CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective December 18, 2013) Currency Unit = Kazakhstan Tenge KZT 154.13 = US$1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BYC CA CAIG CDD CPS CSR CYA ECA Babylon Youth Centers Coordinating Agency Coordinating Agency Implementation Guidelines Community-driven Development Country Partnership Strategy Corporate Social Responsibility Committee on Youth Affairs of the Ministry of Education and Science Europe and Central Asia FBS Fixed Budget Selection FM FRM Financial management Feedback and Resolution Mechanism GAC Governance and Anti-Corruption Action Plan GDP GOK HBS HEI HS HQ Gross Domestic Product Government of Kazakhstan Household Budget Survey Higher Education Institution High School Headquarters IBRD IDA IC International Bank for Reconstruction and Development International Development Association Individual Consultants ICB ICC International Competitive Bidding Information and Communication Campaign IFR ISP Interim Financial Report Implementation Support Plan KZT LFS LCS Kazakhstan Tenge Labor Force Survey Least Cost Selection M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOES Ministry of Education and Science MOLSP Ministry of Labor and Social Protection of the Population MTR NA Midterm Review Non Applicable
Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring KAZAKHSTAN: Youth Corps Project (P127966) Project Development Objectives The proposed Project Development Objective is to promote young people’s community engagement and life skills through a community-based service learning program, especially for vulnerable youth. These results are at Decision Meeting Project Development Objective Indicators Cumulative Target Values Data Source/ Responsibility for Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline YR1 YR2 YR3 YR4 End Target Frequency Methodology Data Collection 1. Share of subprojects rated satisfactory at completion Percentage 0.00 0.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 70.00 Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from exit surveys CYA/MOES 2A. Share of youth project beneficiaries that demonstrate a significantly greater improvement in defined community engagement indicator, relative to controls Percentage 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00 80.00 80.00 Impact evaluation baseline and end-line surveys Impact evaluation CYA/MOES World Bank 2B. Share of vulnerable youth that demonstrate an improvement in defined community Percentage Sub-Type Breakdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 Impact evaluation baseline and end-line surveys Impact evaluation CYA/MOES World Bank
engagement indicator 3A. Share of youth project beneficiaries that demonstrate a significantly greater improvement in defined life skills, relative to controls Percentage 0.00 0.00 0.00 70.00 80.00 80.00 Impact evaluation baseline and end-line surveys Impact evaluation CYA/MOES World Bank 3B. Share of vulnerable youth that demonstrate an improvement in defined life skills Percentage Sub-Type Breakdown 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 Impact evaluation baseline and end-line surveys Impact evaluation CYA/MOES World Bank Intermediate Results Indicators Cumulative Target Values Data Source/ Responsibility for Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline YR1 YR2 YR3 YR4 End Target Frequency Methodology Data Collection Direct project beneficiaries Number 0.00 0.00 2000.00 5000.00 8000.00 8500.00 Bi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from FRM CYA/MOES Female beneficiaries Percentage Sub-Type Supplemental 0.00 0.00 40.00 50.00 55.00 55.00 Bi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from FRM CYA/MOES Youth with disabilities Percentage Sub-Type 0.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 5.00 5.00 Semi-annual Quarterly progress CYA/MOES
beneficiaries Supplemental reports including data from FRM Share of youth project beneficiaries that feel able to make a positive contribution to their community Percentage 0.00 0.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 80.00 Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from FRM and exit surveys CYA/MOES Share of host organizations reporting that they had used the skills they had acquired through project activities to improve youth programming in at least two ways Percentage 0.00 0.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 85.00 Semi-annual Quarterly reports including data from FRM CYA/MOES Information and Communication Campaign developed, implemented, and up-to-date Yes/No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from FRM CYA/MOES Feedback and Resolution Mechanism developed, implemented, and up-to-date Yes/No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports CYA/MOES Beneficiary agencies Number 0.00 0.00 50.00 75.00 100.00 100.00 Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports including CYA/MOES
