nassessed with capacity-building plans developed and resourced. In addition\r\nto Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, and Swaziland, Sudan has also integrated early\r\nwarning information into national economic planning, and has supported\r\nand financed local decision making and implementation of early warning\r\nsystems. In Somalia and Swaziland, all respondents noted that government\r\nfunding mechanisms for EW systems are neither developed nor institution-\r\nalized. The majority of respondents in Kenya (75 percent), Rwanda (100\r\npercent), and Sudan (100 percent) reported that regional and cross-border\r\nagreements are established to ensure early warning systems are integrated.\r\nOnly Ethiopia, Rwanda, and Sudan have embraced public-private partner-\r\nships in EW system development, with a strategy for obtaining, reviewing,\r\nand disseminating data on vulnerabilities only operational in Djibouti. With\r\nthe exception of Rwanda, Somalia, and Zimbabwe, respondents from other\r\nstudied countries were fully aware of the existence of the EW legal or policy\r\nframework.\r\n\r\n\r\n52 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fFIGURE 3.1 Organizational Structure of the EWS in Zambia\r\n\r\n\r\n National disaster management council\r\n\r\n\r\n National disaster technical committee\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Health and Water and Relief and Environment, Training and Early\r\n Finance and Infrastructure Agriculture Security\r\n nutrition sanitation logistics DRR and public warning\r\n tender sub- sub- sub- sub-\r\n sub- sub- sub- climate education sub- systems sub-\r\n committee committee committee committee\r\n committee committee committee change committee committee\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Disaster management and mitigation unit\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Provincial Provincial\r\n Parliamentary\r\n disaster disaster\r\n committee for management management\r\n DDR & committees\r\n climate\r\n coordinators\r\n change\r\n Private sector,\r\n District disaster District NGOs,\r\n management disaster UN system\r\n management\r\n House of coordinators media and\r\n chiefs on committees\r\n DDR & religious\r\n climate\r\n Satellite organizations\r\n change\r\n disaster\r\n management\r\n committees\r\n\r\nSource: ZMD.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Even without overarching frameworks, many ESA countries have coor-\r\n dination systems for information sharing. These are mainly part of the\r\n national DRM platforms. In some countries, the national platform meet-\r\n ings are normally chaired by senior government officials, and in other cases\r\n these are cochaired by the senior government officials and the UN Resident\r\n Coordinator. Further, some countries have established national EW commit-\r\n tees or working groups, which also report at the national platform meetings\r\n (figure 3.1). However, some countries, such as Malawi and Zimbabwe, do not\r\n have a dedicated EWS working group or committee similar to the Zambian\r\n structure.\r\n This study found that strong subnational structures are one of the prereq-\r\n uisites of an effective EWS. This recognition has found currency in most ESA\r\n countries. Many countries are strengthening the subnational structures at the\r\n provincial, district, and community levels. Depending on the legal frame-\r\n works, these structures take various forms—some of the EWS functions are\r\n assigned to disaster risk reduction (DRR) committees and ward development\r\n committees, whereas others are sector specific such as food and security\r\n committees, water users committees, river catchment councils, and environ-\r\n mental committees. In Ethiopia, there is a clear EWS structure from the fed-\r\n eral level to the kebele (ward) under the National Disaster Risk Management\r\n Commission. The kebeles, for example, are actively involved in the National\r\n Productive Safety Net program where they use the products from the EWS,\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 53\r\n\ffor example, in targeting members of their communities eligible to participate\r\nin public works programs. Although many countries recognize the role of\r\nsubnational structures in the EWS, because these are outlined in their pol-\r\nicy frameworks, these structures do not exist in practice, mainly because of\r\nresources constraints.\r\n Uganda has the National Disaster Preparedness and Management Policy,\r\n2011, which talks about collection of EW information by the mandated\r\ninstitutions and dissemination by the National Platform for Disaster Risk\r\nReduction and the media. The policy mentions other activities such as con-\r\nducting risk mapping and vulnerability assessments, research, and documen-\r\ntation as a mode of obtaining EW information and developing EWS. However,\r\nthere is no clear, established channel through which the collected informa-\r\ntion should continue to flow to the coordination center (National Emergency\r\nCoordination and Operations Centre [NECOC]), in the Department of Relief,\r\nDisaster Preparedness and Management. The policy also stipulates that the\r\nUganda Broadcasting Council and Uganda Telecommunications Commission\r\nwill establish memoranda of understanding (MoUs) with FM radio stations\r\nand mobile phone telecommunications companies to enable the use of their\r\nfacilities to send out early warning messages whenever the need arises.\r\nCurrently, the electronic media and FM radio system offer free airtime in the\r\nform of talk shows to disseminate EW information upon release of weather\r\nforecasts, for example, El Niño and La Niña events, and any other events that\r\nthe department finds necessary to communicate to the public ahead of time.\r\n The Department of Relief, Disaster Preparedness and Management has\r\nstarted the process of drafting the National Disaster Preparedness and\r\nManagement Bill; therefore, the legal framework should clearly stipulate how\r\nthe responsible institutions shall ensure the flow of EW information on a reg-\r\nular basis to NECOC (figure 3.2).\r\n In addition, the legal framework needs to task the telecommunication com-\r\npanies with sending out early warning messages as mentioned in the NDPM\r\npolicy. The bill should assign these companies roles as private sector contrib-\r\nutors to disaster preparedness and management. Involving the private sector\r\nin disaster risk reduction is emphasized by the Sendai Framework for Disaster\r\nRisk Reduction 2015–30.\r\n The policy assigns NECOC a coordination role and technical (modeling)\r\nin addition to the responsible institutions. However, capacity building of\r\nNECOC staff to scientifically develop and analyze the provided EW informa-\r\ntion is still low.\r\n Some 65 percent of respondents felt that the EWS activities were not ade-\r\nquately resourced. Evidence from consultation with stakeholders and from the\r\nliterature (for example, Tefft, McGuire, and Maunder 2006) shows that efforts\r\nto develop capacities at the subnational level have generally been externally\r\ndriven, with tremendous challenges of sustainability. The 1990s Regional Early\r\nWarning System in the SADC countries is a case in point, where the benefits\r\nof the program were not financially sustainable when the support from the\r\nDanish government and FAO ceased. Several agencies, NGOs, International\r\n\r\n\r\n54 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fFIGURE 3.2 Uganda National Integrated Early Warning System Information Flow\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: Authors.\r\n\r\n\r\n Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), UN agencies, and\r\n the World Bank have been involved in the EWS capacity-building programs in\r\n different forms. In Somalia, understandably because of the civil conflict there,\r\n food security assessments are mainly conducted by international agencies, led\r\n by FAO with minimal participation from the government (box 3.3). However,\r\n even in stable environments, the external agencies still dominate the EWS\r\n activities. In the rural district of Binga and Nyaminyami in Zimbabwe, a huge\r\n amount of donor resources toward strengthening decentralized systems has\r\n been provided since Zimbabwe’s independence from Britain in 1980; today,\r\n these districts are still dependent on humanitarian assistance. Similarly, in\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 55\r\n\f BOX 3.3 Risk Assessments Led by International Agencies\r\n Currently, NGOs that have the means, knowledge, and resources are very much involved in\r\n assessing hazards and vulnerability for food security, and the findings obtained from these assess-\r\n ments are set only to benefit the NGOs that created this system and not the communities and\r\n the  government. On the other hand, the  government  agencies’ staff cannot assume their roles\r\n even though their roles on the [EWS] subject are clearly identified, and the reason is because\r\n they do not have the means, knowledge, and the resources to achieve these objectives. There are\r\n some hazard and vulnerability assessments data collected by government agencies but they are\r\n collected in an unconventional way.\r\n Source: Survey questionnaire.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nKenya’s arid districts, such as Turkana, the food security challenges remain\r\nafter protracted donor support.\r\n Indeed, there are 18 pilot projects that are being conducted by the World\r\nBank’s Pilot Program for Climate Resilience, including in Zambia and\r\nMozambique. In this project, the staff costs are borne by the government\r\nwhereas the operating costs are borne by the World Bank. When the fund-\r\ning ends, it is conceivable that the benefits accruing from these interventions\r\nare unlikely to be sustained. The reasons for this, as this study found, are the\r\nfollowing:\r\n• About 60 percent of stakeholders felt that senior governmental and polit-\r\n ical leaders are not aware of the economic benefits of the EWS because\r\n cost-benefit analyses of previous disasters are rarely conducted; therefore,\r\n there is limited “buy-in” from the decision makers. Not only is better evi-\r\n dence of the cost-benefit analysis of the EWS needed in supporting deci-\r\n sion making but also the method of delivering these benefits should be\r\n communicated in the language these stakeholders will understand.\r\n• The EWS is viewed as an emergency and seasonal activity, with about\r\n 59 percent of the participants agreeing that the EWSs were rarely inte-\r\n grated into national economic planning. This makes the EWS an ad hoc\r\n activity, relying on emergency budgets, which often creates competition\r\n between the EWS and the regular development agenda. Some people\r\n interviewed in this study strongly advocated for a shift from viewing the\r\n EWS as an ex post event. Rather, the EWS should be viewed as an ex ante\r\n process that is mainstreamed in development frameworks.\r\n• There are limited alternative sources of funding. Some 65 percent of the\r\n participants felt that the capacities of the agencies involved in the EWS\r\n were not well resourced. At the same time, 69 percent of the participants\r\n felt that the PPPs were underutilized in EWS development. As the results\r\n of this study attest, there is also limited engagement in PPPs to help mobi-\r\n lize resources internally. This means the legal frameworks should be clear\r\n on how these partnerships could yield maximum EWS benefits.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n56 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\f Across Uganda, significant levels of investment into systems that collect\r\nand share early warning information on a range of hazards including floods,\r\ndroughts, and diseases exist.\r\n The state of early warning systems in the country was analyzed in terms\r\nof organization, kind of early warning information delivered, dissemination\r\nchannels, and technical and financial sustainability. According to Lumbrosso\r\n(2016), EWSs in Uganda can be categorized as the following:\r\n1. Drought and Food security related early warning systems\r\n • Karamoja Drought Early Warning System (DEWS). Established\r\n in 2008, this system collects and analyzes data on 31 indicators to\r\n monitor hazards and vulnerability that fall into five main categories,\r\n namely, crops, livestock, human health, water, and livelihood. Every\r\n month, data are taken from a representative sample of 10 households\r\n per parish (75 parishes in total are sampled), recorded, analyzed\r\n by district departmental heads, and communicated as a monthly\r\n drought bulletin through a variety of means, including e-mails to\r\n decision makers and to communities through radio programs, dra-\r\n mas through role plays, and mobile phones. The bulletins provide\r\n four drought risk classifications, namely, normal, alert, alarm, and\r\n emergency. The system is largely implemented by the district local\r\n government with oversight from line ministries and financially by a\r\n nongovernmental organization ACTED, supported by FAO. DEWS\r\n appears technically sustainable in that it has a track record of using\r\n district-level and community-based actors to collect information.\r\n Although an exit strategy was developed in 2012 aimed at a phased\r\n handover to the government both in terms of the financing of DEWS\r\n and independent technical management of the activities, this has not\r\n been implemented and donor funding has come to an end.\r\n • Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET). Established\r\n by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in 1985,\r\n FEWS NET helps decision makers plan for humanitarian crises and\r\n provides evidence-based analysis through monitoring of hazards that\r\n may have an impact on food security (for example, droughts, floods,\r\n price shocks, livestock epidemics). This is integrated with informa-\r\n tion and data on markets and trade, nutrition, livestock and crop pro-\r\n duction, and livelihoods to evaluate current and future food security\r\n conditions. The indicators used include TOT, satellite rainfall esti-\r\n mates, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), price data,\r\n nutrition indexes, monthly price data of staple foods, livestock, and\r\n livelihood commodities such as firewood, charcoal, and wage labor.\r\n FEWS NET uses the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification\r\n (IPC) scale to determine food insecurity.\r\n FEWS NET relies on a network of partners to access the data\r\n needed including market prices of staples in Karamoja from the\r\n World Food Programme (WFP) and Farmgain Africa for other\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 57\r\n\f major markets in Uganda. FEWS NET uses seasonal rainfall fore-\r\n casts provided by the Uganda National Meteorological Authority\r\n (UNMA), as well as forecasts by the European Centre for Medium\r\n Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) and the National Oceanic and\r\n Atmospheric Administration. UNMA forecasts are accessed after\r\n the meetings of the Greater Horn of Africa Climate Outlook Forum\r\n (GHACOF). Sometimes there are updates on the rainfall forecast\r\n between GHACOF meetings. Based on the seasonal rainfall forecasts\r\n and by asking what people have planted and how it has germinated,\r\n FEWS NET develops general predictions regarding crop perfor-\r\n mance. These are validated in the field.\r\n A bulletin on food security and vulnerability in Uganda is issued\r\n quarterly and is shared with policy makers. However, the results\r\n produced by FEWS NET do not appear to be widely used by the\r\n Ugandan government. FEWS NET has a commitment to deliver\r\n monthly reports to USAID and hence cannot always wait for the offi-\r\n cial approval of the Ugandan government before issuing bulletins.\r\n FEWS NET is wholly funded by USAID based on a 5-year funding\r\n cycle. Its reliance on donor funding could affect its long-term sustain-\r\n ability because any change in donor funding priorities would result in\r\n its downscaling or in termination of the early warning activities.\r\n • World Food Programme (WFP) Vulnerability Analysis and\r\n Monitoring (VAM). The WFP on a regular basis, either as stand-\r\n alone WFP activities or in partnership with other agencies such as\r\n FEWS NET, collects and analyzes food security, market, and nutrition\r\n data. Every 6 months in partnership with UNICEF, WFP conducts\r\n a food security and nutrition assessment for Karamoja that collects\r\n data on several regional indicators. On a monthly basis, WFP collects\r\n food price data on various commodities in major markets across the\r\n country, such as maize, beans, rice, goats, and sorghum, and issues a\r\n monthly bulletin showing price trends. These bulletins are distributed\r\n by e-mail to policy makers, central and district-level governments,\r\n and food security and agricultural livelihoods cluster members and\r\n donors, and is downloadable from the WFP’s Vulnerability Assessment\r\n and Monitoring (VAM) website. The WFP’s VAM uses staff at a dis-\r\n trict level. From a technical point of view, the methods used to collect\r\n the data are technically sustainable. However, without support from\r\n the WFP, these data would not have been collected.\r\n • Disaster Risk Financing (DRF). This is established under the sup-\r\n port of Third Northern Uganda Social Action Fund Project (NUSAF\r\n III) with a loan from the World Bank. The Department of Relief,\r\n Disaster Preparedness and Management through NECOC imple-\r\n ments a disaster risk financing subcomponent in Karamoja by col-\r\n lecting, analyzing, and storing risk-related information. The primary\r\n indicator for whether DRF should be triggered within Karamoja is\r\n based on NDVI, which is freely available from various remote sensing\r\n\r\n\r\n58 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\f sources online. A monthly NDVI analysis is performed during the\r\n crop growing season and findings shared with the members of the\r\n DRF subcommittee.\r\n The secondary indicator is Integrated Food Security Phase\r\n Classification (IPC), which uses information collected by other\r\n EWSs such as DEWS, FEWS NET, and WFP (for example, food con-\r\n sumption–related indexes, coping strategies, the number of children\r\n admitted to feeding centers, staple food prices, terms of trade [TOT]).\r\n A DRF subcommittee was formed in December 2015, and com-\r\n prises organizations whose activities contribute to the country’s food\r\n security. The organizations include Office of the Prime Minister\r\n (OPM); FAO; WFP; FEWS NET; Ministry of Health; Ministry of\r\n Water and the Environment; ACTED; United Nations Development\r\n Programme (UNDP); UNMA; Makerere University; Ministry of\r\n Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF); and the\r\n Uganda Bureau of Statistics. The major function of the DRF subcom-\r\n mittee is to approve the findings in the DRF report upon compilation\r\n of trigger indicators, and it is also another platform for information\r\n dissemination on Karamoja food security status.\r\n However, currently there is no established information flow from\r\n the local level to the national level. The EWS is still reliant on under-\r\n taking fieldwork by the national technical team. In addition, DRF\r\n does not encompass forecasts. Drought forecasts provide a longer\r\n lead time in which to implement public works programs in areas that\r\n are predicted to be affected by droughts.\r\n It is worth noting that the above-mentioned drought EWSs are\r\n implemented in one region of the country (Karamoja region), yet\r\n with climate change the risk has changed both in occurrence and\r\n magnitude in the cattle corridor that extends from the eastern and\r\n central to the southwestern areas of the country.\r\n2. Flood early warning systems\r\n At the national scale, no flood forecasting and warning system exits,\r\n and there is no flood forecasting and warning system specifically for the\r\n majority of areas at risk of flooding. The Department of Relief, Disaster\r\n Preparedness and Management concluded hazard, risk and vulnerability\r\n profiling at the district level and these indicated areas at risk of flood-\r\n ing. Subsequently, studies (Goretti 2013; Lumbroso 2016) have been con-\r\n ducted, with limited mapping and identification of the areas at flood risk.\r\n The following includes some of the localized initiatives that have been\r\n implemented:\r\n • Butaleja District Flood Early Warning System, established in 2014\r\n on River Manafwa as a joint venture between the government of\r\n Uganda and UN International Telecommunication Union to pro-\r\n vide communities with sufficient time to move to areas outside the\r\n flood plains when high water levels are detected upstream. It should\r\n be noted that the system does not provide forecasts for flood levels,\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 59\r\n\f meaning that it does not provide a long lead time to allow for for-\r\n mulation of appropriate decisions with a bearing on improving food\r\n security. Once the water reaches a certain level on the sensors, a sig-\r\n nal is sent to the central command center to activate a siren that can\r\n be heard in a 5 km radius. The siren gives a message in both English\r\n and the local language to warn communities about a possible flood\r\n and whether they need to evacuate to higher grounds. The EWS is\r\n relatively simple and would appear to be technically sustainable.\r\n However, no budgetary provisions have been made at a district level\r\n to cover any maintenance issues that may arise.\r\n • Pilot forecast-based financing scheme for floods for northeast\r\n Uganda. This has been piloted by the IFRC Climate Center, the\r\n German Red Cross and the Uganda Red Cross Society focusing on 16\r\n villages in Abim, Katakwi, Kotido, and Soroti (Jongman et al. 2016).\r\n The pilot relies on the Global Flood Awareness System (GLOFAS)\r\n run by the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts\r\n (ECMWF), which uses probabilistic forecasts of relevant variables\r\n (rainfall, temperature) with a simple hydrological and hydraulic\r\n model to produce probabilistic forecasts for 40 days in advance.\r\n The GLOFAS is set to produce warnings based on the probability of\r\n exceeding certain probabilities of flow-return periods of 1 in 2, 1 in 5,\r\n and 1 in 20 years (Jongman 2016). To improve its accuracy, the model\r\n is validated with phone Short Message Service (SMS) text messages\r\n and this informed the decision by the German Red Cross to enter\r\n into partnership with Ureport—an SMS-based communication plat-\r\n form launched by UNICEF in 2010. Because the GLOFAS model uses\r\n a forecast of the flood hazard, it could be a useful tool to implement\r\n low-regret actions in flood-risk areas.