INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 05/19/2011 Report No.: AC6285 1. Basic Project Data Original Project ID: P082242 Original Project Name: Nutrition and Social Protection project Country: Honduras Project ID: P126158 Project Name: ADDITIONAL FINANCING FOR NUTRITION AND SOCIAL PROTECTION PROJECT Task Team Leader: Cornelia M. Tesliuc Estimated Appraisal Date: May 9, 2011 Estimated Board Date: June 16, 2011 Managing Unit: LCSHS-DPT Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Vocational training (60%);Other social services (40%) Theme: Social safety nets (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 3.60 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 0.00 Environmental Category: C - Not Required Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) Yes [ ] No [X] or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives This is an Additional Financing Credit that will provide an amount of SDR2.3 million (US$3.6 million equivalent) to the Republic of Honduras for the Nutrition and Social Protection Project (P082242, Cr. 4097). The Additional Financing (AF) would fund costs associated with: (i) the implementation of a new activity under the Component 1 (Institutional Strengthening of the Social Protection Framework for Children and Youth); and (ii) a cost overrun for training activities under Component 3 (Implementation of Borrower#s First Employment Program (FEP) for disadvantaged youth). The AF request will also allow the restructuring of activities in Component 1, and changes to implementation arrangements and key outcome indicators for Components 1 and 2, that do not require additional financing. Summary of changes and expected outcomes: Under Component 1, the proposed Credit would finance a survey of about 100,000 households, leading to the identification of roughly 75,000 households eligible for Bono 10,000, a Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) Program which provides cash transfers to poor families with young children contingent on children attending school and being taken to regular preventive health care checkups. The new activity fits under the current structure of the component, as it would be the basis for the development of a Unique Registry of Beneficiaries to improve targeting of existing safety net programs, which was envisaged under the original project. Under Component 3, the proposed AF would finance the training of 2,300 youth. This would allow the project to reach its original target of 6,000 trained youth (original financing only allowed for the training of 4,800), and exceed that target by 1,100. Given the continued high unemployment of at-risk youth in the country, the GoH has established the expansion of the youth employment program as a priority. The PDO remains the same but is rephrased to improve clarity as follows: The project development objective is to improve Honduras# social safety net for children and youth. This would be achieved by: (i) strengthening the government#s capacity to administer social assistance programs; (ii) improving nutritional and health status of young children by expanding the AIN-C program, and (iii) increasing employability of at-risk youth by piloting a First Employment program. 3. Project Description The proposed changes from the original Project are as follows: Component 1. Institutional Strengthening of the Borrower#s Social Protection Framework for Children and Youth (US$1 million). The new activity is the collection of household data to identify eligible beneficiaries for Bono 10,000. The AF would allow the identification of roughly 75,000 households in urban and rural areas. While the targeting methodology for rural areas is already developed, the one for urban areas is not, so the AF would finance technical assistance consulting services to achieve this by: (i) defining the targeting methodology for the Program in urban areas; (ii) adaptation or design of the data collection instrument (starting from the rural socioeconomic survey instruments) to be applied in these areas; and (iii) piloting the data collection instrument. The National Statistical Institute (INE) would carry out the data collection given its considerable experience with household surveys (INE collected the first round of surveys for Bono 10,000) and because of the need to have a government institution that could ensure continuity in the process. Technical assistance for the identification of community counterparts, and the development of participatory instruments for local level monitoring would be dropped, since the Government’s new Social Protection Strategy will include participatory social monitoring of social programs mechanisms and their implementation would be financed with national resources. Given the changes described above, SOP has identified the need to adjust the implementation arrangements for Component 1 and agreed on a collaboration with the Secretary of Social Development (SSD), whereby SSD would be responsible for the technical oversight of Component 1 (including preparation of periodic progress reports and updating the implementation plans), while SOP would retain the fiduciary functions (financial management and procurement). Component 2. Support for the Borrower#s AIN-C Program - no additional financing required. An indicator is being added to measure health status of beneficiary children, which was not included in the original results matrix. Clarification of the wording in the PDO indicator is proposed; see Annex 1 for details. Component 3. Implementation of Borrower#s First Employment Program (FEP) for At- Risk Youth (US$2.6 million). Following the original project design, the AF would provide financial support for the implementation of the First Employment Program. The component would finance activities under four subcomponents: (i) Targeting and selection of eligible beneficiaries to be enrolled in the First Employment Program; (ii) Training services; (iii) Promotion, dissemination, and support for labor market insertion; and (iv) Program management and monitoring. (i) Subcomponent 1. Targeting and selection of eligible beneficiaries. Youth aged 15-21 living in poor urban areas, who are not enrolled in formal education and who are unemployed or visibly underemployed, would be eligible for the program. A minor change in the design of the FEP would be introduced to expand the age limit for participants in the program from 18 years to 21 years old, based on lessons learned from the first stage of implementation that showed there is a large number of at#risk youth in the older age group who could benefit from the intervention. In addition, the requirement to be enrolled in a program of alternative education would be eliminated to avoid excluding disadvantaged youth who may not find a place because of limited supply. Notwithstanding the elimination of the requirement to be enrolled in alternative education, the FEP would continue to emphasize the importance of being enrolled in a second chance education program. The additional credit would finance a series of promotion activities in communities, schools, and with NGOs through a variety of