data from FRM Grievances registered related to delivery of project benefits addressed (%) Percentage 0.00 0.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 85.00 Semi-annual Quarterly progress reports including data from FRM CYA/MOES MOES annual report on youth published with support of project’s technical assistance Yes/No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Quarterly progress reports CYA/MOES Indicator Name Description (indicator definition etc.) 1. Share of subprojects rated satisfactory at completion Denominator is all subprojects approved for funding; Numerator is those that were completed with a satisfactory rating 2A. Share of youth project beneficiaries that demonstrate a significantly greater improvement in defined community engagement indicator, relative to controls Denominator is all youth beneficiaries of the project; Numerator is those that showed a positive change in defined community engagement indicator. The “community engagement indicator” will be finalized after the Community-Based Service Learning pilot program. Important aspects of community engagement include: (i) capacity to direct cumulative effort over time towards volunteering, (ii) access to environments that are free from physical and mental hazards to engage in volunteering, (iii) feelings of positive recognition, (iv) understanding of the importance of providing services to the very poor, the elderly, migrants, or people with disabilities, and (v) active participation as alumni of Youth Corps Project, where time allows for such an evaluation. After the pilot program, a composite indicator will be developed and reflected in the POM. 2B. Share of vulnerable youth that demonstrate an improvement in defined community engagement indicator Denominator is all youth beneficiaries of the project who have demonstrated an improvement in defined community engagement indicator; Numerator is those defined as vulnerable. "Vulnerable youth" is defined as those who are (i) neither in education, employment, or training or (ii) working poor. The proxy for this indicator is (i) youth with a secondary education degree or below and (ii) youth with TVET degree. 3A. Share of youth project beneficiaries that demonstrate a significantly greater improvement in defined life skills, relative to controls Denominator is all youth beneficiaries of the project; Numerator is those that showed a positive change in defined life skills. The “life skills indicator” will be finalized after the Service Learning pilot program, which will include the life skills development and Based
youth population. The design of the project also offers an opportunity to pilot innovative methods and address sensitive but essential subjects for youth healthy development, such as safe sex and family planning. Based on the evidence of the prevalence of risky behaviors among youth in Kazakhstan (see youth profiling section), it is important to consider including a component on healthy lifestyles (see table 2 for more information estimated benefits of health focus in youth programming). Table 2: Estimated cost and benefits of programs healthy lifestyles Program name Description Benefits (per Youth) Costs Benefits minus costs Project Northland Community-wide intervention designed to reduce adolescent alcohol use. $1,575 $152 $1,423 Life Skills Training (LST) School Intervention to prevent and reduce the use of tobacco, alcohol and marijuana. $746 $29 $717 Teen Outreach Program Prevent teenage pregnancy and dropping out of school $801 $620 $181 Multidimensional Treatment Foster Care (MTFC) Group or individual intensive treatment for adolescents with chronic antisocial behavior, emotional disturbance, and delinquency. $32,087 $843 $31,243 Note: Reproduced from Washington State Institute for Public Policy Rationale for public intervention The government expenditure for labor market programs over the period 2009 to 2011 fell from 0.32% of GDP in 2009 to 0.13% of GDP. Some of these initiatives also target youth (see box 1). These services require beneficiaries to be registered as unemployed. An analysis of these programs suggests that some programs target educated, but unemployed university or vocational college graduates in urban areas (for example, Youth Internship program). Many of these initiatives are carried out through national efforts such as the National University Student Networks or NGOs (see box 2). Young people with general secondary education or lower can access professional training courses, event-oriented initiatives and public works. These initiatives consist of the mobilization of young people during specific national sporting or cultural event, during the voting period, or devoted to caretaking or embellishment of public urban spaces. The Youth Corps project can provide a more balanced approach and open more opportunities to youth with fewer opportunities. World Bank’s contributions