\r\n The GLOFAS website is freely accessible; however, from a technical\r\n sustainability point of view, its accuracy is low. It would also require\r\n the Ministry of Water and Environment to set aside sufficient bud-\r\n get to allow its members of staff to assist the ECMWF with improv-\r\n ing its forecasting accuracy for large rivers in Uganda. Although the\r\n IGAD/ICPAC recently rolled out flood forecasting models such as\r\n GeoCLIM to member states, these are still based at NECOC await-\r\n ing training of technical experts from line institutions and districts.\r\n Thus, this will take some time because it requires financing of short\r\n trainings.\r\n3. Weather forecasts and warnings for farmers\r\n Approximately 80 percent of Ugandans depend on agriculture for income\r\n and food security; hence, any threat to agricultural production degrades\r\n Uganda’s socioeconomic status and puts a huge population at risk of\r\n poverty and hunger (Lumbroso 2016). In many low-income countries\r\n effectively disseminating weather forecasts and warnings to farmers\r\n is challenging and meteorological authorities often generate warnings\r\n solely in English using technical language.\r\n\r\n\r\n60 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\f The following details two weather forecasting and warning sys-\r\n tems aimed at farmers in Uganda:\r\n • Africa Climate Change Resilience Alliance (ACCRA) weather fore-\r\n cast and warning system. Under this ACCRA system run by UNMA,\r\n at the beginning of each season, a half-day meeting composed of key\r\n sector actors is held, the output of which is a simplified forecast for\r\n each Uganda district (ACCRA 2014). The forecast from GHACOF is\r\n translated into local languages (so far, 22 out of 54 locally spoken lan-\r\n guages in Uganda) and the translations are produced on prerecorded\r\n audio CDs, which are then sent to radio stations and posted on the\r\n UNMA website as audio broadcasts (Lumbroso 2016). It is worth\r\n noting the system is one of the few in Uganda that uses forecasts and\r\n generates warnings aimed at a specific user group. Because it uses\r\n regional forecasts from GHACOF, it should be technically sustain-\r\n able. However, because ACCRA is an NGO, it is not clear whether\r\n budgetary provisions for funding have been made within the relevant\r\n government department.\r\n • Mobile 3-2-1 service. This is being developed based on lessons\r\n learned in Malawi and Madagascar by Human Network International\r\n (HNI), an international development organization specializing in\r\n technology dissemination in partnership with Airtel Uganda, a tele-\r\n communication company. HNI is currently working with Airtel on a\r\n free SMS-based information and warning system covering only Airtel\r\n subscribers. The system will be owned and operated by Airtel in the\r\n districts bordering Lake Victoria and along the cattle corridor. The\r\n service provides users with 10 free SMS messages per month con-\r\n taining information on microfinancing, health, and water; however,\r\n in the future, it will provide information on weather warnings; there-\r\n fore, it has the potential to raise sizable awareness on risks posed by\r\n weather, including risks to agriculture. The system is one of the few\r\n primarily reliant on a private sector organization. However, pilot pro-\r\n grams in Malawi and Madagascar have shown that it has the potential\r\n to be both financially and technically sustainable.\r\n4. Disease warning tools\r\n There are a number of tools in Uganda that are used or are being piloted\r\n for the surveillance of livestock diseases. It worth noting that these tools\r\n are not strictly EWS. These are briefly described in the following:\r\n • Pictorial Evaluation Tool (PET). This is a pilot phase in Karamoja as\r\n an objective, ground-based system to provide objective means of rap-\r\n idly of assessing crop yields and livestock conditions by comparing\r\n observations in the field with photo-indicators of actual crops and\r\n animals. Training for district and MAAIF officers by FAO on use of\r\n the tools is currently under way.\r\n • EMPRES-i event mobile application. Commissioned by the Irish\r\n government and FAO in 2013, it was piloted in 10 districts as a\r\n smartphone-based tool to report animal disease outbreaks. It allows\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 61\r\n\f for workers to use smartphones to communicate disease outbreaks to\r\n the Uganda National Animal Disease Diagnostic and Epidemiology\r\n Centre. Although it was found to be useful, it is unclear whether it\r\n continues to be used and how sustainable it is from a financial and\r\n technical point of view.\r\n5. MAAIF Early Warning System\r\n The Planning Unit at the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industries\r\n and Fisheries (MAAIF) issues warnings after analyzing implications of\r\n UNMA season forecasts on agriculture. The warnings are accompanied\r\n by advisory messages and mitigation measures for crops, livestock, and\r\n fisheries. Within each growing season crop, livestock and fish monitoring\r\n takes place. A postharvest assessment is also carried out.\r\n The IPC working group composed of MAAIF, FAO, WFP, Makerere\r\n University, and other key actors handles data analysis at the national\r\n level. It is worth noting that access to adequate data, especially for the\r\n Karamoja, remains a challenge. Additionally, schedules for regular mon-\r\n itoring of livestock, fish, and crops are nonexistent. Notably, triggers for\r\n responses have never been set. From the reports developed, there is one\r\n specifically focusing on Karamoja because it is the most vulnerable region\r\n in the country. The information generated is disseminated as advisories\r\n twice a year through newspapers and e-mails to local government, as well\r\n as via local radios.\r\n Although the MAAIF EWS uses seasonal climate forecasts from\r\n UNMA just like most other EWSs in Uganda, it does not forecast the risk.\r\n Additionally, it appears underresourced and lacks a feedback mechanism,\r\n which makes it difficult to ascertain how effective it is in reaching vulner-\r\n able communities and engendering a response.\r\n6. NECOC Disaster Monitoring System\r\n NECOC Disaster Monitoring System, developed with support from\r\n UNICEF, is a community-led alert system managed by the Department of\r\n Disaster Preparedness and Office of Prime Minister (OPM). It is a coun-\r\n trywide web-based application system that receives and sends SMS mes-\r\n sages with the use of a short code on mobile-based communication tools.\r\n In 2016, OPM applied to the Uganda Communication Commission for\r\n a toll-free number so that users can send messages at no cost (Lumbroso\r\n 2016).\r\n At the district level, data are collected by Chief Administrative Officers\r\nusing the Open Data Kit (ODK) to collect for detailed information to inform\r\nresponse to a disaster. The ODK has a number of forms that cover issues\r\nrelated to a hazard, such as:\r\n• Number of households affected\r\n• Origins of the data\r\n• Coordinates of the hazard\r\n• Number of mothers affected\r\n• Number of children affected\r\n\r\n\r\n62 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fThe ODK uses the DesInventar platform for collecting and generating data-\r\nsets. NECOC has an ICT infrastructure to operate the system and has a ded-\r\nicated technical team, so the system is technically sustainable. The District\r\nDisaster Management Committee has the responsibility to profile, validate\r\nthe nature of the disaster, and thereafter decide on the appropriate response.\r\nThe long-term goal is to get one trusted member of the community at a sub-\r\ncounty level operating the system (that is, one person per 60,000).\r\n However, the system does not forecast hazards and relies on an individual\r\nto feed information into the ODK. The system is currently funded by UNDP\r\nand it is unclear if OPM will provide funding to NECOC for future operations.\r\n\r\nChallenges Faced by EWSs in Uganda\r\nMost of the challenges in Uganda’s EWSs relate to governance and finance\r\ngaps. Good governance is facilitated by robust legal and regulatory frame-\r\nworks and effective institutional arrangements. Critical challenges include:\r\n• Technological development, especially the use of mobile phone by most\r\n CSOs to collect EW information. This has led to “individualization” of\r\n EWS, citing failure of responsible agencies to act in real time. Thus, NECOC\r\n with the relevant line ministry take responsibility for any false warnings,\r\n accuracy, and authenticity of the information, as well as related costs.\r\n• Poor coordination of response and accountability. Early warning infor-\r\n mation is transmitted to relevant ministries, CSOs, and other agencies\r\n that quite often use it in bits to develop plans. This makes it impossible to\r\n arrive at a coordinated and timely action.\r\n• Lack of constant, guaranteed, and adequate funding, which results in\r\n unsatisfactory equipment and staffing levels. This therefore threatens the\r\n sustainability of early warning systems.\r\n• Limited technical capacity owing to the fact most of the country’s EWSs\r\n do not have a forecasting element to them, making it hard to engender\r\n early action. Therefore, inadequate capacities in terms of knowledge and\r\n skills continue to be a challenge to supporting the proper functioning of\r\n different early warning systems. Additionally, EW methodologies, tools,\r\n and techniques are often inadequate or poorly integrated. This, therefore,\r\n threatens the reliability and timeliness of EW information.\r\n\r\nRecommendaƟons:\r\n\r\n1. Support incorporation of climate forecasts into most nationally available\r\n EWSs and tools to foster formulation and operationalization of early\r\n (timely) action. This will necessitate facilitating specialized training on\r\n use of forecast models and tools.\r\n2. Produce and disseminate simplified EWS messages that include risk\r\n information designed to link threat levels to contingency preparedness\r\n and response actions; understood by authorities and end users; and\r\n issued from a single (or unified), recognized and authoritative source.\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 63\r\n\f3. Support alignment of technical capacities with financial across national\r\n and local governments to facilitate development and out-scaling of rele-\r\n vant EWSs and tools and corresponding response mechanisms.\r\n4. Establish a national early warning committee or secretariat to facilitate\r\n coordination with respect to existing EWSs and relevant tools.\r\n5. Strengthen Uganda’s institutional framework for disaster management by\r\n supporting development of a comprehensive law on disaster risk manage-\r\n ment and food security related emergencies.\r\n6. Build capacity to downscale global and regional climate change informa-\r\n tion to national and subnational level to support decision making.\r\n7. Develop tools to support vulnerable households and communities to\r\n establish household community systems that can respond to emergencies.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nPerformance of Food Security EWS\r\nat the Regional Level\r\nThe EWS and Risk Knowledge at the Regional Level\r\n\r\nConducting regular food security risk assessments is one of the key roles of\r\nthe regional institutions. Understanding regional hazards and key vulnerabil-\r\nities requires regular systematic collection and analysis of data to help priori-\r\ntize EWS needs and guide preparations for disaster prevention and responses.\r\nTable 3.6 shows the proportion of responses that indicate weaknesses in the\r\nrisk assessment thematic subjects, scoring low on the 5-point scale, and the\r\nthematic subjects under risk assessment that are ineffective, showing low\r\nfrequencies of the categories of Agree and Strongly Agree. Most participants\r\n(69  percent) agreed that the agencies involved in risk assessments at the\r\nregional level have clear roles and responsibilities. This was substantiated by\r\ntwo main reasons, as outlined in the following discussion.\r\n First, the main agencies involved in the collection of hydrometeorological\r\nhazard data are ICPAC and the SADC’s CSC. Institutionalized in IGAD and\r\nSADC, respectively, both ICPAC and CSC organize annual seasonal climate\r\nforecasts, through GHACOF and SARCOF, where they bring together mem-\r\nber states and development agencies to report on weather forecasts for the\r\nnext rainy season, often 6 months ahead of time. The impacts of GHACOF\r\nand SARCOF manifest on the extent to which they inform the National\r\nClimate Outlook Forums and help users to decide on their farming activities\r\nand dam management options and guide disease preventions such as malaria\r\nprevention and control. What is clearly a good practice is the extent to which\r\nthe GHACOF report outlines actions that should be considered by the users\r\n(see box 2.2), which is not clearly stated in the SARCOF reports. Some of the\r\nchallenges ICPAC and CSC face are summarized in box 3.3.\r\n Similarly, the roles and responsibilities of agencies involved in vulnera-\r\nbility assessments are outlined across the RECs. In IGAD the FSNWG is a\r\nforum for building consensus on food and nutrition policy and interventions,\r\n\r\n\r\n64 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.6 Effectiveness of Risk Assessments at the Regional Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nAgencies involved in hazard and 25 44 6 25 0\r\nvulnerability assessments are\r\nidentified and roles clarified.\r\nHazards are regularly analyzed 13 31 19 24 13\r\nand evaluated.\r\nIntegrated risk and hazard maps 19 25 6 50 0\r\nare regularly developed and\r\nassessed.\r\nRegional vulnerability 0 37 13 37 13\r\nassessments are conducted\r\nannually and with disaggregated\r\nresults.\r\nRegional vulnerability 19 31 31 19 0\r\nassessments are conducted\r\nannually on the impact of\r\nseasonal climatic hazards.\r\nIndustry is consulted during risk 0 7 53 27 13\r\nassessments.\r\nResults of risks assessment are 19 37 25 13 6\r\nintegrated into regional risk\r\nmanagement plans and warning\r\nmessages.\r\nCentral database is established 0 13 25 43 19\r\nto store risk information and is\r\navailable to users and is\r\nregularly updated.\r\nAverage 12 28 22 30 8\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n and updates the food security and nutrition situation analysis (EW). With a\r\n membership of approximately 80 organizations (IGAD, UN agencies, NGOs,\r\n donors, and research institutions), the FSNWG has been serving regional\r\n governments, donors, and nongovernment agencies since 2006. The key out-\r\n puts of the FSNWG are monthly regional food security outlooks that provide\r\n key messages and actions required by member states and agencies working in\r\n the region. The major challenge for the FSNWG is that it is not institution-\r\n alized as an IGAD coordination body. Currently, there is no regional policy\r\n mandating the preparation of hazard and vulnerability plans for the regional\r\n food and livelihood security because such a policy has not been passed by the\r\n IGAD member states.\r\n Consistent with the vulnerability context of the Horn of Africa, the regional\r\n livestock and pastoralism coordination working group has also been estab-\r\n lished as a subgroup of the FSNWG. It aims at providing a platform for\r\n technical discussion and coordinated planning by professionals and experts\r\n dedicated to livestock and pastoralism programming in the Horn of Africa\r\n (covering seven countries: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan,\r\n Sudan, and Uganda).\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 65\r\n\f However, although IGAD has established these working groups, the\r\nabsence of a working group with a clear EWS mandate is one of the crit-\r\nical gaps. The role of the EWS working group would include coordination\r\nof initiatives by various organizations such as the International Maize and\r\nWheat Improvement Center–led Integrated Agricultural Production and\r\nFood Security Forecasting System for East Africa project that was launched in\r\nApril 2015. Funded by the Consortium of International Agricultural Research\r\nCenters Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security\r\nunder its Flagship 2 initiative, the project aims to develop a robust, scientif-\r\nically sound, and user-friendly forecasting system that integrates improved\r\nseasonal climate, production, and food security forecasts for east Africa. It\r\nwill also provide accurate and spatially disaggregated early warnings to local\r\nand national governments and relief agencies, enabling them to respond to\r\nclimate crises in a timely and efficient manner.\r\n In the SADC, vulnerability assessments are guided by the Regional\r\nVulnerability Assessment Committee (RVAC) that was established in 1999.\r\nThis is a multiagency structure tasked with strengthening national and\r\nregional vulnerability analysis systems and supported by multiagency work-\r\ning groups, with the following:\r\n• Nutrition Information Management Urban Assessments IPC Centre of\r\n excellence (of five universities) and capacity-building markets assessments.\r\n• The RVAC is supported by the National Vulnerability Assessment\r\n Committees (NVACs). Although since its inception in 1999, the\r\n Vulnerability Assessment Committee (VAC) system has relied on donors\r\n and was carried out as a project, the structure reviewed in 2017 shows\r\n that the VAC system is now institutionalized in the SADC structure.\r\n Although most of the countries are at different levels in terms of capacity,\r\n there is a shift toward domestic funding of the VAC process, for example,\r\n Botswana, South Africa, and Zambia generate their own funds to conduct\r\n the vulnerability assessments.\r\n• However, about two-thirds of the participants generally disagreed on the\r\n effectiveness of the risk assessments processes and outcomes. A closer\r\n look at the thematic subjects shows that 88 percent of the participants\r\n indicated that an integrated regional food security database did not exist\r\n in each of the regions. This was confirmed through regional interviews\r\n and during the validation workshop where participants indicated that\r\n although directorates at the regional level had risk databases, they were\r\n still working in silos because there was no central portal for sharing the\r\n risk information. Some 62 percent of the participants disagreed that the\r\n risk assessment results were disaggregated according to age, gender, or\r\n disability, yet this information is critical when targeting the at-risk popu-\r\n lation. Of all the thematic subjects, the lack of involvement of the private\r\n sector in risk assessments came under the spotlight with 93 percent of\r\n the participants indicating that the private sector was not involved in risk\r\n assessments.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n66 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.7 Effectiveness of Monitoring and Warning Service at the Regional Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nRoles and responsibilities of 7 13 7 66 7\r\nagencies in generating and\r\nissuing EWs are established.\r\nAgreements are in place for 0 7 40 46 7\r\nconsistency in warning language\r\nand communication channels.\r\nRegional EWS systems are 0 20 27 33 20\r\nsubjected to systemwide tests\r\nand exercises annually.\r\nRegional EWS systems 13 7 47 33 0\r\ncommittee is in place.\r\nWarnings are verified to check 0 20 40 33 7\r\nthey have reached the intended\r\nmember states.\r\nA 24/7 regional warning center is 0 13 13 61 13\r\nin place and staffed.\r\nEquipment for hazards and 0 36 57 7 0\r\nvulnerability monitoring is\r\nsuitable, and personnel trained\r\nin O&M.\r\nHazards and food security data 7 33 27 33 0\r\nfrom regional networks and\r\ninternational sources are\r\naccessible (shared across\r\nboundaries).\r\nData are received and 0 42 29 29 0\r\nprocessed and warnings\r\ndisseminated on time, in\r\nmeaningful formats, and in real\r\nor near-real time.\r\nData analysis, prediction, and 7 13 7 66 7\r\nwarning are based on accepted\r\nscientific and technical\r\nmethodologies.\r\nAverage 3 20 29 41 6\r\n\r\n\r\n EWS Monitoring and Warning Service at the Regional Level\r\n\r\n A credible EWS service is supported by a sound scientific basis for predicting\r\n and forecasting hazards to generate accurate and timely warnings. The warn-\r\n ing should be coordinated to gain the benefit of shared institutional, proce-\r\n dural, and communication networks.\r\n Table 3.7 shows the proportion of responses that indicate the effectiveness\r\n of the monitoring and warning service thematic subjects on a 5-point scale.\r\n Generally, more than two-thirds (about 70 percent) of the respondents were\r\n of the impression that the monitoring and warning service was ineffective at\r\n the regional level. A closer look at the thematic subjects reveals that 80 per-\r\n cent felt the roles and responsibilities for agencies mandated to issue warning\r\n were unclear, because there were no regional agreements or protocols that\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 67\r\n\fclarify such roles. As well, 80 percent of the participants were not aware that\r\na regional EW committee existed. The issuance of warnings tends to be the\r\nresponsibility of directorates that have mandates in those areas. For exam-\r\nple, the Food, Agriculture, and Natural Resources directorate takes respon-\r\nsibility of the issuance of warnings. Although at the national level there are\r\nestablished procedures, at the regional level there are no clearly defined pro-\r\ncedures. Developing such standards will not require considerable technical\r\ninvestment. Because the GHACOF and SARCOF models, for example, have a\r\nwell-established system of issuing the EWs, it might be worthwhile building\r\nthe standards using these models.