modalities (mass media, job orientation sessions, workshops with graduates of the program, etc.), as well as specially organized enrollment and eligibility determination sessions. For indigenous communities, the program would organize mobile enrollment units working together with the training institutes and the indigenous Federations. (ii) Subcomponent 2. Training services. The training would be offered by private and public training centers, contracted out through a competitive bidding process, which would be responsible for defining the specific areas of training based on internships they have previously identified and agreed with employers. While in training, FEP participants would benefit from: (a) 3-4 months of technical vocational training combined with life skills training; (b) a stipend to cover the costs of transportation and food for each day of assistance; (c) training materials; and (d) sitting in an exam to obtain a competency certification. The training is followed by an internship period of about three to four months in duration, preferably in private companies operating in business directly linked to training. So far, most internships have been offered in large services companies (hotels, supermarkets, restaurants), but also in some small and medium-size enterprises (garments, construction, hairdresser, greenhouses, among others) as well as public organizations (museums). The SLSS delegated the administration of training services through a service contract to the Advisory Center for Human Resources Development (CADERH), a non-profit organization with a leading role in the accreditation of training institutes and development of occupational standards in Honduras. Under FEP, CADERH is responsible for accreditation and maintenance of a Registry of Training Providers, and handles requests for proposals, evaluation of proposals, contracting of training providers, supervision of contracts and beneficiaries during training and internship, certification of competencies, and reporting to the SLSS. (iii) Subcomponent 3. Promotion, dissemination and support for labor market insertion. After the training and internship phase, graduates would be registered in the database of the National Employment Service of SLSS, and would be eligible to receive assistance in job search and job placement. In addition, program participants would receive personalized, intensive psychological support, to manage frequently encountered traits among beneficiaries including low self esteem, depression, impacts from sexual and domestic violence, and the affects of low school attainment. (iv) Subcomponent 4. Program management. The AF would finance the cost associated with the annual audit of the project. The current monitoring and evaluation activities would continue to be carried out with funding from the original credit. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The recruitment points for the AF will be virtually the same as the original project. The indigenous groups likely to benefit are the Lenca and the Maya-Chorti in the Western Region, and the Garifuna in Northern coastal areas. Indigenous migrants from other areas may be recruited as well. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ms Ximena B. Traa-Valarezo (LCSHE) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project should provide training and temporary employment opportunities to at-risk indigenous youth. The training and internships provided under the First Employment Programs, for both the indigenous and non-indigenous youth, will improve their long- term employment opportunities. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: N/A 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The IPP has been updated to capitalize on the lessons learned from implementation of the original project, and from the outcomes of the consultations with indigenous and Afro- Honduran organizations. Based this, for all the youths (including indigenous), the AF for the FEP will include aspects introduced during implementation of the original project. These include the following: # Training centers will be required to include topics dealing with social exclusion, sexuality, drugs, stress management, peer pressure, civil responsibility, entrepreneurship, etc. # The AF project will include professional services for youth counseling, and close follow-up and monitoring, using resources and materials being used by the Programa de Atención al Adolescente at the Secretariat of Health. The counseling services will be coordinated with the Job Assistance Program of the SLSS. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The Borrower carried out free, prior and informed consultations with Afro-Honduran and Indigenous Federations. Both consultations were organized with the participation of the new Ministry of Indigenous Affairs, and the National Program for Education. Those consulted included: Youth Group Ememigini, community leaders of the Department of Colon; leaders from Sambo Creek, La Ceiba, Roatan, and Cortes, staff from the Ministry of Indigenous Affairs, and regional staff from the SLSS in San Pedro Sula. Recommendations from the consultations include: - The video #Mi Primer Empleo# will be disseminated by the Secretariat of Indigenous Affairs to community leaders. The Secretariat will make available their facilities in Copan and Olancho for registration. - Organized community groups will assess topics of highest demand based on the job market, to bring to the attention of FEP staff. - Communities will organize training sites to bring training to their locations. Options are being discussed. - The Secretariat of Indigenous Affairs will organize a workshop with indigenous leaders to promote the FEP among indigenous youth. The Secretariat of Labor is committed to improve retention of indigenous youths in the FEP program. Over the past few years, FEP has learned how to better attract and retain indigenous youth, and Bank supervision missions have confirmed that they have incorporated these lessons into their program design. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 05/02/2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 05/02/2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 05/02/2011 Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as Yes appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Yes Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed N/A and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank’s Yes Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a Yes form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities Yes been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project Yes cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the Yes monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the Yes borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms Cornelia M. Tesliuc 04/28/2011 Environmental Specialist: Social Development Specialist Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Mr Glenn S. Morgan 05/02/2011 Comments: Sector Manager: Mr Gaston Mariano Blanco 05/02/2011 Comments: Gaston Blanco was Acting SM on that date.