\r\n Another concern expressed by about two-thirds (60 percent) of the respon-\r\ndents was that the EW information was rarely shared across boundaries. For\r\nexample, whereas it is critical to access data from the Democratic Republic of\r\nCongo for flood warning for the Zambezi river, this information is not avail-\r\nable for countries in the Zambezi basin. Sharing information across boundar-\r\nies is one of the requirements for effective monitoring of threats. The EWS for\r\neach country gives preference to the safety of its citizens. From this perspec-\r\ntive, cross-boundary risk can receive less attention. Although some data can\r\nbe accessed from satellite-based datasets, there are considerable challenges in\r\nsharing EWS information between member states. The absence of MoUs or a\r\nregional policy or protocol compounds the challenge. For example, Somalia\r\nheavily relies on the rivers flowing from Ethiopia. Information on river levels\r\nin Ethiopia is rarely shared with food security analysts in Somalia; however,\r\nthis information is critical for the Somalis whose livelihoods are dependent\r\non those rivers to act if the information is shared on time. In some cases, the\r\ninformation is posted online but the problem is that rural communities may\r\nnot be able to access such information because of lack of Internet access and\r\nresources to purchase Internet bundles.\r\n Systemwide testing and exercises for EWSs for hazards such as drought,\r\nfloods, structural failures (for example, dam failures), fire, lightning, cyclones,\r\nthunderstorms, and pest infestations should be regularly conducted. About\r\n80 percent of the participants felt that EWSs were rarely tested at the regional\r\nlevel. Although some countries conduct simulation exercises, for exam-\r\nple, Madagascar and Mozambique on cyclones and floods and Zambia and\r\nZimbabwe on the Kariba Dam wall failure, the tests for fire and insect infesta-\r\ntions such as the FAW are rare. A structured regional approach is required to\r\nenhance the capacity testing and simulation in the region. This will help expose\r\nthe information and resources gaps. These weaknesses were compounded by\r\nthe absence of a 24/7 regional warning center, or EOC, with about 87 percent\r\nof the participants correctly disagreeing that such a facility existed.\r\n Effective EWSs have a feedback system to verify whether warnings have\r\nbeen received and acted upon. Although the risk information on health,\r\nnutrition, food availability, migration, and cross-border traders, for example,\r\nis shared through the FSNWG and RVAC bulletins, 80 percent of the par-\r\nticipants stated that there were no regional verification systems in place to\r\nascertain the uptake and utilization of this information. Establishing such a\r\n\r\n\r\n68 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.8 Effectiveness of EWS Dissemination and Communication at the Regional Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nEW communication and 29 7 43 14 7\r\ndissemination are tailored to the\r\nneeds of the member states.\r\nPrivate sector resources are 7 7 50 29 7\r\navailable where appropriate.\r\nWarning alerts and messages 0 36 14 50 0\r\nare tailored to the specific needs\r\nof those at risk.\r\nAverage 12 17 36 31 5\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n system might not require substantial investment for users who have access\r\n to information technology because it might involve creating an interactive\r\n platform on the website. However, for the target group, and in this case the\r\n affected communities, it might be possible to use the existing focal persons\r\n network in member states who will be requested to provide feedback to verify\r\n whether the information has been acted upon.\r\n\r\n EW InformaƟon DisseminaƟon and CommunicaƟon\r\n at the Regional Level\r\n An effective EWS depends on the robustness of the dissemination and com-\r\n munication system that is tailored to the needs of the users. Table 3.8 sum-\r\n marizes the responses on the status of dissemination and communication\r\n of regional EW information. Although about 36 percent of the participants\r\n agree that a regional system for disseminating EWS information through, for\r\n example, SARCOF, GHACOF, FSNWG, and RVAC is generally well estab-\r\n lished, about 64 percent of the participants felt that warning messages were\r\n not tailored to the needs of at-risk communities, suggesting the EW informa-\r\n tion is of little use to the communities to help them make decisions.\r\n Although the involvement of the private sector in the dissemination and\r\n communication of EWS information has come under the spotlight over\r\n the years, about 86 percent of the participants stated that the private sec-\r\n tor resources were rarely used in the dissemination and communication of\r\n warnings at the regional level. KIs revealed that where the private sector was\r\n involved, these tended to be ad hoc, with no agreements or MoUs governing\r\n such involvement.\r\n\r\n UƟlizing EW InformaƟon for Response Planning\r\n The capacity to apply the EW information to preparedness and response plan-\r\n ning is one of the indicators of an effective EWS. Using a 5-point scale, table 3.9\r\n presents respondents’ views on the extent to which the EW information trig-\r\n gered regional response mechanisms. The results reveal that most (64 percent)\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 69\r\n\fTABLE 3.9 Effectiveness of Response to Regional Warnings at the Regional Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nHazard and vulnerability maps 21 43 21 15 0\r\ninform regional emergency\r\npreparedness and response\r\nplans.\r\nRegular tests and drills are 7 14 43 29 7\r\nconducted to test the\r\neffectiveness of EWS\r\ndissemination and responses.\r\nMember states respond 0 21 36 29 14\r\neffectively to EWs associated\r\nwith all seasonal climatic\r\nhazards.\r\nMember states respond 7 14 43 29 7\r\neffectively to all EWs associated\r\nwith socioeconomic hazards.\r\nAverage 9 23 36 26 7\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nof the participants agreed that EW data informed the regional preparedness\r\nand response plans. In the SADC region, the preseason workshops that are\r\nheld before the onset of the rainy season use the data from SARCOF and RVAC\r\nto assist member states to develop contingency plans for the approaching rainy\r\nseason. Similarly, in IGAD, the FSNWG issues bulletins, which assist member\r\nstates to review and develop their contingency plans.\r\n Although the study found that risk data were used to develop contingency\r\nplans across the regions, the feeling by some 79 percent of the respondents is\r\nthat there are no systems for simulation exercises. Particularly considering\r\nthe threat of the FAW, the benefits of simulation exercises could be immense\r\nbecause they help in identifying gaps in preparedness and response plans,\r\nincluding information deficiencies, unrealistic planning assumptions and\r\nscenarios, and resource gaps. To develop such a system does not require a\r\nsubstantial amount of investment, because the major input is to develop the\r\nexercising materials, which can be developed with the support of cooperating\r\npartners. However, to be effective, what might be required is to develop an\r\nexercising group that will provide guidelines and schedules for such exercises.\r\n Timely response to warnings is of essence to save lives and livelihoods. If\r\nthe affected communities responded on time, it is possible to reduce the dev-\r\nastating impact of a materialized hazard. However, 79 percent of the partic-\r\nipants in this study felt that the regional response was often delayed until\r\nthe situation turned into an emergency. It is clear from the way the SADC\r\nresponded to the 2016 El Niño-induced drought that the SADC EWS faces\r\nchallenges, because this system was unable to adequately inform the SADC\r\nof the impending food insecurity. At a meeting in Johannesburg in February\r\n2016 that was intended to produce a road map for the humanitarian appeal,\r\nmost member states did not have up-to-date information. It was not until\r\n\r\n\r\n70 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fJune 2017 that member states could produce the assessments results to inform\r\nthe appeal that was launched in July 2016. This suggests the system is “not\r\nwell oiled” and, therefore, not as effective in providing EWS information on\r\ntime. One way of prompting early action is to engage in advocacy with policy\r\nmakers and senior government officials on the benefits of taking early action.\r\nThis requires evidence on the costs and benefits of taking early action, which\r\ncan be obtained post disaster events.\r\n\r\nEWS Regional Governance Mechanisms\r\n\r\nWell-developed governance and effective institutional arrangements support\r\nthe successful development and sustainability of sound EWS systems. These\r\nshould be supported by good governance, robust legal and regulatory frame-\r\nworks, long-term political commitment, broader participation, and adminis-\r\ntrative and resource capabilities at the national and subnational levels. Vertical\r\nand horizontal communication and coordination between EW stakeholders\r\nshould also be established (UNISDR 2006).\r\n Table 3.10 summarizes the regional EWS institutional arrangements. Some\r\n92 percent of study participants noted a lack of awareness of regional lead-\r\ners on the benefits of investing in EWSs, whereas 77 percent of the partici-\r\npants felt that EWSs are not integrated into the regional planning process.\r\nThis suggests that EWSs are perceived as a response activity rather than part\r\nof regular development processes. There was concern over unreliable and\r\nunpredictable resource mobilization from the RECs, with all the participants,\r\nboth questionnaire and interviews, stating that EWSs were primarily funded\r\nby external sources, which raises questions on the sustainability of programs.\r\nInterestingly, all participants also felt that the PPPs were underused to help\r\ngenerate alternative sources of funding.\r\n Besides the resource challenges, the ESA region faces coordination chal-\r\nlenges. The following five RECs in ESA are recognized by the AU:\r\n• EAC\r\n• SADC\r\n• IGAD\r\n• COMESA\r\n• ECCAS\r\n In addition, there are two RECs that are not recognized by the AU:\r\n• Southern African Customs Union (SACU)\r\n• IOC\r\n All the RECs have a focus on regional economic cooperation and inte-\r\ngration, and considering the ESA region being agro-based, all the RECs\r\nhave a remit on food security. Table 3.11 shows that most countries in the\r\nESA region have multiple memberships to the RECs, with 11 countries\r\nbeing members of three RECs. This creates a situation of overlapping and\r\nin some cases competing commitments across member states, which poses\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 71\r\n\fTABLE 3.10 Institutional Arrangements and Investment at the Regional Level\r\n Frequency, percent\r\n Strongly Somewhat Strongly\r\nSubjects agree Agree disagree Disagree disagree\r\nBenefits of EWS are highlighted 0 8 38 46 8\r\nto regional leaders.\r\nEWS is integrated into regional 0 23 62 15 0\r\nplanning.\r\nRegional and cross-border 0 8 58 34 0\r\nagencies are established for\r\nEWS integration.\r\nCapacities of agencies are 0 0 38 54 8\r\nassessed and capacity-building\r\nplans developed and resourced.\r\nRegional funding mechanisms 0 0 46 39 15\r\nfor EW are developed and\r\ninstitutionalized.\r\nPPPs are utilized to support the 0 0 54 23 23\r\nEWS system.\r\nRegional EWS policy is in place. 13 19 56 6 6\r\nRegional standards for EWS are 0 38 31 13 18\r\nin place.\r\nAgreements are in place for 0 7 40 47 8\r\nconsistency in warning language\r\nand communication channels.\r\nRegional EWSs committee is in 13 7 47 33 0\r\nplace.\r\nWarning dissemination chain is 0 21 36 36 7\r\nenforced through regional policy.\r\nAgreements are developed to 0 15 54 23 8\r\nutilize private sector resources in\r\nthe dissemination warning.\r\nAverage 2 12 47 31 8\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nchallenges for members to discharge their obligations, including maintain-\r\ning their membership subscriptions. A closer look at table 3.12 reveals some\r\nduplication within the RECs on food security, but they also tend to heavily\r\nrely on external resources.\r\n Of the countries studied, Swaziland and Zimbabwe belong to the SADC,\r\nwhereas Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Sudan are IGAD members.\r\n Synthesis of data from IGAD and SADC member states reveals minimal\r\ndifferences. Across the board, the following are salient issues that deserve pol-\r\nicy action at a REC level:\r\n• Nonexistence of national standards for risk assessment\r\n• Limited reliance on hazard and vulnerability maps in the development of\r\n national emergency preparedness and response plans\r\n• Nonexistence of regular public awareness/education campaigns concern-\r\n ing disaster risks\r\n• Limited consultation of affected communities and industries while con-\r\n ducting risk assessment\r\n\r\n\r\n72 CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n\fTABLE 3.11 ESA RECs and Their Member States Overlaps\r\nCountry COMESA EAC ECCAS IGAD IOC SACU SADC\r\nAngola X X X\r\nBotswana X X\r\nBurundi X X X\r\nComoros X X\r\nCongo, Dem. Rep. X X X\r\nDjibouti X X\r\nEgypt X\r\nEthiopia X\r\nEretria X X\r\nKenya X X X\r\nLesotho X X\r\nLibya X\r\nMadagascar X X X\r\nMalawi X\r\nMauritius X X X\r\nMozambique X X\r\nNamibia X X X\r\nRwanda X X X\r\nSeychelles X X X\r\nSomalia X\r\nSouth Africa X X\r\nSouth Sudan X X X\r\nSudan X X\r\nSwaziland X X X\r\nTanzania X X\r\nUganda X X X\r\nZambia X X\r\nZimbabwe X X\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n • Absence of binding agreements for consistency in warning language and\r\n communication channels\r\n • Failure to tailor warning alerts and messages to the specific needs of those\r\n at risk and incorporate the understanding of the values, concerns and\r\n interests of those who will need to take action\r\n This means challenges to EWSs across the African continent are similar,\r\n with scattered best practice information. Thus, the need exists to encourage\r\n and support knowledge and experience sharing between countries, regardless\r\n of REC membership.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa 73\r\n\f TABLE 3.12 Regional EWS Institutional Summary\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n74\r\n Region Agency/system Roles and responsibilities Products and services Weaknesses\r\n SADC CSC Provides operational services for monitoring Weather/climate forecasts, including SARCOF and Technical capacity and resources\r\n and predicting climate extremes capacity building\r\n Food Security Regional Early Warning System provides Food security bulletins, seasonal outlooks, and Technical capacity, external\r\n Information System advance information on food crop yields and monthly regional balance sheet resources, and diverse\r\n food supplies and requirements. methodologies\r\n RVAA Humanitarian situation, RFBS, and food insecure Technical capacity, resources,\r\n population and multiple methodologies\r\n DRR Unit Develops regional DRR strategies and DRR strategies, including regional preparedness Limited technical capacity and\r\n facilitates preseason preparedness plans and response strategies reliance on external resources\r\n and postseason lessons learning\r\n Regional Early Warning Strengthen the SADC mechanisms for Security information and inputs to RVAA program No clear integration to food\r\n Centre conflict prevention, management, and security\r\n resolution\r\n IGAD ICPAC Climate monitoring, prediction, applications, Dekadal (10 day) and monthly bulletins, seasonal Reliance on external funding\r\n capacity building, environmental monitoring, outlooks including GHACOF, and climate watch\r\n DRR, dissemination, and research\r\n Conflict Early Warning Assess situations that could potentially lead Linking conflict and food security and EWSs by Weak link with food security EWS\r\n and Response to violence or conflicts and prevent considering ICPAC climatic forecast and reliance on external\r\n Mechanism escalation resources\r\n Center for Pastoral Regional livestock and dry-lands policy, Transboundary animal disease control, livestock Reliance on external funding\r\n Areas and Livestock research and development, coordination, products trade, and mapping cross-border\r\n Development and capacity building resources\r\n FSNWG Up-to-date food security and nutrition Monthly regional food security and nutrition outlook External resources and not\r\n analysis and building of consensus on through e-mail and posted online institutionalized in IGAD structure\r\n critical issues facing policy and intervention\r\n EAC Agriculture and Food Improve food security, strengthen the EWS, RFBS, cross-border trade monitoring, and EAGC Policy, technical capacity, and\r\n Security and increase inter/intra-regional trade bulletin multiple membership\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 3—Performance of EWSs in East and Southern Africa\r\n COMESA Climate Change Unit Address the impacts of climate change in the Updates on the COMESA-EAC-SADC tripartite Reliance on external funding,\r\n COMESA-EAC-SADC region and promote arrangements coordination between the RECs,\r\n climate-smart agriculture and multiple membership\r\n Food and Agricultural Improve agricultural marketing through the Information portal and cellular-based information Reliance on external funding,\r\n Marketing Information dissemination of market information, policy platform to inform conservation agriculture, weather, coordination between the RECs,\r\n System changes, and impacts and agro-dealers and multiple membership\r\n\fCHAPTER 4\r\nStrategies for Long-Term\r\nSustainability of Investments on\r\nEarly Warning Systems\r\n\r\nIntroduction\r\nDocumenting the value of hydrometeorological services helps to justify\r\ninvestment in NMHSs as well as those agencies tasked with vulnerability\r\nassessments and monitoring. It is particularly important to consider that\r\nmore than 100 NMHSs in developing countries need substantial investment\r\nto bring their services to a level at which they can provide timely, reliable, and\r\naccurate forecasts of high-impact weather to the public and to national eco-\r\nnomic sectors (Rogers and Tsirkunov 2013). This chapter highlights some of\r\nthe investment required to strengthen an EWS. The chapter begins by a reflec-\r\ntion on the cost-benefit analysis of investing in EWSs. The costs are estimates\r\nbased on other studies and field consultations. It is important to highlight that\r\nonly a few comprehensive studies on the benefit-cost ratio have been carried\r\nout in developing countries. Some of the costing presented in this chapter has\r\nnot been subjected to rigorous costs-benefit analyses to determine the BCR\r\nand the economic rate of return to such investments.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Costs and Benefits of Investing in an EWS\r\nAlthough there is a widespread recognition of the need to improve countries’\r\ncapacity to prepare and respond to evolving and future food insecurity crises,\r\nas the data suggest in chapter 3, there is still a challenge investing in food\r\nsecurity EWSs in the ESA region. Part of the problem is lack of studies that\r\ndemonstrate the benefits of such investments. Most of the studies that have\r\nbeen conducted have tended to be focused toward assessing the benefits of\r\ninvesting in agrometeorological services. There is still a high level of com-\r\npartmentalization in the analyses that hinder the ability to integrate the entire\r\nfood security and EW information system, considering all the components\r\nof effective end-to-end EWS, that include physical climate hazards and social\r\nvulnerability dimensions. However, even without a comprehensive analysis\r\nof costs and benefits of the entire information system, the studies on weather\r\nand climate services are overwhelmingly positive and suggest the triple bot-\r\ntom line benefits of investing in NMHSs (box 4.1). The BCRs as illustrated in\r\ntable 4.1 range from 2:1 to 36:1, and in one study, in which the value of lives\r\nwas quantified, a BCR of 2,000:1 was estimated.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 75\r\n\f BOX 4.1 Benefits of Early Action\r\n A study by the U.K. Department for International Development that examined the relative costs\r\n of early and late action for drought in Kenya and Ethiopia suggests that the economic case for\r\n early action is compelling. Over a 20-year period of droughts on a 5-year cycle, it was estimated\r\n that early procurement by agencies and early interventions to support pastoralist livelihoods such\r\n as commercial destocking, supplementary animal feeding, and veterinary services could generate\r\n significant savings relative to an emergency response. In the Wajir district of Kenya these were\r\n estimated to be US$392 million, and in the more populous region of southern Ethiopia it was\r\n US$3,066 million: more than US$1,000 per beneficiary in each case (table B4.1.1).\r\n\r\n TABLE B4.1.1 Cost Estimates for Drought Responses in Horn of Africa,\r\n Discounted over 20 Years\r\n Saving\r\n Beneficiaries Emergency Early action Saving per capita\r\n Wajir, Kenya 367,000 US$606 million US$214 million US$392 million US$1,068\r\n Southern 2,800,000 US$3,800 US$734 million US$3,066 US$1,095\r\n Ethiopia million million\r\n Source: Bailey 2012, 6.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n In developing countries, which include the ESA countries, the benefits, on\r\naverage, range from 4:1 to 36:1, for example, in Nepal (10:1) and Ethiopia (3:1\r\nto 6:1). There is, however, a need for caution when analyzing those World\r\nBank projects in Sub-Saharan Africa in table 4.2 that have a strong element\r\nof food security and EW information systems. Although the range of BCRs\r\nappears to be at the lower end of the average of developing countries, if the\r\nwider social benefits were included in the cost-benefit analyses, in addition to\r\nthe direct quantifiable benefits, the benefits are much higher.\r\n Similarly, the BCR of improving national hydrometeorological services in\r\ndeveloping countries ranges from 4:1 to 36:1. In Ethiopia, a drought EWS can\r\npotentially reduce livelihood losses and dependence on assistance, with a\r\nBCR ranging from 3:1 to 6:1 (WMO 2015).\r\n There are several examples of the benefits of investing in EWSs. Some EWS\r\nprojects are currently being implemented across Africa (table 4.3). In the\r\nDemocratic Republic of Congo, the World Bank is supporting a project called\r\n“Strengthening Hydro-Meteorological and Climate Services.” The aim of the\r\nproject is to improve the quality of the government of the Democratic Republic\r\nof Congo’s targeted hydrometeorological and climate service by doing the\r\nfollowing:\r\n• Improving hydrometeorological and EW capacity and strengthening net-\r\n works through open data and information sharing\r\n• Leveraging partnerships and fostering interagency coordination to maximize\r\n economies of scale and regional integration and promote south-south coop-\r\n eration to ensure transformational change and longer-term sustainability\r\n\r\n\r\n76 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fTABLE 4.1 Examples of Triple Bottom Benefits of Investing in Hydrometeorological Services\r\n Theme Benefits\r\n Social Avoidance of loss of life and/or injuries/illnesses from natural disasters\r\n Safety and security of the traveling public; improved information and data for the scientific\r\n community\r\n Contribution to the day-to-day safety, comfort, enjoyment, and general convenience of\r\n citizens, including:\r\n • Recreation\r\n • Travel and commuting\r\n • Preparation for severe weather\r\n • Home improvement decisions\r\n • Other direct and indirect forms of societal benefits\r\n • Event management\r\n Avoided climate-related illnesses (for example, heat-related illnesses, vector-borne\r\n diseases such as malaria that are worsened by climate)\r\n Environmental Long-term monitoring of basic indicators of the state of the environment\r\n Minimization of release of toxic substances and other pollutants\r\n Management of local environmental quality\r\n Support for addressing major global environmental issues\r\n Water savings\r\n Reduced runoff from fertilizer application, resulting in improved water quality\r\n Economic Avoidance of crop losses from frost, hail, or drought\r\n Increased farm production and sales\r\n More efficient scheduling of the use of agricultural machinery\r\n Reduced transportation fuel consumption through route planning\r\n Improved scheduling of flight arrivals and departures\r\n Minimization of airline costs from aircraft diversions\r\n Minimization of search and rescue costs\r\n Minimization of drought-relief costs\r\n Efficient scheduling of ship loading facilities\r\n Avoidance of unnecessary shutdown of offshore oil and gas operations\r\n Avoidance of weather damage to personal property\r\n More efficient planning of energy production and delivery\r\nSource: Lazo et al. 2009, cited in WMO 2015, 60.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n • Aligning with the principles of the Global Framework for Climate\r\n Services (GFCS) and identifying the requirements of users as a starting\r\n point for generation of services, products, and data\r\n The costs associated with the project amount to a total of about US$8\r\n million (table 4.4) with an estimated NPV23 of US$117.27 million and with\r\n a BCR of 7.36:1 at 3 percent baseline discount rate.24 Based on the “Triple\r\n\r\n 23 Net present value is the present value of a security or an investment project, found by discounting all pres-\r\n\r\n ent and future receipts and outgoings at an appropriate rate of discount (see note 24). If the NPV calculated\r\n is positive, it is worthwhile investing in a project (Black, Hashimzade, and Myles 2017).\r\n 24 Discount rate is the interest rate at which future benefits or costs are discounted to find their present value\r\n\r\n (Black, Hashimzade, and Myles 2017).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 77\r\n\f TABLE 4.2 Illustrative Economic Assessments of Meteorological/Hydrometeorological Services\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n78\r\n Geographic\r\n Social economic benefits study location Sectors Benefits methods/measures BCR\r\n Contingent valuation study of the public weather service in the Sydney Sydney, Australia Households Willingness to pay survey of households 4:1\r\n metropolitan area (Anaman and Lellyett 1996).\r\n Benefits of Ethiopia’s Livelihoods, Early Assessment, and Protection Ethiopia Households Quantification of avoided livelihood losses and 3:1 to 6:1\r\n drought early warning and response system (Law 2012) decreased assistance costs\r\n Success of the U.S. National Weather Service Heat Watch/Warning Philadelphia, Households/ Regression analysis to determine lives saved, 2,000:1+\r\n System in Philadelphia (Ebi et al. 2004) Pennsylvania, elderly application of the U.S. Environmental Protection\r\n United States Agency value of a statistical life estimate\r\n The benefits to Mexican agriculture of an El Niño-Southern Oscillation Five-state region Agriculture Change in social welfare based on increased 2:1 to 9:1\r\n (ENSO) early warning system (Adams et al. 2004) in Mexico crop production with use of improved\r\n information\r\n Economic efficiency of NMHS modernization in Europe and Central Asia 11 European and Weather- Sector-specific and benchmarking approaches 2:1 to 14:1\r\n (World Bank 2008) Central Asian dependent to evaluate avoided losses\r\n countries sectors\r\n Benefits and costs of improving met/hydro services in developing Developing National level Benefits-transfer approach to quantify avoided 4:1 to 36:1\r\n countries (Hallegatte 2012) countries and weather- asset losses, lives saved, and total value added\r\n sensitive in weather-sensitive sectors\r\n sectors\r\n Social economic benefits of enhanced weather services in Nepal—part Nepal Agriculture, Statistical inference and expert judgment 10:1\r\n of the Finnish-Nepalese project (Makela et al. 2011) transport, and\r\n hydropower\r\n Economic and social benefits of meteorology and climatology (Frei 2010) Switzerland Transport, Benefit transfer, expert elicitation, decision 5:1 to 10:1\r\n energy, aviation, modeling\r\n agriculture, and\r\n households\r\n Socioeconomic evaluation of improved met/hydro services in Bhutan Bhutan National level Benefit transfer, expert elicitation, cardinal rating 3:1\r\n (Pilli-Sihvola, Namgyal, and Dorji 2014) method\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n Source: Adapted from WMO 2015, 8–9.\r\n\f TABLE 4.3 Benefits of Investing in Climate Information and EWSs\r\n Net present value (NPV) BCR\r\n Investment US$, Discount rate\r\n Country Name of project Project duration (US$, millions) millions (percent)\r\n Kenyaa Kenya Climate-Smart Agriculture Project with a 2017–22 279 304 6 1.40–5.56\r\n component on Supporting Agro-weather, Market,\r\n Climate and Advisory Services\r\n Mozambiqueb Mozambique Climate Resilience: Transforming 2013–18 22.50 391.17 3 6.56\r\n Hydrological and Meteorological Services\r\n Congo, Dem. Rep.c Strengthening Hydro-Meteorological and Climate 2017–22 8.029 117.27 3 2.39–7.36\r\n Services\r\n Malid Strengthening Climate Resilience in Sub-Saharan Feasibility study 22.75 124.4 5 5\r\n Africa: Phase 1 Mali Country\r\n Madagascar National Action Plan for Improvement of Feasibility study 58.48 44.9 3 1.67–7.60\r\n Hydrometeorological Services\r\n Nigeria Transforming Irrigation Management in Nigeria 2014–22 560.3 12 13.5 Not stated\r\n Zambia Zambia Strengthening Climate Resilience (PPCR 2013–19 36 18.3 3 Not stated\r\n Phase II)\r\n Tanzania Second Water Sector Support 2017–21 230 180 10 Not stated\r\n Uganda Water Management and Development 2012–18 135 24.6 15 Not stated\r\n Note:\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n a This includes US$32.9 for the development of agro-weather forecasting and marketing information system and their dissemination tools through improving agrometeorological forecasting and monitoring\r\n\r\n institutional and technical capacity; using big data to develop a climate-smart, agro-weather MIS and advisories. The Project Appraisal Documents (PADs) can be accessed at http://documents.\r\n worldbank.org/curated/en/440241486868444705/pdf/Kenya-PAD-01182017.pdf.\r\n b The PAD can be accessed at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/506641468321881521/pdf/759390PAD0P1310040901300SIMULT0DISC.pdf.\r\n c The analysis follows the overall structure of the “Triple Dividend of Resilience” framework, which includes (i) avoided damage and losses, (ii) unlocked economic potential, and (iii) development\r\n\r\n cobenefits. The PADs can be accessed at http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/289901488209393335/pdf/DRC-GEF-PAD-02222017.pdf.\r\n d See http://www.greenclimate.fund/documents/20182/226888/GCF_B.13_16_Add.04_-_Funding_proposal_package_for_FP012.pdf/2af42103-a150-4e0b-a3f3-29d8b433e377.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n79\r\n\fTABLE 4.4 Financing for Strengthening Hydrometeorological and Climate Services\r\nin the Democratic Republic of Congo\r\n Component, subcomponent, and indicative budget (US$) Total (US$)\r\n Component A: Institutional and regulatory strengthening, capacity building, and 1,578,000\r\n implementation support\r\n A (i) Reinforce the legal and regulatory framework of MettelSat to develop partnerships and\r\n SOPs for delivery of service\r\n A (ii) Strengthen the quality management systems to raise standards and quality\r\n control/verification procedures across the institutions\r\n A (iii) Implement a long-term and on-demand capacity development and training program\r\n for staff\r\n Component B: Modernization of equipment, facilities, and infrastructure for basic 4,462,000\r\n observation and forecasting\r\n B (i) Hydrological and meteorological monitoring networks (small-scale rehabilitation of\r\n priority stations and installation of new sensors)\r\n B (ii) Transmission, data management, and data dissemination hardware\r\n B (iii) Refurbishment of facilities needed to support the services\r\n B (iv) Technical systems and software for performing meteorological, hydrological, and\r\n climate modeling, and forecasting\r\n Component C: Improvement of hydromet information service delivery 1,256,000\r\n C (i) Define requirements, delivery, and feedback mechanisms with different user groups\r\n (in line with the National Framework for Climate Services)\r\n C (ii) Develop customized products and services made available to user groups through\r\n dedicated interfaces\r\n Component D: Project management 733,452\r\n D (i) Coordination and technical implementation support\r\n D (ii) Fiduciary and safeguard aspects and audit\r\n Total 8,029,452\r\nSource: PAD for Financing for Strengthening Hydro-Meteorological and Climate Services in the Democratic Republic of Congo.\r\nReport No: PAD1864\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nDividend of Resilience” framework, the benefits will include (a) avoided\r\ndamage and losses, (b) unlocked economic potential, and (c) development\r\ncobenefits.\r\n Although the Democratic Republic of Congo project identifies the impor-\r\ntance of legal and regulatory frameworks and gender awareness, it does not\r\nhave a strong institutional capacity-building component at the subnational\r\nlevel, which participants of this study called “the more encompassing and\r\nproactive food information approach which addresses all components of food\r\nsecurity in line with its definition. However, it is important to emphasize and\r\nrecognize that the project’s main objective was not necessarily on address-\r\ning food security risks. The objective is directly aimed at hydromet modern-\r\nization, which has direct, measurable impacts on improving the country’s\r\ncapacity to provide enhanced agro-met services, and in turn, improving agri-\r\ncultural extension services.\r\n “It is widely recognized that enhancing the knowledge on hydromet haz-\r\nards is key for improving the effectiveness of multi-hazard EWS. However,\r\nwhile the significance of meteorological data/information in food security\r\ninformation cannot be underestimated, it remains one of many other data/\r\n\r\n\r\n80 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fTABLE 4.5 Estimated Costs for National Action Plan for Improvement of\r\nHydrometeorological Services (NAPIHMS) Project in Madagascar (US$)\r\n Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 O&M\r\n (years\r\n (years 1–2) (years 3–5) (years 6–10) 11–15) Totals\r\n Monitoring network equipment 25,785,402\r\n Hydrological observation network 531,250 1,593,750 3,187,500 5,312,500\r\n Groundwater observation network 403,200 604,800 1,008,000\r\n Meteorological and climatological 263,135 726,405 1,011,810 2,001,350\r\n observation network\r\n Radar 6,000,000 6,000,000 12,000,000\r\n Volunteer rainfall network 3,305 9,915 19,830 33,050\r\n Vehicles 96,000 288,000 576,000 960,000\r\n Water quality lab equipment 26,600 79,801 159,601 266,002\r\n Discharge measurement equipment 63,000 189,000 378,000 630,000\r\n Field equipment 215,625 646,875 1,293,750 2,156,250\r\n Data management 2,715 8,145 16,290 27,150\r\n Rehabilitation of the DGM hydrometeorological 150,000 150,000\r\n instrumentation laboratory.\r\n Installation of new hydrometeorological 111,510 384,930 744,660 1,241,100\r\n stations\r\n Forecasting and service delivery 5,065,285\r\n Headquarters and regional hydrological 72,000 781,714 1,508,571 1,560,000 3,922,285\r\n forecasting center O&M\r\n Headquarters and regional hydrological 207,000 346,000 185,000 155,000 893,000\r\n forecasting center capital investment\r\n Weather forecasting equipment and 150,000 50,00 50,000 250,000\r\n software\r\n O&M 18,335,633\r\n Monitoring network 582,369 2,362,314 7,494,225 7,494,225 17,933,133\r\n Stations rehabilitation works 11,250 26,250 37,500\r\n Stations rehabilitation equipment 109,500 255,500 365,000\r\n Research and development 992,008 1,488,012 2,480,020\r\n Training and capacity development 222,300 666,900 1,333,800 2,223,000\r\n NMHSUG training 100,000 100,000 200,000\r\n Consulting 1,760,000 1,320,000 1,320,000 4,400,000\r\n Total by phase: 4,677,559 17,180,707 27,371,849 9,209,225\r\n Grand 58,489,340\r\n Total:\r\nNote: The costings are based on the NAPIHMS World Bank project in Madagascar.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n information types of food security. Hence, there is a need to pay attention to\r\n the other data types and sources.”25 The examples from Madagascar (table 4.5)\r\n and Zambia (table 4.6) are more reflective of the comprehensive investment\r\n needs of most ESA countries as they address both the technical and the insti-\r\n tutional needs at both national and subnational levels.\r\n\r\n\r\n 25 One of the participants consulted as part of this study.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 81\r\n\fTABLE 4.6 Estimated Costs of the Food Security EWS in Zambiaa\r\n Sector Capacity needs Cost (US$)\r\n ZMD Equipment (AWSs, radars, computers, software, and so on) 13,080,000\r\n Technical capacity (training for staff) 2,250,000\r\n Institutional capacity (training, AWSs/radars, O&M, and so on) 35,000\r\n Subtotal 15,365,000\r\n Hydrological Services Equipment (telemetric stations, computers, and so on) 7,553,150\r\n Technical capacity (human resources capacity building) 935,000\r\n Institutional capacity (training catchment councils, and so on) 3,340,000\r\n Subtotal 11,828,150\r\n Agriculture Equipment (increasing rain gauge network) 180,000\r\n Technical capacity (capacity for data analysts) 20,000\r\n Institutional capacity (capacity for extension services) 50,000\r\n Subtotal 250,000\r\n DMMU Technical capacity (national level) (information system setup) 1,089,000\r\n Institutional capacity (national level) 1,598,050\r\n Provincial-level capacity building 559,000\r\n District-level capacity building 19,527,500\r\n Satellite-level capacity building 36,380,000\r\n Subtotal 59,153,550\r\n Grand total 86,596,700\r\na The cost estimates were produced by the DMMU, with inputs from Zambia Meteorological Services, Hydrology, and Agriculture.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n However, the estimated investments are beyond the capacity of most ESA\r\ncountries. A phased approach might be required. A study conducted by the\r\nWorld Bank (2015) illustrates three investment options on a continuum,\r\nfrom traditional to advanced weather station programs (table 4.7), with\r\neach option having a high BCR. This suggests that even when a phased\r\napproach is considered, the benefits accruing from the investment are still\r\nhigh.\r\n The same study applies the results to Ethiopia and Kenya, which may\r\nalso apply widely to most ESA countries. In Ethiopia, agriculture accounts\r\nfor about 39.4 percent of the national gross domestic product (GDP) =\r\nUS$41.72 billion (2012 estimate, or about US$16.44 billion). If a tradi-\r\ntional or minimal agrometeorology program is considered, it would\r\nincrease the agricultural contribution to GDP by about 0.18 percent, a\r\ntransitional program by about 1.5 percent, and a modern or advanced\r\nprogram by about 6.1 percent. Similarly, in Kenya, agriculture accounts\r\nfor about 24 percent of the national GDP of US$40.70 billion (2012 esti-\r\nmate or US$10 billion). If a traditional or minimal agrometeorology pro-\r\ngram is considered, this would increase the agricultural contribution to\r\nGDP by about 0.30 percent, a transitional program by about 2.5 percent,\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n82 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fTABLE 4.7 Options for Investing in Observation Networks\r\nOption Traditional/minimal Transitional Modern/advanced\r\nDescription Mostly traditional instrumentation, Still mostly traditional National network of\r\n with automated systems at only a instrumentation, but more automated systems\r\n very limited number of locations; automated systems in supplemented by\r\n limited professional regional networks; staff of traditional\r\n agrometeorological staff, very agrometeorologists and instrumentation,\r\n limited field training or extension supporting technicians still professional staff\r\n work; no real-time operations modest in size but now now able to support\r\n sufficiently large to begin full-scale real-time\r\n routine training of farmers operations and\r\n and support fieldwork for training\r\n and extension\r\n support\r\nInitial capital US$3 million US$20 million US$50 million\r\ninvestment in\r\nequipment, facilities,\r\ntraining\r\nContinuing annual US$1 million US$5 million US$10 million\r\ncost\r\nCost-benefit ratio 1:30; US$30 million increase in approximately 1:50; 1:100; US$1 billion\r\n agricultural production US$250 million increase in increase in\r\n agricultural production agricultural\r\n production\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n and a modern or advanced program by about 10 percent. The comments\r\n arising from this are as follows:\r\n • Clearly, as one progresses from a traditional to advanced program, the\r\n contribution to the GDP increases. In Uganda, for instance, the remark-\r\n able decrease in poverty levels is directly attributable to increases in the\r\n contribution of agriculture to the GDP.\r\n • A traditional or minimal program is consistent with the current invest-\r\n ment levels in most ESA countries and such a program does not contrib-\r\n ute much to the national GDP. The resources could be deployed elsewhere\r\n where they can yield better benefits.\r\n • Although the advanced program has the potential of delivering increased\r\n economic benefits, policy makers may not support the investment\r\n required. This will need evidence-based advocacy through contextualized\r\n EWS cost-benefit studies.\r\n According to the findings of this study, upgrading the observation networks\r\n alone is inadequate for achieving the goals of measurably reducing the levels of\r\n poverty and food insecurity across the ESA regions. However, it is a required\r\n ingredient in the establishment of effective and efficient end-to-end EWSs,\r\n including those for food security. This means a phased strategy is required\r\n to incrementally build on the successes of each of the phases. A strategy that\r\n works in partnership with the private sector and farmers’ union might be\r\n required to leverage on the resources.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 83\r\n\f Governments in Africa should commit to and take responsibility for the\r\nadequate funding of the NMHSs, as basic hydromet monitoring and forecast-\r\ning services shall be provided as a public good. Strong NMHS can develop\r\nadditional sources of funding through the provision of specialized services to\r\nsectors and industries, such as aviation and insurance, but the societal ben-\r\nefits of the provision of basic hydromet services at no cost to all audiences\r\nsurpass the direct costs to the government. Governments should ensure that\r\nNMHSs are able to discharge their institutional responsibilities in an ade-\r\nquate and sustainable manner. As part of the strengthening of the NMHs and\r\nthe services they provide, exploring win-win NMHS-led partnerships with\r\nthe private sector should also be encouraged.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCost-Effective Strategies for Improving\r\nAgrometeorological Observation Systems\r\nOne of the key findings of this study is that most ESA countries have some\r\nsystem for hydrometeorological observation services. Many countries have\r\nboth the traditional observation networks, which employ observers or local\r\nvolunteers, with only modest training and AWSs. There are two strategic\r\noptions for improving the weather observation networks, and ultimately the\r\nquality and types of agrometeorological services that can be provided to tar-\r\ngeted audiences. First is to enhance the existing manual weather stations and\r\nthe second is to migrate incrementally to a modern and advanced observation\r\nnetwork.\r\n\r\nOpƟon 1: Enhancing the Manual Weather StaƟons\r\n\r\nMost meteorological and hydrological observation networks in the ESA\r\ncountries are manual weather stations. Although it is recognized that not all\r\nthe instrumentation or methods used for hydromet monitoring and fore-\r\ncasting are used for or are applicable to agrometeorology (for example, lake\r\nand maritime navigation), adequate coverage of the observational networks\r\ncontributes to improve countries’ capacity to provide adequate, timely agro-\r\nmeteorological to agriculturists, pastoralists, and other audiences involved in\r\nweather- and climate-sensitive sectors.\r\n In Ethiopia, for example, there are several hundreds of manual weather sta-\r\ntions, a similar situation across the ESA countries. In most cases, the obser-\r\nvations from manual networks are recorded by hand and often mailed into a\r\ncentral office. Such observations, when passed by a rigorous quality assurance\r\nprocess, provide invaluable data for both long-term climate studies and mon-\r\nitoring of how given growing seasons are evolving.\r\n Equipment such as rain gauges can be locally fabricated, and such weather\r\nstations can be placed in schools and rural health centers. A simple data-\r\nsheet is recorded by hand, as is the case in Zambia’s Sesheke weather station,\r\nafter which the data are transmitted by mobile phone or mailed to a central\r\n\r\n\r\n84 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\flocation. The data transmitted through the mobile phone go to an automated\r\nreceiving system that records the data, does simple error checking, and pro-\r\nvides a first-order analysis. Although manual weather stations have several\r\ndisadvantages, such as data inaccuracies and slowness in data collection and\r\ntransmission, the manual weather stations tend to have relatively low O&M\r\ncosts.\r\n It has been well documented that in the medium to long term, O&M of\r\nhydromet monitoring and forecasting represent the highest cost items of any\r\ninvestments in hydromet modernization, surpassing the original costs of\r\nupgrading equipment and software. Such high costs of O&M are the primary\r\nreason why so many well-intentioned equipment improvement projects failed\r\nwhen the funding ended.\r\n The application of mobile technologies, as is the case at Sesheke weather\r\nstation in western Zambia, facilitates the transmission of near-real-time\r\ndata to Lusaka three times per day. Using mobile phone technology enables\r\nfast data aggregation and calculation of temperature and precipitation data.\r\nIn Sesheke, mobile phones are also used to share weather data with local\r\nfarmers, for example, through WhatsApp groups and community radio\r\nstations.\r\n The estimated cost of upgrading a manual station to use mobile phone tech-\r\nnology in data collection and transmission in Zambia is about US$75,000,\r\nwhich is consistent with the World Bank (2015) study that estimated the\r\ncosts between US$50,000 and US$75,000 to install the central data collection\r\ncomputer.\r\n There will be deployment and training costs to get the new equipment into\r\nthe field and to train the observers or volunteers to operate it. Upgrading\r\na manual weather station, as is the case with Sesheke, comes with continu-\r\ning charges for the mobile phone services and maintenance of the central\r\ncomputer. However, if mobile phones charges are unbearable, the observers\r\nswitch to pen and paper format. In any case, in Sesheke, for example, in addi-\r\ntion to the data recorded in a mobile phone, a manual copy is also maintained\r\nas a backup. The study by the World Bank (2015) reiterates the importance\r\nof training the operators at the central computer to a higher skill level in pro-\r\ngramming and system administration. Additional personnel should include\r\na small team of three or more quality assurance meteorologists who review\r\nthe raw data in parallel with the automated procedures, flagging questionable\r\ndata.\r\n\r\nOpƟon 2: TransiƟon to Modern and Advanced Networks\r\n\r\nThere are several different costs involved in developing a national meteoro-\r\nlogical observation system. The study by the World Bank (2015) categorizes\r\nthe costs that may be involved in investing in advanced observation networks.\r\nThese are summarized in table 4.8.\r\n The study by the World Bank (2015) also suggests the steps to be followed\r\nfor the strategy to be cost effective.\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 85\r\n\fTABLE 4.8 Estimated Annual Costs of an Advanced Network\r\n Estimated\r\nElement Description Cost (US$)\r\nSite costs Purchase or long-term lease of the site; civil works and site preparations 55,000\r\n as needed (access road, security fence, electrical power if available or a\r\n solar panel/battery system—the last one is a good backup against\r\n outages even if electrical power is available); tower or mast;\r\n instrumentation; data logger and software; telecom interface (could be\r\n microwave radio, cell phone connection, hardwired Internet connection,\r\n and so on; can be two-way to allow remote interrogation of the data\r\n logger); cables and related hardware; labor for site improvements,\r\n installation, and so on; miscellaneous costs such as shipping costs\r\n related to getting equipment on site.\r\n Costs can run between US$10,000 and US$100,000 per site, depending\r\n on the number and types of instruments installed. A good mean cost\r\n would be US$55,000.\r\nCentral data Facility preparation (space modifications, provision of power, provision for 225,000\r\ncollection facility air conditioning, dehumidification, heating as necessary); telecom\r\ncosts interface for receiving incoming data streams (and transmitting\r\n commands to data loggers in the field); computer(s) for receiving,\r\n decoding, quality checking, and basic analysis (this could be the same\r\n system that receives data from the traditional network); display system\r\n Can run between US$50,000 and US$350,000 (average = US$225,000)\r\nCentral Facility preparation (space modifications, provision of power, provision for 150,000\r\nmaintenance facility air conditioning, dehumidification, heating as necessary); facility\r\n furnishings to include workspace for maintenance and calibration, and\r\n storage space for spare instruments, repair parts, and expendables; tools\r\n and calibration equipment; miscellaneous costs such as shipping costs\r\n Costs can run between US$50 and US$250,000.\r\nStaff costs Data analysts, software developers, technical maintenance/calibration 130,000\r\n staff—about 8 to 10 professionals required at US$15,000 per year =\r\n US$120,000–US$150,000\r\nOperating costs Telecom charges; repair parts and spare instruments; expendable 140,000\r\n supplies for operating and maintaining the data collection system;\r\n vehicles, fuel, and the related costs (a small group of vehicles is needed\r\n for all agrometeorologists to go out in the field to study local conditions\r\n and to support technical maintenance/calibration staff making routine site\r\n visits).\r\n Costs can run between US$25,000 per year and US$250,000 per year.\r\nTotal Approximately US$1 million 700,000\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Step 1a. In parallel, build up and enhance the existing traditional network\r\nof rain and temperature observations taken by observers and volunteers.\r\nWhere the cell network allows, provide observers with mobile phones to call\r\nin their observations once per day.\r\n Step 1b. In parallel, establish an automated dial-in data delivery sys-\r\ntem so that people can begin sending information. This computer should\r\nhave sufficient capability to service both the dial-in delivery of data from\r\nnetwork of traditional sites, data from manual weather stations received\r\nthrough mail, and the acquisition of data from the modern or advanced\r\nsites. This means the central data collection goes in at this early stage, so\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n86 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fthat it is ready to receive data from the AWSs (as well as from the enhanced\r\ntraditional network).\r\n Step 2. Select sites for the installation of the AWSs supporting agrometeo-\r\nrology. Keep in mind that this is an agrometeorology network, so the stations\r\nwill be concentrated in agricultural regions with sites selected to be represen-\r\ntative of local farming operations. Ideally sites would be within, but distinct\r\nfrom, fields. However, this is not always practical, so sites at the edge of fields\r\nmay be utilized.\r\n The program can start with a few stations and then gradually upscale to\r\ncover the whole country.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nStrengthening Food Security Information\r\nSystems at the Regional Level\r\nAt the regional level, there are efforts in developing the EWS information\r\nsystems, which include food security. Currently, the RECs have multiple\r\ninformation systems and networks, some of which have continental and\r\ninternational standing. ICPAC and Conflict Early Warning and Response\r\nMechanism in IGAD and the VAA, CSC, and Regional Early Warning\r\nCenter EW in the SADC are exemplary of successful information net-\r\nworks. Most of the other systems are either in their infancy or limited to\r\nspecific programs. For these systems to be effective, they require policy,\r\nlegal, institutional, and operational mechanisms in place for coordinating,\r\nstreamlining, and harmonizing the activities of these systems to optimize\r\ntheir performance efficiently and effectively. Inevitably, disparities exist in\r\ndata and information exchange systems and processes between these net-\r\nworks, which lead to duplication of efforts, wastage of resources, and even\r\nundesirable competition.\r\n In the SADC, the DRR unit is in the process of developing a disaster\r\nmanagement information system portal that will be accessible to users.\r\nThe need to strengthen the information system has also been expressed in\r\nthe SADC’s 2017 Regional Disaster Preparedness and Response Strategy.\r\nIn east Africa, the EAC is working on an initiative to develop climate\r\ninformation sharing, and so is the COMESA. In IGAD, there are efforts\r\nto revamp the Regional Integrated Information System (RIIS). Because\r\nthe major role of the RECs is mainly to integrate national information\r\nsystems into a coordinated regional information system, the investment is\r\nmodest. A good example is IGAD’s proposed RIIS whose estimated costs\r\nare provided in table 4.9.\r\n Table 4.10 assumes that the member states will meet the operating costs\r\nduring and after project implementation to sustain project benefits. As empha-\r\nsized by participants at the validation workshop as part of this exercise, in\r\naddition to member states mobilizing resources internally, support from coop-\r\nerating partners and PPPs would be required.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 87\r\n\fTABLE 4.9 IGAD RIIS: Estimated Budget for the Formulation Process of the RIIS\r\n Phase Description Cost (US$)\r\n Phase 1 Assessment of Information System in the IGAD Region\r\n Consultants Fees and local transport for seven National consultants 17,500\r\n (1 per member state) for two weeks\r\n Total fees for two international consultants for 30 days 39,000\r\n Travels 11,000\r\n Workshops Seven national workshops (1 per member state) 49,000\r\n One regional workshop to review assessment findings 100,000\r\n Phase 2 Design/Architecture of the RIIS\r\n Consultants Fees for two international consultants 19,500\r\n Workshops One regional workshop to review the RIIS design 100,000\r\n Phase 3 Formulation of the RIIS Project Document\r\n Consultants Fees for two international consultants 39,000\r\n Workshops One regional workshop to validate the RIIS project document 100,000\r\n Total 475,000\r\n Contingency 25,000\r\n Total 500,000\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nTABLE 4.10 Roles of Regional and National Funding Mechanisms\r\n Regional mechanisms National mechanisms\r\n Member states should provide funding for EWS PPPs should be developed as one of the key\r\n programs. priorities for sustainable EWSs, for example, the\r\n PPPs can build on existing partnerships with telecom\r\n Mechanisms should be developed to address\r\n service providers to provide the EW information to\r\n transboundary issues.\r\n their subscribers for free as in Zimbabwe.\r\n Centers of leadership, for example, could downscale\r\n Government should create the EW units for\r\n global models to national levels; and capacity\r\n governance, policy, strategy, and coordinating\r\n development should be developed.\r\n agency for national EWS funding mechanisms.\r\n Funding policies for EWS should be developed,\r\n harmonized with existing policies, and effectively\r\n implemented.\r\n Develop policies/protocols for data sharing\r\n Instances where economies of scale would benefit from\r\n regional funding mechanisms should be prioritized.\r\nSource: Validation workshop.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nOperational Models and PPPs\r\nGenerally understood as a “long-term contract between a private party and a\r\ngovernment agency, for providing a public asset or service, in which the pri-\r\nvate party bears significant risk and management responsibility” (World Bank\r\n2012, 11), PPPs are more than just an interesting idea; they are a necessity in\r\nthe provision of climate services (Snow et al. 2016).\r\n The widely held idea that specialized government agencies (NMHSs) have\r\nthe authority and responsibility for the provision of hydromet forecasting\r\nand monitoring services as a government-financed public good is exem-\r\nplified by the role played by leading meteorological agencies in the United\r\n\r\n\r\n88 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fStates and Europe that provide their basic services at no cost to everyone,\r\nincluding the private sector. This proposition is supported by the accounting\r\nof tangible benefits, including the financial returns from revenue collected\r\nby the governments from private companies’ development and marketing\r\nof derivative products and services based on “free” hydromet information.\r\nIn addition, indirect financial gains for the government include the reduc-\r\ntion of its contingent liabilities from losses derived from uninsured assets,\r\nbecause readily available basic hydrometeorological information allows and\r\npromotes the development of new industries such as insurance markets for\r\nweather- and climate-related perils such as flood risk and crop failure, which\r\nin their absence would compel the government to intervene as the insurer of\r\nlast resort to compensate uninsured victims.\r\n In this context, there are several reasons for involving the private sector in\r\nclimate and weather information provision. For instance, private sector enter-\r\nprises can leverage technical and financial resources for addressing evolving\r\ninformation needs, such as the increasing demand for localized weather infor-\r\nmation, for example, by large agribusinesses, allowing the NMHSs to focus on\r\nimproving their country-level monitoring and forecasting capabilities, as well\r\nas providing entirely new services. Thus:\r\n\r\n• Leveraging on private sector capacity, NMHSs may increase the sustain-\r\n ability of the benefits of the climate and weather information services.\r\n The increasing access to the Internet provides an opportunity for research\r\n institutions, businesses, and individuals to generate weather data using\r\n freely available satellite data and by purchasing their own weather stations.\r\n• Mutually beneficial collaborative arrangements can be established\r\n between the NMHSs and the academic and research institutions as well\r\n as with the private sector aimed at expanding the types and quality of\r\n weather and climate information and services that can be provided to\r\n general public as well as to specialized audiences.\r\n\r\n There are several PPP operational models. Although Snow et al. (2016)\r\nidentify four PPP models on a continuum, the five business operating models\r\nthat are relevant to the ESA countries are those identified by the World Bank\r\n(2016) (box 4.2).\r\n There is potential for PPPs in the ESA countries (table 4.11) to generate\r\nrevenue from the sale of weather/climate goods and services to the private\r\nsector. This potential is a result of a positive enabling environment for PPPs,\r\nas well as effective communication channels to disseminate information. The\r\ncapacities for NMHSs to engage in PPPs vary across the ESA region, with\r\nTanzania and Zambia being at the level where they can start engaging in PPPs\r\ncompared with the NMHSs in Ethiopia, Malawi, and Uganda, in which the\r\nfollowing challenges are more pronounced:\r\n• Limited technical capacity to generate tailored products and services to\r\n meet the specific needs of private sector clients\r\n• Limited funding from their governments\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 89\r\n\f BOX 4.2 Operating Models of Climate Information Services Providers\r\n TABLE B4.2.1 Operating Models\r\n Operating models\r\n Public Private but Private and\r\n departmental not profit profit International\r\n Characteristics unit Public body oriented oriented organization\r\n Government Directly Indirectly controlled Indirectly Indirectly No, host country\r\n control controlled controlled controlled agreements\r\n Own legal entity No Partially or fully Yes Yes Yes\r\n separate\r\n Legal basis Public law Public law Private law Private law Convention\r\n Financing State budget, State budget, grants, Grants, own Own Grants\r\n grants own revenues revenues revenues\r\n Control Direct political Statutes, laws Regulation Regulation Host country\r\n mechanism agreements\r\n Ministerial Yes Partial No No No\r\n responsibility\r\n Autonomy No Yes Yes Yes Yes\r\n\r\n\r\n Each of these models is characterized by the following:\r\n Public departmental unit. This model is characterized by lack of autonomy, finance by state\r\n budget, problem of monopoly, limited and unreliable public financing, weak technical capac-\r\n ity, low organization incentives, little freedom or incentive to compete in commercial markets,\r\n and poor service delivery.\r\n Public body. This model faces less political and hierarchical influence, has more operational\r\n and managerial freedom, supplements state budgets with grants and revenue from service\r\n delivery, and faces challenges in enforcing payments for services from sister departments.\r\n Private but not profit oriented. These are climate adaptation projects and project-based spon-\r\n sorships, targeting a limited number of beneficiaries, with limited scope of service provision,\r\n and are unsustainable.\r\n Private and profit oriented. These operate in the free market, generate their own revenue,\r\n enjoy high freedom of autonomy, and are subject to government regulations. Privatization may\r\n not offer a solution to effective climate information service delivery.\r\n International organizations. These are funded by members and grants and do not generate\r\n revenue from climate services.\r\n Source: World Bank Group 2016.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n• Weak network of weather observation stations to generate fine-scale\r\n weather data\r\n• Inadequate political framework for regulating PPPs\r\n During this study, KIs expressed concerns regarding the privatization of\r\nclimate services, particularly on the risk of further marginalizing vulnerable\r\ncommunities who are unable or unwilling to pay for the climate services that\r\n\r\n\r\n90 CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments\r\n\fTABLE 4.11 Potential for NMHSs to Develop PPPs in Weather Products in Some ESA\r\nCountries\r\n Country Potential for PPPs\r\n Ethiopia Opportunities for PPPs in Ethiopia are limited, but private companies are legally required to share\r\n climate and weather data with the NMHS.\r\n Malawi The PPP Bill and PPPs Commission facilitate PPPs in Malawi.\r\n Tanzania There is a dedicated PPP Unit in the country (Tanzania Investment Centre).\r\n Uganda There is scope for PPP between the NMHS and the private sector. Legally, the NMHS is the sole\r\n provider of weather information in the country. Demand for information has been expressed by the\r\n private sector, particularly aviation, construction, and mining. Currently, there is a cost recovery\r\n agreement between the NMHS and Uganda’s Civil Aviation Authority.\r\n Zambia The Meteorological Bill promotes PPPs in the development of meteorological services, particularly\r\n for the following sectors: (a) aviation, (b) agriculture, (c) water resources management, (d)\r\n education and research, (e) health, and (f) building and civil engineering.\r\nSource: Adapted from Mills et al. 2016.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n are unaffordable to them. In this regard, there is a need for further exploration\r\n of communities’ willingness to pay for specialized climate services across the\r\n ESA countries.\r\n The establishment of PPPs should not be limited to NMHSs; they can also\r\n address broad food security EWS needs. However, for the PPP to be effective\r\n at both regional and national levels, these should be supported by legal frame-\r\n works, protocols, and MoUs for partnerships to yield maximum benefits.\r\n These arrangements should provide guidance and clarity on the benefits of\r\n private sector interventions, including their contributions in terms of human\r\n and technical resources as well as the products and services to be delivered. In\r\n most instances, support will still be required from international development\r\n and cooperation partners for the design and strengthening of the enabling\r\n environment for effective PPPs with, for example, mobile network compa-\r\n nies, water, and electricity utility companies as well as with private enterprises\r\n engaged in weather- and climate-sensitive sectors, such as agribusiness, fish-\r\n eries, and tourism.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 4—Strategies for Long-Term Sustainability of Investments 91\r\n\f\fCHAPTER 5\r\nBest Practices and\r\nRecommendations for Institutional\r\nStrengthening\r\n\r\nIntroduction\r\nThis chapter presents three cases of good practice that have been drawn from\r\nwithin and outside ESA. The exemplars include good practices on PPPs, food\r\nsecurity information systems, and feedback forums to help improve delivery\r\nof the EWS.\r\n First, this study found that there was limited engagement between the\r\npublic and private sectors in production, monitoring, dissemination, and\r\nutilization of EW information. This is despite the increasing demand for\r\ngreater involvement of the private sector in the provision of climate services\r\nto inform adaptation decisions. The Environmental Analysis and Remote\r\nSensing (EARS) and other emerging entrepreneurs in Africa are explored\r\nto highlight the potential benefits of involving the private sector in climate\r\nservices provision.\r\n Second, food security and EW information systems are generally weak\r\nat both national and regional levels. Consequently, the users do not receive\r\ntimely EW information to help them make decisions that will trigger\r\nappropriate action. The ASEAN region appears to have successfully set up a\r\nregional food security information system that has responded to the needs\r\nof the member states.\r\n Finally, as the purpose of the EW information is about triggering action on\r\nthe ground, setting up a framework for users to integrate science-based and\r\ntraditional climate forecasts adds value to people’s lives. This also helps the\r\nproducers of EW information to improve ways of packaging EW information\r\nto meet user needs.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nInnovations for Improving Food Security EW:\r\nRole of the Private Sector\r\nAs this study attests, there is potential for the private sector to play a criti-\r\ncal role in complementing the public sector efforts to satisfy the demand for\r\nclimate services in the ESA countries. EARS is one of the private initiatives\r\nthat provides a sustainable business model that can complement the NMHSs\r\ncapacity (box 5.1).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 93\r\n\f BOX 5.1 Good Practice from EARS\r\n Since 2012, EARS has been involved in piloting a project in Senegal using different climate data\r\n collection techniques, including satellites, to improve data quality for Weather Index-Based\r\n Insurance. Depending on the design parameters, climate, and drought sensitivity of the crop, the\r\n index detects when the drought level is such that yield losses are imminent. In that case, a payout\r\n for that location is triggered by the index.\r\n After the first year, the project demonstrated that there is considerable potential for improve-\r\n ment to calibrate the weather indexes by (a) incorporating additional ground data made available\r\n by the project; (b) interacting directly with local experts, including NMHS staff; and (c) integrat-\r\n ing different methodologies.\r\n Background. EARS is a remote sensing and geo-informatics company that has developed its own\r\n innovative technology, known as the Energy and Water Balance Monitoring System. This tech-\r\n nology is used to derive and map temperature, radiation, evapotranspiration, cloudiness, and\r\n rainfall data from Meteosat data. EARS has processed 33 years of Meteosat data on evaporation\r\n and precipitation data fields that cover the entire African continent at a 3-km spatial scale, with\r\n daily temporal resolution. This Meteosat reception and processing continues in real time at the\r\n head office. In addition, EARS receives data from the WMO Global Telecommunication System\r\n for calibration and validation purposes. Based on the aforementioned data, EARS has developed\r\n systems and services for river flow forecasting, drought monitoring, crop yield forecasting, and\r\n crop index insurance.\r\n The model. Since 2009, EARS has been developing a microcrop index insurance called the Food\r\n Early Solutions for Africa (FESA). This initiative aims to insure farmers against damage caused\r\n by drought, extreme precipitation, and winter or night frost. Once farmers have signed up for\r\n the insurance, EARS will use the Meteosat receiving system to (a) monitor the index during the\r\n growing season; (b) calculate payouts; and (c) report the results. The project was cofunded by the\r\n Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands as a contribution to achieving the UN Millennium\r\n Development Goals.\r\n Benefits. FESA has been developing and providing low-cost drought and excessive precipitation\r\n insurance in Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, Benin, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Uganda, Malawi,\r\n Mozambique, and Botswana. However, as with many microinsurance schemes, the model was\r\n found not to be commercially viable without public sector funding.\r\n Upscaling and satellite data versus ground weather stations. Through the use of Meteosat-derived\r\n data, full spatial coverage and long-time series can be provided in Africa through EARS. These satel-\r\n lite-derived data can address the current geographic gaps that exist between meteorological ground\r\n stations in Africa. However, the investment and O&M of these satellites are expensive. To provide\r\n the long-time series that are required for a proper risk assessment and insurance design, the satellite\r\n data need to be complemented by real-time data from on-the-ground weather stations.\r\n Relationship with the NMHSs. EARS is a provider of tailored climate information systems and\r\n products that are generated from Meteosat-derived data. EARS therefore does not use data from\r\n the NMHSs. As a result, the company has only incidental relationships with NMHSs, often with\r\n the objective to obtain data that are not available through the WMO Global Telecommunication\r\n System to validate satellite weather data.\r\n Source: Mills et al. 2016, 27–28.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n94\r\n\f In addition to international companies such as EARS, small to medium\r\nentrepreneurs are emerging who have the capacity to develop user-specific\r\nweather products to a variety of market segments and disseminate this infor-\r\nmation, the result of which would strengthen the weather information value\r\nchain. Severe Weather Consult (SWC) in Rwanda is another company that\r\nhas recently been established to provide weather information services. SWC,\r\nfor example, has piloted a weather information service in Rwanda following a\r\nmarket survey that identified weather information needs for farmers and city\r\ndwellers. As weather data were not available promptly, SWC opted to install\r\na few ground weather stations with which they will combine saturate data.\r\nIn future, SWC will charge farmers to sustain the system, and they will con-\r\ntinuously explore other areas where data could be valuable, such as lightning\r\ninformation.\r\n However, involving the private sector in weather information products and\r\nservices needs some considerations of the following key issues:\r\n\r\n• The legal frameworks would need to be amended to allow for the par-\r\n ticipation of nongovernmental entities in the provision of weather and\r\n climate services. In most countries across the ESA region, NMHSs are\r\n the sole authoritative providers of basic weather information products\r\n and services, and this condition continues to be considered as the most\r\n effective scenario. In Ethiopia, for example, the National Meteorological\r\n Agency is the sole authority and provider of tailored climate and weather\r\n information products. For the legal framework to be amended, it is likely\r\n to take some time to liberalize the weather and early warning information\r\n services.\r\n• Consistent with WMO’s Resolution 40 (Cg-XII), which urges members\r\n to strengthen their commitment to the free and unrestricted exchange\r\n of meteorological information, the resolution highlights the need to\r\n strengthen the role of the NMHS, particularly in regard to the potential\r\n impact of commercialization of basic services and the impact of for-profit\r\n activities by private sector enterprises. Accordingly, Resolution 40 states\r\n the following:\r\n considering . . . (4) The continuing requirement for Governments to\r\n provide for the meteorological infrastructure of their countries, (5) The\r\n continuing need for, and benefits from, strengthening the capabilities of\r\n NMSs, in particular in developing countries, to improve the provision of\r\n services, . . . (6) The dependence of the research and education communi-\r\n ties on access to meteorological and related data and products, . . . (7) The\r\n right of Governments to choose the manner by, and the extent to, which\r\n they make data and products available domestically or for international\r\n exchange, . . . Recognizing further: (1)The existence of a trend towards the\r\n commercialization of many meteorological and hydrological activities, (2)\r\n The requirement by some Members that their NMSs initiate or increase their\r\n commercial activities, (3) The risk arising from commercialization to the\r\n established system of free and unrestricted exchange of data and products,\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 95\r\n\f which forms the basis for the WWW, and to global cooperation in meteo-\r\n rology, (4) Both positive and negative impacts on the capacities, expertise\r\n and development of NMSs, and particularly those of developing countries,\r\n from commercial operations within their territories by the commercial sec-\r\n tor including the commercial activities of other NMSs, Reminds Members\r\n of their obligations under Article 2 of the WMO Convention to facilitate\r\n worldwide cooperation in the establishment of observing networks and to\r\n promote the exchange of meteorological and related information; and of the\r\n need to ensure stable ongoing commitment of resources to meet this obliga-\r\n tion in the common interest of all nations.26\r\n• The installation of new weather stations is unlikely to be always consistent\r\n with the WMO standards. One of the approaches to creating this con-\r\n sistency for weather stations is to ensure that all installations of weather\r\n stations are done by the NMHS. In Tanzania, the government has made\r\n it compulsory that weather stations—from both the public and private\r\n sector—be installed by the Tanzania Meteorological Agency (TMA) and\r\n TMA staff are trained to maintain these stations. However, the challenge\r\n here is that many ESA countries have limited capacity to deploy and\r\n maintain their own networks. It is therefore unlikely that the NMHSs\r\n will have the capacity to manage a commercial operation. As indicated,\r\n there is a recognition that the governments have the responsibility for\r\n the allocation of adequate resources for the NMHS, which will allow\r\n them to properly discharge their institutional responsibilities, including\r\n becoming the authoritative source of hydromet monitoring and forecast-\r\n ing information to improve the country’s decision-making and invest-\r\n ment-planning processes. Currently, most NMHSs in the ESA regions do\r\n not have the capacity to compete with the private sector in areas such as\r\n staff training, equipment maintenance, or payment of subscriptions for\r\n certain specialized services.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nASEAN Food Security Information System\r\nSoutheast Asia is one of the most disaster-affected regions in the world, with\r\nthe region having experienced two of the world’s mega-disasters during the\r\npast decade: the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 and Cyclone Nargis, which hit\r\nMyanmar in 2008. More recently, the floods in Thailand in 2011 caused more\r\nthan US$45 billion in damages, and the latest major disaster, super typhoon\r\nHaiyan, was the deadliest disaster in 2013, with more than 6,000 fatalities.\r\nAccording to the International Disaster Database, the region accounted for\r\nmore than 31 percent of all global fatalities from disasters and 8.83 percent\r\nof those affected by disasters from 2003 to 2013. Losses related to natural\r\n\r\n26World Meteorological Organization, http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/ois/Operational_Information\r\n/Publications/Congress/Cg_XII/res40_en.html.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n96 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\fdisasters cost the ASEAN region, on average, more than US$4.4 billion annu-\r\nally over the past decade.\r\n ASEAN was founded August 8, 1967, by Indonesia, Malaysia, the\r\nPhilippines, Singapore, and Thailand. Its goal was to accelerate economic\r\ngrowth, social progress, and cultural development and to promote peace and\r\nstability in the region. After the Cold War, its membership expended to 10\r\nby admitting Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, the Lao People’s Democratic\r\nRepublic, Myanmar, and Vietnam. Located in Jakarta, Indonesia, and led\r\nby the Secretariat, ASEAN consists of four major departments: Political and\r\nSecurity Community, Economic Community, Sociocultural Community, and\r\nCommunity and Corporate Affairs. In 2012, the Secretariat had a budget of\r\nUS$15.7 million and 260 staff.\r\n To fulfill its objectives, one of the initiatives of ASEAN was to create the\r\nASEAN Food Security Reserve (ASFR) in 1979. Following the establishment\r\nof the ASFR, several enterprises were also initiated. This included an agency\r\nto manage the regional emergency rice reserve, assess in phases the level of\r\nfood security in the Southeast Asian region, and prepare information about\r\nthe food security development policy in member states. This initiative led\r\nto the setting up of the ASEAN Emergency Rice Reserve for use during crisis.\r\nThe term emergency was used to refer to the states or situations of extreme\r\nsuffering resulting from disasters of a natural or anthropogenic nature. Some\r\ndisasters would overwhelm the member states’ capacity to address such cir-\r\ncumstances through national reserves and also leave them unable to cater to\r\nthe supply needs through normal trade channels (Briones 2011). Two decades\r\nlater in 2003, the ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS) was\r\ninitiated. Today, AFSIS has become a critical element of the ASEAN nations\r\nbecause it is the basis of EWS information.\r\n AFSIS was born out of the agreement at the first meeting of the ASEAN\r\nMinisters of Agriculture and Forestry and the Ministers of Agriculture of\r\nChina, Japan, and South Korea, held in 2001. The aim of AFSIS is to provide\r\naccurate and reliable information in a timely manner, which is necessary for\r\nfood security in the ASEAN region.\r\n To achieve the objectives, AFSIS is supported by two main components:\r\nHuman Resource Development and Information Network Development.\r\nFirst, the Human Resource Development is aimed at raising the technical\r\ncapacity of member states at two levels. The first level was achieved through a\r\ncombination of activities such as training, workshops, and national seminars.\r\nThese activities were planned to provide related personnel in member states\r\nwith knowledge and skills in statistics and the development of food security\r\ninformation systems to ensure that they will be capable of implementing the\r\nproject’s activities competently and at the same standard.\r\n At the second level, the project introduced the activity for mutual technical\r\ncooperation to replace the national seminars of the first level. The objective\r\nwas to share the knowledge and views between the ASEAN member states\r\nthrough the organization of training courses and technical visits. Under this\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 97\r\n\factivity, the more advanced member states were requested to help improve\r\nthe capacity of the others to accomplish the implementation of the project’s\r\nactivities.\r\n Third, the Information Network Development component focused on the\r\ndevelopment of a regional food security information network. This included\r\nthe development of the database to enable stakeholders in member states\r\nto disseminate and acquire food security–related data required for policy\r\nplanning and implementation. This component also planned to provide\r\nmember states and the project management units with the sets of computer\r\nhardware including printers and necessary application software, as well as\r\nannual operating costs to develop information networks at national and\r\nregional levels.\r\n Having built the technical capacity and the appropriate physical infrastruc-\r\nture, the project emphasized the enrichment of databases and data analysis.\r\nThe development of Early Warning Information and Commodity Outlook\r\nwas included to monitor and analyze food security in the region. In addition,\r\nthe project planned to provide network equipment to some member states as\r\nconsidered necessary for project implementation.\r\n The expected outputs of the project were as follows:\r\n• Member states will be capable of providing accurate, reliable, and timely\r\n information required for the construction of regional food security infor-\r\n mation at the same standard.\r\n• The project will be able to provide complete information needed for plan-\r\n ning and implementation of food security policy in the region.\r\n• The development of EW information and commodity outlook will facili-\r\n tate the management of food security policies and programs. These activ-\r\n ities will help assess food security situations in the region and identify\r\n the areas where food insecurity is likely to occur as well as the degree of\r\n seriousness.\r\n• The responsible agencies will be better aware of the problem in food\r\n security, so that affected people will receive more robust responses and\r\n support.\r\n\r\nAFSIS InsƟtuƟonal Arrangements\r\n\r\nThe key institution, which oversees the implementation of AFSIS, is a focal\r\npoint agencies group from every member state. This group is responsible for\r\nmanaging and assisting in carrying out the project’s activities. The functions\r\nare organized through the focal point meeting (FPM).\r\n The FPM is the decision-making mechanism of the project and is held at\r\nleast once a year to discuss, review, and decide on the following:\r\n• Work plans of the project\r\n• Implementation of project activities at the regional and national levels\r\n• Other important matters relevant to the implementation of the project\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n98 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\f The ASEAN Food Security Information and Training Centre, in the\r\n Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives in Thailand, is the secretariat of the\r\n FPM and also doubles as a center for regional training and as a hub of infor-\r\n mation on regional food security.\r\n\r\n Food Security InformaƟon Database\r\n\r\n Figure 5.1 summarizes the food security database and the benefits to member\r\n states and other users.\r\n\r\n Lessons for ESA Countries from the AFSIS Project\r\n\r\n • AFSIS is a legally binding policy framework for cooperation, coordi-\r\n nation, technical assistance, and resource mobilization in food security\r\n information systems in the ASEAN member states. If the ESA countries\r\n should adopt a similar system, then they need to consider developing a\r\n legally binding agreement.\r\n • The AFSIS FPM is made up of the respective food security focal points\r\n to oversee the implementation of the program. The ESA countries could\r\n adopt the same framework perhaps through the already existing work-\r\n ing groups, for example, FSNWG in IGAD and Regional Early Warning\r\n Unit (REWU) in the SADC. However, these systems will need to be\r\n institutionalized.\r\n The resources for AFSIS are mobilized by member states, and if the\r\n ESA countries would like to sustain the benefits of such a project, then\r\n they should mobilize resources internally.\r\n\r\nFIGURE 5.1 Contents of AFSIS Database and Benefits to Users\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: AFSIS.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 99\r\n\fParticipatory Scenario Planning for\r\nCoproducing User-Based Climate Services\r\nApplication of climate and weather information at the local community level\r\nis one of the key bottlenecks that has been highlighted by participants of this\r\nstudy. At the local level, for example, in Mbeta Island in Zambia, it was clear\r\nthat access to weather information is limited and, if available, is often not\r\nspecific enough, not easily understood, or not framed as actionable decision\r\npoints. In Zimbabwe, climate information from meteorological services is\r\noften viewed as of high quality and based on science and technology, but this\r\ninformation is of limited value because it has limited interface, if any, with\r\nlocal knowledge from users, particularly farmers.\r\n Participatory scenario planning (PSP) is one of the tools that provides an\r\nopportunity to integrate science-based climate information and context-spe-\r\ncific local knowledge (box 5.2). Successful adaptation and resilience to\r\nclimate variability and change requires building people’s capacity to continu-\r\nously make adaptive decisions that review, anticipate, and have the flexibility\r\nto respond to climate risks, uncertainties, and opportunities. To make good\r\ndecisions, the government at different levels, organizations, and communities\r\nneed context-specific information on the climate and its uncertainties, poten-\r\ntial climate impacts, and response options.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nQuality Assurance Measures and Service\r\nImprovements through Producer-User\r\nInterface Forums\r\nOne of the criticisms leveled against producers of the food security EW\r\ninformation is not only limited understanding of user needs but also feed-\r\nback from users. It is then critical for the EW producers, including NMHSs,\r\nagriculture departments, UN agencies, NGOs, and private sector providers to\r\nregularly assess service quality by evaluating current products and services,\r\nas well as using surveys and focus group interviews. Such assessments are\r\nlikely to increase understanding of gaps in service provision in terms of who\r\nis accessing information, how that information is being used, and the expe-\r\nrience of users in matching that information to their specific needs as well as\r\nexploring potential demand for new services.\r\n Srinivasan, Rafisura, and Subbiah (2011) outline the benefits of creating a\r\nuser platform to provide a two-way dialogue between producers and users\r\nof EWSs as one of the ways of reaching climate information users. Climate\r\nforums were initiated by the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre in several\r\ncountries in Asia, including Mongolia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam.\r\nThe climate forums helped build institutional mechanisms for communicat-\r\ning forecasts to users and for allowing feedback from users to providers. It is\r\na regular two-way dialogue and multistakeholder process of understanding\r\nand applying climate information. The climate forum is usually initiated and\r\n\r\n\r\n100 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\fBOX 5.2 Application of Climate Information through PSP\r\nParticipatory Scenario Planning (PSP) is a method used by CARE International under its\r\nAdaptation Learning Program (ALP), implemented in Africa, for the collective sharing and\r\ninterpretation of climate forecasts. The ALP supports communities and local governments to\r\nuse seasonal climate forecasts and information on climatic uncertainty for decision making as\r\npart of the community-based adaptation approach.\r\n\r\nFIGURE B5.2.1 Five Major Steps of the PSP Process\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Step 1. Designing Step 2. Preparing Step 3. Facilitating Step 4. Step 5. Feedback,\r\n the PSP process for a PSP workshop a PSP workshop Communicating monitoring and\r\n advisories from a evaluation\r\n Developing an Involve all relevant Multistakeholder\r\n PSP workshop Two-way\r\n informed, locally stakeholders, forum—access,\r\n communication &\r\n relevant, and recognizing their understanding, & Reaching all actors feedback between\r\n appropriate PSP roles, and utilizing combining who need to use producers,\r\n process, including their specific meteorological & the information, intermediaries, and\r\n deciding the level knowledge and local seasonal in understandable users of climate\r\n (national, county/ capacities to enable a forecasts; language, accessible information enabling\r\n province, district participatory process interpretation into channels, & in continuous, iterative,\r\n and so on) at which that is responsive to locally relevant good time to inform & shared learning on\r\n to conduct PSP & user needs. and actionable decisions & plans. climate information\r\n forming partnerships information for services.\r\n for sustainability. seasonal decision\r\n making & planning.\r\n\r\n PSP is an iterative learning process\r\n\r\n\r\nSource: http://careclimatechange.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ALP-PSP-Brief-2017.pdf.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nThe PSP method creates space for meteorologists, community members, local government depart-\r\nments, and NGOs to share scientific and traditional local knowledge. It allows these stakeholders\r\nto find ways to combine and interpret these two sources of information into locally relevant and\r\nuseful forms. Participants of the PSP method consider the probabilities of changes in the climate;\r\nassess their likely hazards, risks, opportunities, and impacts; and develop scenarios based on such\r\nan assessment. They discuss the potential implications of these scenarios on livelihoods, which\r\nlead to agreement on plans that respond adequately to the identified levels of risk and uncertainty.\r\n For example, in Kenya, the PSP method helped local communities make local agricultural deci-\r\nsions by prompting consideration of the different types and varieties of crops that would respond\r\nto the different levels of risk. Decisions were made about what crops to plant in the coming season\r\nand, crucially, how much of each crop type and variety to plant so as to spread the risk of total\r\ncrop loss because of whatever climate that actually occurred. Plans were also made about risk\r\nreduction strategies that needed to be put in place by communities and how local government and\r\nNGOs could support these strategies through their ongoing and planned activities.\r\nSource: https://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/nairobi_work_program/application/pdf/care_psp_indigenous_knowledge.pdf\r\n(accessed June 13, 2017).\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 101\r\n\ffacilitated by the national hydrometeorological agency and includes partici-\r\npation by different stakeholders from the public and private sectors. The cli-\r\nmate forum draws upon Indonesia and the Philippines as they have extensive\r\nexperiences in institutionalizing climate forums at national and local levels.\r\n In March 2003, the Philippine Atmospheric Geophysical and Astronomical\r\nServices Administration initiated the national-level climate forum in the\r\naftermath of two severe El Niño events (1997–98 and 2002–03) that demon-\r\nstrated the need to establish a platform for discussing climate forecasts. The\r\nholding of a local-level climate forum was also initiated at the provincial level.\r\n In general, the objectives of the climate forum are\r\n• To ensure that forecast products, including their uncertainties and limita-\r\n tions, are understood by and communicated to users;\r\n• To encourage risk mitigation in various climate-sensitive sectors; and\r\n• To provide a platform for interagency coordination of policies and pro-\r\n grams for dealing with potential impacts of climate-related hazards on a\r\n season-to-season basis.\r\n Because the countries have different contexts, the mechanics and specific\r\nobjectives of climate forums are in recognition of the diverse institutional char-\r\nacteristics and mandates. To ensure regularity, the climate forum is anchored\r\non a recurring phenomenon, such as the onset of the monsoon. Meetings are\r\nconvened at least twice a year, just before the onset of the monsoon and then\r\nagain after the monsoon. The risks and opportunities characterizing each sea-\r\nson vary to a great extent; hence it is important that the forecast providers and\r\nusers meet more frequently to make sure that the nature and timing of risks\r\nare well understood.\r\n For climate forums to be successful, it is critical that the users must be will-\r\ning to participate and constantly engage the hydrometeorological service.\r\nSecond, the national hydrometeorological agency should have a good under-\r\nstanding of the user context. It should have an understanding of the following:\r\n• Who are the users and what are their key activities, for example, water\r\n resources management, agriculture, disaster management, or public\r\n health?\r\n• What kind of climate information do they need to carry out their func-\r\n tions more effectively and when is this information needed?\r\n• Do they have the capacity to receive, interpret, and translate climate fore-\r\n casts into sectoral impacts? If not, what capacity-building activities are\r\n needed?\r\n Having a communication plan for forecast providers and users is essential.\r\nThere should be regularity in releasing forecast information. Users should\r\nalso give regular feedback to the national hydrometeorological agencies in the\r\nform of postseason reports or other channels. Finally, users, specifically user\r\nagencies, must have a mechanism for receiving and utilizing climate informa-\r\ntion within their respective organizations.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n102 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\f The experience in Myanmar indicates that sometimes there is no need to\r\ncome up with entirely new mechanisms for allowing feedback from users to\r\nNMHSs. Some user agencies have a long-standing practice of preparing post-\r\nmonsoon season reports. Most of the questions relate to the usefulness of\r\ninformation decisions made by users, actions that were taken, and lessons\r\nlearned (Srinivasan, Rafisura, and Subbiah 2011).\r\n• What were the expected and actual climates as forecasted by the hydro-\r\n meteorological agency?\r\n• What were the options considered or recommended by the department\r\n to end users?\r\n• What options were adopted as the season progressed?\r\n• What were the impacts?\r\n• What were the lessons learned?\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nSummary of Findings and Recommendations\r\nAlthough progress has been made, there are challenges that recur across the\r\nRECs and member states. Most of these challenges fall into the following\r\nthree categories:\r\n\r\n\r\nInsƟtuƟonal Challenges\r\n\r\n• Lack of EWS working groups in both RECs to coordinate EWS activities.\r\n In the IGAD region, the institutionalization of the FSNWG has been slow\r\n as the FSNWG has yet to be endorsed as an institution of IGAD.\r\n• Policies that outline roles and responsibilities for EWS actors at both\r\n regional and national levels are generally weak. Although many ESA\r\n countries have sector policies, the sectors still operate in silos because of\r\n lack of overarching EWS policies. In addition, although several tools such\r\n as the IPC have manuals that guide users, these have not been endorsed\r\n by regions and member states to provide guidance on systematic data\r\n collection, data sharing, monitoring, and agreed action triggers.\r\n• Although the GHACOF report focuses more on the actions that users\r\n need to consider as compared with the SARCOF reports, which are\r\n still expressed in probabilities, some users such as pastoralists are still\r\n excluded as the reports are in English. Whereas the start and end dates for\r\n the season are useful, there is still a gap in the intensity and frequency of\r\n the information and it has yet to reach some of the intended users.\r\n• There is a lack of regular updates of the RFBSs and NFBSs and weak\r\n monitoring of grain markets, cross-border trade, and commodity price\r\n monitoring. Although FEWS NET and the WFP actively monitor these\r\n activities, integration of some of these into regional and national systems\r\n is still limited.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 103\r\n\fTechnical Challenges\r\n\r\n• Although the SARCOF and GHACOF processes are well established in\r\n providing regional climate forecast, there are still challenges to downscal-\r\n ing these forecasts to local levels such as districts or villages. Another\r\n limitation of GHACOF and SARCOF is that they tend to focus on rain\r\n and pay little attention to other parameters.\r\n• Limited coverage of the weather observation networks and challenges\r\n in crop production forecasts makes agrometeorology data less reliable.\r\n The capacity of NMHSs in Africa is not adequate and has considerably\r\n degraded in some countries during the past 20 to 25 years.\r\n• In some countries, there is a lack of technically qualified professionals\r\n such as meteorologists, agrometeorologists, and hydrometeorologists to\r\n ensure quality hydrometeorological products.\r\n• Although the VAC system has become one of the most useful and reliable\r\n EWS tools in the SADC, there are multiple methodologies that need har-\r\n monization. The IPC procedures allow for the incorporation of the most\r\n reliable relevant information from multiple sources. There is a system\r\n for weighing the credibility of the source. As the sources of data become\r\n more reliable the IPC estimates become more accurate, contributing\r\n toward improving the level of understanding of evolving food security\r\n situations. Although the IPC protocols continue to gain currency across\r\n the ESA regions, there are challenges to its general adoption by national\r\n governments, due in part to differences in the manner some countries\r\n account for food security outcome indicators, some using actual metrics\r\n whereas others rely on proxies of those indicators.\r\n• Weak food security information systems and absence of a framework for\r\n sharing EWS data at both regional and national levels makes EWS infor-\r\n mation slow to reach users. However, it is key to understand that although\r\n regional- and national-level EWSs are complementary, these play entirely\r\n different roles at their respective geographic scales. Regional-level EWSs\r\n are not required to provide guidance on site-specific interventions,\r\n whereas the national EWSs are expected to transform risk knowledge\r\n into effective on-the-ground interventions for reducing risk and protect\r\n lives and assets.\r\n\r\n\r\nSustainability and Financial Challenges\r\n\r\n• There are no clear funding mechanisms for EWSs. Although conceptu-\r\n ally part of the emergency preparedness of the country, in many nations\r\n EWS programs are perceived as part of the emergency response activi-\r\n ties. Consequently, funding for EWS tends to be ad hoc, oftentimes com-\r\n peting for funds during the emergency response. In addition, because\r\n EWSs rely on international assistance, which tends to be project based,\r\n they often face financial sustainability challenges once the external\r\n funding ceases. However, in general, national government authorities\r\n\r\n\r\n104 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\f and other relevant stakeholders across the ESA regions have a pretty\r\n good understanding of the need for effective, timely EWS, as they have\r\n joined the Hyogo Framework for Action (2015–15) and the Sendai, and\r\n most countries have ratified the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk\r\n Reduction. They have established partnerships with specialized agencies\r\n of the United Nations, such UNDP, UNEP, UNICEF, WFP, FAO, and the\r\n World Bank, the African Development Bank, EU, and so on. The chronic\r\n financial constraints that affect many countries in Africa are the primary\r\n reasons why adequate ex ante resources are not allocated for EWS. Most\r\n countries are becoming increasingly aware of their contingent liabili-\r\n ties and are exploring mechanisms to reduce them, including exploring\r\n the establishment of disaster risk financing and transfer strategies. The\r\n World Bank’s Africa Program has an ongoing policy dialogue with most\r\n countries in the region, aimed to help national governments to find ways\r\n to improve regional collaboration and coordination to address food inse-\r\n curity through other mechanisms, and to improve EWSs that are ade-\r\n quately funded by the government.\r\n• There is limited private participation in the provision of climate services.\r\n However, it is hypothesized that PPPs could contribute to reducing coun-\r\n tries’ reliance on external donors. There is uncertainty, however, over the\r\n nature of the relationship between the NMHSs and the private sector.\r\n There is also a perception that the private sector may be a threat to data\r\n ownership and the ability of governments to fulfill their national and\r\n international commitments regarding the provision of basic hydromet\r\n services as a public good, including data for EWSs.\r\n\r\n\r\nRecommendations\r\nThe following are key areas that require investment:\r\n\r\nStrengthening InsƟtuƟonal Capacity Framework\r\n\r\n• Strengthen the EWS governance at both the national and REC levels\r\n by improving legal and regulatory frameworks, and coordination and\r\n ensuring clarity of roles and responsibilities at each EWS phase. This\r\n will also include developing common methodologies and procedures for\r\n data collection, management, and data sharing across geographic borders.\r\n• Develop and strengthen the food security information system at both\r\n the national and regional levels to meet the RECs’, African Union’s,\r\n and member states’ agendas, including the Comprehensive Africa\r\n Agriculture Development Program. The information should serve reg-\r\n ular development, EWSs, and emergency preparedness and response. The\r\n RECs in the ESA region should consider establishing a food security infor-\r\n mation system like that of the ASEAN Food Security Information System\r\n (AFSIS) to strengthen the food security EWS. This will be supported by\r\n a data-sharing framework and a one-stop food security information hub\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 105\r\n\f such as an emergency operation center that is accessible to users from\r\n governments, the public, and the international community. The regional\r\n food security information system should also be replicated in each of the\r\n member states.\r\n• An effective all-hazards regional technical committee, with a remit\r\n on food security EWS, needs to be reviewed, strengthened, or created\r\n where one does not exist. This will improve the coordination, commu-\r\n nication, packaging, and delivery of information in the region, especially\r\n in terms of better joint preparedness and response plans. The mandate\r\n should include multihazards and specific hazards such as pest infesta-\r\n tions (for example, the FAW). The regional EWS committee should be\r\n replicated in the member states.\r\n• Develop innovative but carefully designed public-private partnerships\r\n that have the potential of improving the sustainability of climate and\r\n EWS. PPPs have the potential of breaking the downward trend of relying\r\n on external funding, addressing weak infrastructure, deficient services,\r\n and low visibility that have a negative impact on efficient and effective\r\n EWS services. The increasing access to the Internet has spread rapidly\r\n across Africa, which also provides an opportunity to engage the private\r\n sector to collect near-real-time data from automatic weather stations and\r\n to disseminate this information, alerts, and warnings to improve food\r\n and livelihood security. This will require the ESA countries to be proac-\r\n tive to engage with private international and local weather and climate\r\n information services providers.\r\n• Hydrometeorological monitoring and forecasting, and the mainte-\r\n nance and operation of the observational networks, will continue\r\n to be an activity that is best carried out by specialized government\r\n agencies, as a government monopoly, and the services generated by\r\n such a monopoly provided as a public good. The privatization of key\r\n government functions that have been traditionally carried out by the\r\n NMHSs is a contentious issue because establishing the required obser-\r\n vational networks is a capital-intensive endeavor that is not, in general,\r\n profitable from a business perspective. Considering that private partici-\r\n pation is a relatively new territory for the ESA countries, its integration\r\n into the existing structures will require a phased approach that can allow\r\n for experimentation, testing, flexibility, evaluation, and sharing of lessons\r\n learned as the innovations progress.\r\n• PPPs shall be supported by legal frameworks and agreements that out-\r\n line the roles and responsibilities of the participating partners, data\r\n policy, and intellectual property rights to ensure the public goods ser-\r\n vice of EWS is not compromised. It is also key to understand that private\r\n enterprises will find the required technical infrastructure unprofitable to\r\n maintain for periods of time that can span for generations and for future\r\n uses that are as yet unknown, or for which the expected return on invest-\r\n ment cannot be estimated. Private enterprises would be discouraged from\r\n investing in infrastructure to cover geographic areas where, for example,\r\n\r\n\r\n106 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\f they don’t have markets, or if potential markets exist, such markets are\r\n unprofitable. However, private entities can benefit from government ser-\r\n vices provided at no cost to all. For instance, hydromet information can\r\n be used to develop and promote whole new industries, including para-\r\n metric agricultural/flood risk insurance, which, in turn, would contribute\r\n to reducing the government’s contingent liabilities resulting from adverse\r\n hydrometeorological events. In this regard, certain specialized weather\r\n services can be taken up by the private sector, building on the basic ser-\r\n vices, provided by the government NMHSs.\r\n• As the technical capacity of NMHSs improve, these agencies could also\r\n provide specialized fee-based services. For instance, in many countries\r\n airlines pay for additional weather services at airports.\r\n• NHMS will continue to derive its core funding for operation and mainte-\r\n nance and research from the government budget.\r\n\r\nImprove Technical CapaciƟes and Knowledge Exchange\r\n\r\n• Invest in technical capacity development to enable the collection of\r\n high-quality agrometeorological crop production forecasts and vul-\r\n nerability data. EWSs require (a) improved capacity to downscale\r\n regional climate forecasts to high resolution for the forecasts to be\r\n meaningful at the local level; (b) strong weather observation networks\r\n with a wider coverage; and (c) improved data collection for crop assess-\r\n ments, livestock assessments, and vulnerability assessments. The SADC’s\r\n Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis as well as the IPC methodologies\r\n should be harmonized, or at least agree on, minimum indicators to ensure\r\n quality assurance and comparison between countries.\r\n• Improving capacity building is key for ensuring that NMHSs are capa-\r\n ble of discharging their mandates. However, the chronic underfund-\r\n ing of many, if not most, NHMSs across the developing world—already\r\n struggling to stay financially afloat, and consequentially not very effective\r\n or relevant for government decision making—makes it hard to persuade\r\n financially constrained government officials to invest in future, often-\r\n times unknown or undetermined benefits. For this reason, among others,\r\n it is critical to come up with ways to demonstrate the current economic\r\n value of effective and efficient NMHSs.\r\n• Review and strengthen monitoring of the regional food balance sheets\r\n and national food balance sheets, grain markets, cross-border trade,\r\n and commodity pricing monitoring and agree on action triggers when\r\n thresholds are reached. There is a need to develop market monitors for\r\n cross-border trade to help monitor prices and volumes to determine the\r\n food security levels in the countries. The monitoring and warning service\r\n should be supported by regional standard operating procedures (SOPs).\r\n• Improve knowledge of emerging threats such as pest infestations\r\n (for example, FAW) by strengthening links with local universities\r\n and research institutes, for example, collaborating with botany and\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 107\r\n\f biological sciences, and linking these with the meteorological depart-\r\n ments. Improving agricultural productivity goes hand in hand with\r\n improved weather and climate forecasting capabilities, which in turn\r\n contributes to enhancing the provision of Agricultural Extension Services\r\n (AESs). However, AESs do not necessarily materialize without the con-\r\n certed effort of key stakeholders from government agencies, NGOs, and\r\n academic/research institutions. AESs have a substantial impact in pro-\r\n tecting the livelihoods of households engaged in agriculture and, conse-\r\n quently, in reducing or mitigating the risk of food insecurity in vulnerable\r\n populations.\r\n• Promote south-south knowledge exchanges, for example, exchange of\r\n information between AFSIS and RECs in the process of developing their\r\n Food Security Information Systems. Inter-REC knowledge exchanges\r\n such as Agriculture, Hydrology and Meteorology Regional Centre of the\r\n countries of the Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought in the\r\n Sahel could also be considered.\r\n• Develop and strengthen community-based VACs, including knowledge\r\n and best practices sharing between ESA countries.\r\n\r\nLeverage Available Financial Resources\r\n\r\n• Strengthen public commitment and mainstream EWS considerations\r\n into agricultural/food security policies, budgetary allocations, and\r\n planning frameworks.  This will require evidence-based advocacy to\r\n regional leaders and cooperation of development partners on the eco-\r\n nomic benefits of EWSs.\r\n• In Uganda, for instance, the government has demonstrated its awareness\r\n of the existing nexus between weather, climate, and water and food inse-\r\n curity levels. Uganda has adopted medium-range and long-term strate-\r\n gies for reducing the risk of food insecurity, including the incorporation\r\n of key concepts of climate-smart agriculture, which depends on improved\r\n hydromet monitoring and forecasting capabilities that also contribute\r\n to effective end-to-end EWSs. To achieve similar goals across the ESA\r\n regions, national governments need to create the enabling environment\r\n for policy dialogue that promotes the paradigm shift from responding to\r\n food insecurity crises toward managing food insecurity risks, an endeavor\r\n that requires a multidisciplinary engagement across multiple sectors and\r\n levels of government administration.\r\n• There is a growing body of evidence that demonstrates that the societal\r\n value of certain government services, including weather and climate\r\n monitoring and forecasting services, far exceeds their direct costs (on\r\n par with other government-funded services such as public education and\r\n health programs). The BCR of investments in hydromet, EWS, and sim-\r\n ilar services, generally paid by the national government and provided as\r\n a public good, demonstrates the societal gains of providing such services\r\n at no cost to the public, including the private sector. However, there is\r\n\r\n\r\n108 CHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations\r\n\f potential for implementing effective and efficient cost-recovery measures\r\n in the ESA countries, particularly considering that the NMHSs are essen-\r\n tially the only agencies providing weather and climate services.\r\n• Scale up technical support and investment under schemes such as\r\n the World Bank modernization of hydrometeorological infrastruc-\r\n ture and institutional strengthening and capacity building of targeted\r\n NMHSs with an added emphasis on strengthening subnational insti-\r\n tutional capacity. There is also a need to consider leveraging on climate\r\n and development finance and build a “weaning phase” into EWS projects\r\n financed by development partners to ensure sustainability of benefits.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nCHAPTER 5—Best Practices and Recommendations 109\r\n\f\fReferences\r\n\r\nAbrahams, P., T. Beale, M. Cock, N. Corniani, R. Day, J. Godwin, G. Richards,\r\n J. Vos, and S. Murphy. 2017. “Fall Armyworm Status. Impacts and\r\n Control Options in Africa: Preliminary Evidence Note (April 2017).”\r\n CABI. http://www.invasive-species.org/Uploads/InvasiveSpecies/FAW-\r\n inception-report.pdf.\r\nAdams, Richard M., Laurie L. Houston, Bruce A. McCarl, Mario Tiscareño,\r\n Jaime Matus, and Rodney F. Weiher. 2004. “The Benefits to Mexican\r\n Agriculture of an El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Early Warning\r\n System.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 115 (2003): 183–94. http://\r\n www.ukm.my/ipi/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/50.2003The-benefits-\r\n to-Mexican-agriculture-of-an-El-Ni%C3%B1o-southern-oscillation-\r\n ENSO-early-warning-system.pdf.\r\nAFSIS. 2017. “ASEAN Plus Three Food Security Information System.” http://\r\n www.aptfsis.org/index.php/statistics-m.\r\nAnaman, K. A., and S. C. Lellyett. (1996). “Contingent Valuation Study of\r\n the Public Weather Service in the Sydney Metropolitan Area.” Economic\r\n Papers 15(3): 64–77. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1759-\r\n 3441.1996.tb00123.x/abstract.\r\nBailey, Rob. 2012. Famine Early Warning and Early Action: The Cost of Delay.\r\n London: Chatham House. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload\r\n /drought/docs/0712pr_bailey.pdf.\r\nBasher, R. 2006. “Global Early Warning Systems for Natural Hazards:\r\n Systematic and People-Centred.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal\r\n Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 364 (1845):\r\n 2167–82. doi:10.1098/rsta.2006.1819.\r\nBlack, John, Nigar Hashimzade, and Gareth Myles. 2017. A Dictionary of\r\n Economics. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.\r\n com/academic/product/a-dictionary--of-economics-9780198759430?\r\n cc=us&lang=en&.\r\nBriones, Roehlano M. 2011. “Regional Cooperation for Food Security:\r\n The Case of Emergency Rice Reserves in the ASEAN Plus Three.”\r\n ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series No. 18, Asian\r\n Development Bank, Manila. https://think-asia.org/handle/11540/1416.\r\nChambers, R. 1996. Rural Development: Putting the Last First. London:\r\n Longman.\r\nCoughlan de Perez, E., B. van den Hurk, M. K. van Aalst, B. Jongman, T. Klose,\r\n and P. Suarez. 2015. “Forecast-based Financing: An Approach for Catalyzing\r\n Humanitarian Action Based on Extreme Weather and Climate Forecasts.”\r\n https://www.nat-hazards-earth-syst-sci.net/15/895/2015/nhess-15-895-\r\n 2015.pdf.\r\nCIMMYT (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center). 2017.\r\n “Multi-Pronged Approach Key for Effectively Defeating Fall Armyworm in\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\nReferences 111\r\n\f Africa.” CIMMYT. http://www.cimmyt.org/press_release/multi-pronged-\r\n approach-key-for-effectively-defeating-fall-armyworm-in-africa/.\r\nDMMU (Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit). 2015. Disaster Manage-\r\n ment Operational Manual. Lusaka: Disaster Management and Mitigation\r\n Unit, Office of the Vice President.\r\nEast Africa Food Security Outlook, July 2017. https://reliefweb.int/report\r\n /somalia/east-africa-food-security-outlook-july-2017.\r\nEbi, Kristi L., Thomas J. Teisberg, Laurence S. Kalkstein, Lawrence Robinson,\r\n and Rodney F. Weiher. 2004. “Heat Watch/Warning Systems Save Lives:\r\n Estimated Costs and Benefits for Philadelphia 1995–1998.” Bulletin of the\r\n American Meteorological Society 85 (8): 1067–73.\r\nECA (Economic Commission for Africa—Subregional Office for Southern\r\n Africa). 2011. “Enhancing the Effectiveness of Food Security Information\r\n Systems in SADC.” Issue Paper. https://www.uneca.org/sites/default\r\n /files/PublicationFiles/enhancing-the-effectiveness-of-food-security-\r\n information-systems-in-sadc_issues-paper.pdf.\r\nFAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN). 1996. The Rome\r\n Declaration on World Food Security. Rome: FAO.\r\n———. 2001. Food Balance Sheets: A Handbook. Rome: FAO.\r\n———. 2017. “GIEWS—Global Information and Early Warning System.”\r\n FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/giews/country-analysis/en/.\r\n———. 2006. “Assessment of Food Security Early Warning Systems in sub-\r\n Saharan Africa.” Policy Brief, FAO, Rome. ftp://ftp.fao.org/es/ESA/poli-\r\n cybriefs/pb_04.pdf.\r\n———. 2015. “The Impact of Natural Hazards and Disasters on Agriculture\r\n and Food Security and Nutrition: A Call for Action to Build Resilient\r\n Livelihoods.” FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4434e.pdf.\r\n———. 2017. “Global Report on Food Crises.” FAO, Rome. http://www.fao.\r\n org/3/a-br324e.pdf.\r\nFEWS NET (Famine Early Warning Systems Network). 2009. “Markets, Food\r\n Security and Early Warning Reporting.” Market Guidance No. 6. https://\r\n www.fews.net/sites/default/files/MT_Guidance_Markets%2C Food Security\r\n and Early Warning Reporting No 6_En.pdf.\r\n———. 2016. “Southern Africa Special Report: Illustrating the Extent and\r\n Severity of the 2015–16 Drought.” http://www.fews.net/sites/default/files\r\n /documents/reports/FEWSNET_Southern Africa 2015_16 Drought Map\r\n Book_20160318_0.pdf.\r\n———. 2017. “East Africa Special Report: Illustrating the Extent and Severity\r\n of the 2016 Horn of Africa Drought.” http://www.fews.net/east-africa\r\n /special-report/february-3-2017.\r\nFrei, T. 2010. “Economic and Social Benefits of Meteorology and Clima-\r\n tology in Switzerland.” Meteorological Applications (2009). https://\r\n www.wmo.int/pages/prog/amp/pwsp/documents/MetAppl_Frei_\r\n MeteoSwiss.pdf.\r\nFSIN (Food Security Information Network). (2017). “Global Report on Food\r\n Crisis 2017.” http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents\r\n /ena/wfp291271.pdf?_ga=1.107527238.551697735.1492614194.\r\n\r\n112 References\r\n\fGFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2016. “Striving\r\n toward Disaster Resilient Development in Sub-Saharan Africa.” GFDRR,\r\n Washington, DC. https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication\r\n /disaster-resilient-development-sub-saharan-africa.pdf.\r\nGoretti K.K. M. 2013. “Study on the Natural-Hazards Vulnerability and\r\n Risk Profiles in Hotspot Areas as a Support to Early Warning, Disaster\r\n Preparedness and Risk Reduction (EWDPRR) Measures in Uganda.”\r\n http://www.unesco-uganda.ug/files/downloads/Report%20on%20geo\r\n hazards%20in%20Uganda.pdf.\r\nHallegatte, Stéphane. 2012. “A Cost Effective Solution to Reduce Disaster Losses\r\n in Developing Countries: Hydro-Meteorological Services, Early Warning\r\n and Evacuation.” World Bank Policy Research Paper No. 6058, World\r\n Bank, Washington, DC. http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/amp/pwsp\r\n /documents/wmo_1153_en.pdf.\r\nICPAC (IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre). 2017. “Forty\r\n Fifth Greater Horn of Africa Climate Outlook Forum (GHACOF 45)\r\n Bulletin.” ICPAC, Nairobi.\r\nIFRC (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies).\r\n 2009. World Disaster Report 2009: Focus on Early Warning and\r\n Early  Action. Geneva: IFRC. http://www.ifrc.org/Global/WDR2009-\r\n full.pdf.\r\nIPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification). 2017. “The Integrated\r\n Food Security Phase Classification.” http://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-\r\n countries/ipcinfo-southern-africa/en/.\r\nIPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2014. Climate Change,\r\n Adaptation, and Vulnerability: Summary of Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge\r\n University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg2\r\n /WGIIAR5-IntegrationBrochure_FINAL.pdf.\r\nJacobs, K., and D. A. Sumner. 2002. The Food Balance Sheets of the Food\r\n and Agriculture Organization: A Review of Potential Ways to Broaden\r\n the Appropriate Uses of the Data. Rome: FAO. ftp://ksph.kz/Chemistry_\r\n Food Safety/TotalDietStudies/FBS_Rev.pdf.\r\nJones, A. D., F. M. Ngure, G. Pelto, and S. L. Young. 2013. “What Are We\r\n Assessing When We Measure Food Security? A Compendium and\r\n Review of Current Metrics.” Advances in Nutrition: An International\r\n Review Journal 4 (5): 481–505. doi:10.3945/an.113.004119.\r\nLumbroso, Darren. 2016. “Building the Concept and Plan for the Uganda\r\n National Early Warning System (NEWS) Final Report.” https://mafiadoc.\r\n com/queue/building-the-concept-and-plan-for-the-uganda-national-\r\n early-warning-_599c78031723dd08400c04a9.html.\r\nMakela, Antti, Irma Ylikangas, Ramchandra Karki, Kamal Prakash\r\n Budhathoki, Adriaan Perrels, Kristiina Säntti, Mikko Partio, and Matti\r\n Keränen. 2011. “FNEP: Finnish-Nepalese Project for improving the\r\n meteorological readiness in Nepal.” Journal of Hydrology and Meteorology\r\n 8 (1): 72–76. http://soham.org.np/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/8.pdf.\r\nMIDIMAR. 2013. “Development of Comprehensive (National and\r\n Local) Disaster Risk Profiles for enhancing Disaster Management in\r\n\r\nReferences 113\r\n\f Rwanda Project.” https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/publication\r\n /Development_of_comprehensive_Disaster_Risks_Profiles_in_\r\n Rwanda_Project_Brochure.pdf.\r\nMills, Anthony, Onno Huyser, Olga van den Pol, Kim Zoeller, Dirk\r\n Snyman, Nicholas Tye, and Alice McClure. 2016. “Revenue-Generating\r\n Opportunities through Tailored Weather Information Products,” UNDP\r\n Market Assessment, New York.\r\nMurphy, S. J., R. Washington, T. E. Downing, and R. V. Martin. 2001. “Seasonal\r\n Forecasting for Climate Hazards: Prospects and Responses.” Natural Hazards\r\n 23 (2–3): 171–96 http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1011160904414.\r\nNational Drought Management Authority. 2017. “Taita Taveta County\r\n Drought Early Warning Bulletin for February 2017.” Nairobi. http://www\r\n .ndma.go.ke/component/jdownloads/send/3-taita-taveta/20-taita-taveta-\r\n february-2017?option=com_jdownloads.\r\nPilli-Sihvola, K., P. Namgyal, and C. Dorji. 2014. “Socio-Economic Evaluation\r\n of Improved Met/Hydro Services in Bhutan.” Finnish Meteorological\r\n Institute, Department of Hydro-Met Services, Bhutan. https://www\r\n .researchgate.net/profile/Karoliina_Pilli-Sihvola/publication/301286763_\r\n Socio-Economic_Study_on_Improved_Hydro-Meteorological_\r\n Services_in_the_Kingdom_of_Bhutan/links/570f72d808ae38897ba0fa35\r\n /Socio-Economic-Study-on-Improved-Hydro-Meteorological-Services-\r\n in-the-Kingdom-of-Bhutan.pdf.\r\nRogers, David P., and Vladimir V. Tsirkunov. 2013. Weather and Climate\r\n Resilience. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/gfdrr\r\n /files/publication/Weather_and_Climate_Resilience_2013.pdf.\r\nSADC (Southern African Development Community). 2016a. “SADC\r\n Regional Humanitarian Appeal.” Gaborone.\r\n———. 2016b. “State of Food Security and Vulnerability in the Southern\r\n African Development Community.” Regional Vulnerability Assessment\r\n and Analysis Synthesis Report. http://www.sadc.int/files/9014/7911/5767\r\n /SADC_RVAA-August-Final-Web.pdf.\r\nScoones, Ian. 1998. “Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis.”\r\n IDS Working Paper 72, Institute of Development Studies, Brighton.\r\nSen, Amartya. 1981. Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and\r\n Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press. http://staging.ilo.org/public/libdoc\r\n /ilo/1981/81B09_608_engl.pdf.\r\nSnow, John T., Bonizella Benchwick, Greg Benchwick, George Georgie, Joost\r\n Hoedjes, Allan Millaer, and Jeremy Usher. 2016. A New Vision for Weather\r\n and Climate Services in Africa. New York: UNDP. https://www.thegef.org\r\n /sites/default/files/publications/WeatherAndClimateServicesAfrica.pdf.\r\nSrinivasan, G., K. M. Rafisura, and A. R. Subbiah. 2011. “Climate Information\r\n Requirements for Community-Level Risk Management and Adaptation.”\r\n Climate Research 47 (1–2): 5–12. http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/cr/v47\r\n /n1-2/p5-12/.\r\nSwaziland. 2011. “National Disaster Risk Management Policy.” http://ndma.\r\n co.sz/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/National-Disaster-Management-\r\n Policy-2010-22.06.12.pdf.\r\n\r\n114 References\r\n\fTadesse, Tsegaye, Menghestab Haile, Gabriel Senay, Brian D. Wardlow, and\r\n Cody L. Knutson. 2008. “The Need for Integration of Drought Monitoring\r\n Tools for Proactive Food Security Management in Sub-Saharan Africa.”\r\n Drought Mitigation Center Faculty Publications 32 (January): 265–79.\r\n http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/droughtfacpub/1.\r\nTefft, James, Mark McGuire, and Nick Maunder. 2006. “Planning for the\r\n Future: An Assessment of Food Security Early Warning Systems in Sub-\r\n Saharan Africa.” FAO, Rome.\r\nUNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2016. “A New Vision\r\n for Weather and Climate Services in Africa.” UNDP, New York.\r\n https://www.thegef.org/sites/default/files/publications/WeatherAnd\r\n ClimateServicesAfrica.pdf.\r\nUNECA (United Nations Economic Commission for Africa). 2011. “Enhancing\r\n the Effectiveness of Food Security Information Systems in SADC.” Addis\r\n Ababa: UNECA.\r\nUNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction).\r\n 2006. “Developing Early Warning Systems: A Checklist.” UNISDR, Bonn.\r\n———. 2009. “Terminology on DRR [Disaster Risk Reduction].” http://www\r\n .unisdr.org/eng/terminology/terminology-2009-eng.html.\r\nUnited Nations. 2006. “Global Survey of Early Warning Systems: An\r\n Assessment of Capacities, Gaps and Opportunities towards Building a\r\n Comprehensive Global Early Warning System for All Natural Hazards.”\r\n A report prepared at the request of the Secretary-General of the United\r\n Nations, Geneva. http://www.unisdr.org/2006/ppew/info-resources/ewc3\r\n /Global-Survey-of-Early-Warning-Systems.pdf.\r\nUnited Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR). 2 February\r\n 2017. “Early Warning System.” http://preventionweb.net/go/478.\r\nUSAID. 2012. “Food Security Monitoring and Early Warning Systems:\r\n International, regional and national examples, and Indonesia’s applica-\r\n tion of best practices.” http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00J8PV.pdf.\r\nVervers, M.-T. 2012. “The East African Food Crisis: Did Regional Early\r\n Warning Systems Function?” The Journal of Nutrition 142 (1): 131–33.\r\n http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/drought/docs/The%20\r\n Journal%20of%20Nutrition_EAfrica%20food%20crisis%20(Nov%20\r\n 2011).pdf.\r\nWMO (World Meteorological Organization). 1992. International Meteorological\r\n Vocabulary. Geneva: WMO. https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1136281M\r\n /International_meteorological_vocabulary.\r\n———. 2010. “Guidelines on Early Warning Systems and Applications of\r\n Nowcasting and Warning Operation.” WMO/TD No. 1559, WMO,\r\n Geneva. https://library.wmo.int/pmb_ged/wmo-td_1559_en.pdf.\r\n———. 2012a. “Convention of the World Meteorological Organization\r\n International Environmental Agreements (IEA) Database Project.”\r\n International Environmental Agreements (IEA) Database Project. https://\r\n iea.uoregon.edu/treaty-text/1947-worldmeteorologicalorganizationentxt.\r\n———. 2012b. “The Guide to Hydrological Practices.” WMO No. 168, WMO,\r\n Geneva. http://www.whycos.org/hwrp/guide/.\r\n\r\nReferences 115\r\n\f———. 2015. “Valuing Weather and Climate: Economic Assessment of\r\n Meteorological and Hydrological Services.” WMO, Geneva. http://www\r\n .wmo.int/pages/prog/amp/pwsp/documents/wmo_1153_en.pdf.\r\nWorld Bank. 2008. “Weather and Climate Services in Europe and Central Asia;\r\n A Regional Review.” World Bank Working Paper No. 151. http://www\r\n .preventionweb.net/files/7578_WeatherClimateWBWP151.pdf.\r\n———. 2012. Public-Private Partnerships: Reference Guide Version 1.0.\r\n Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org\r\n /handle/10986/16055.\r\n———. 2015. “Increasing Agricultural Production and Resilience through\r\n Improved Agro-Meteorological Services.” World Bank, Washington,\r\n DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/246621468167041502\r\n /Increasing-Agricultural-Production-and-Resilience-Through-improved-\r\n Agrometeorological-Services.\r\nWorld Bank Group. 2016. “Climate Information Services Providers in Kenya.\r\n Agriculture.” Global Practice Technical Assistance Paper, World\r\n Bank, Washington, DC. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en\r\n /706021467995075539/Climate-information-services-providers-in-Kenya.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n116 References\r\n\f Appendix A\r\n Early Warning Systems and\r\n Their Attributes\r\nName Host Description Link\r\nICPAC IGAD ICPAC provides (a) timely climate EW http://www.icpac.net/\r\n information and support to specific sector\r\n applications for the mitigation of the impacts of\r\n climate variability and change for poverty\r\n alleviation, management of the environment, and\r\n sustainable development; (b) technical capacity\r\n building of producers and users of climatic\r\n information to enhance the use of climate\r\n monitoring and forecasting products in climate\r\n risk management and environment\r\n management; (c) proactive, timely, broad-based\r\n system of information/product dissemination and\r\n feedback, at both the subregional and national\r\n scales through national partners; and (d)\r\n support to maintain quality-controlled databases\r\n and information systems required for risk/\r\n vulnerability assessment, mapping, and general\r\n support to the national/regional climate risk\r\n reduction strategies.\r\nCSC SADC The CSC (a) provides operational and http://www.sadc.int/\r\n regional services for monitoring and sadc-secretariat/\r\n predicting extremes in climate condition and services-centres/\r\n (b) develops and disseminates climate-services-centre/\r\n meteorological, environmental, and\r\n hydrometeorological products, and hosts the\r\n SARCOFs, which are designed to develop\r\n regionwide consensus on climate outlooks in\r\n the near future. The Real Time Extreme\r\n Weather and Climate Monitoring System is the\r\n key tool used to gather and visualize all\r\n meteorological data for analysis and EW.\r\nRegional Integrated RIMES RIMES provides regional EW services and http://www.rimes.int/\r\nMulti-Hazard Early member builds capacity of its member states in the\r\nWarning System states end-to-end EW of tsunami and\r\n(RIMES) for Africa hydrometeorological hazards.\r\nand Asia\r\nLocust Watch FAO The Food Security Warning System provides http://www.fao.org/ag/\r\n timely information on the movement of locust locusts/en/info/info/\r\n swarms and the potential impacts these index.html\r\n swarms may have on food security.\r\n\r\n table continues next page\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n Appendix A—Early Warning Systems and Their Attributes 117\r\n\f(continued)\r\n Name Host Description Link\r\n AGRHYMET CILSS AGRHYMET is a specialized agency of the http://www.agrhymet.ne/\r\n CILSS of 13 countries. AGRHYMET has\r\n established itself as a regional center of\r\n excellence in areas/services including (a)\r\n agrometeorological and hydrological\r\n monitoring at the regional level, (b) agricultural\r\n statistics and crop monitoring, (c) regional\r\n data banks, (d) management and\r\n dissemination of information on the monitoring\r\n of natural resources in the Sahel, and (e)\r\n strengthening of interstate cooperation through\r\n the exchange of technology and methodology.\r\n Flood Forecasting Mekong Core River Basin Management Functions are http://www.mrcmekong.\r\n System River performed jointly at the regional and national org\r\n Commission levels and include (a) data acquisition,\r\n exchange, and monitoring; (b) analysis,\r\n modeling, and assessment; (c) planning\r\n support; and (d): forecasting, warning, and\r\n emergency.\r\n AFSIS ASEAN AFSIS is designed to facilitate access to http://www.aptfsis.org/\r\n commodity outlooks, EW, and agricultural index.php\r\n statistical data at the subnational level from\r\n the ASEAN members plus China, Japan, and\r\n Korea, Rep.\r\n Regional Météo- The Multi-Hazard Early Warning System http://www.meteofrance.\r\n Specialized France provides real-time weather advisories and is re/accueil\r\n Meteorological responsible for tracking tropical cyclones in\r\n Centre La Réunion the southwest Indian Ocean.\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n118 Appendix A—Early Warning Systems and Their Attributes\r\n\f\f\f" } } }