Page 1 Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (ISDS) Section I – Basic Information Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: October 12, 2004 Report No.:AC1080 A. Basic Project Data A.1. Project Statistics Country: Grenada Project ID: P092692 Project: Grenada Hurricane Ivan Emergency Recovery Project TTL: Francis Ghesquiere Total project cost (by component): Component A: Critical Imports – US$2.0 million Component B: Assistance to Recovery in the Education Sector – US$5.0 million Component C: Assistance to Recovery in the Health Sector – US$2.5 million Component D: Project Support and Supervision – US$0.5 million Appraisal Date: October 21, 2004 Loan/Credit amount($m): IDA: US$ 5 IBRD: US$ 5 Board Date: November 16, 2004 Other financing amounts by source: ($m.) Managing Unit: LCSFU Sector: Primary education (50%);Health (25%);General education sector (10%);Other social services (10%);Solid waste management (5%) Lending Instruments: Emergency Recovery Loan Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency recovery? Yes? [X] No? [ ] Environmental Category: B A.2. Project Objectives The project will support the recovery efforts of the government of Grenada through the financing of critical important and rehabilitation activities in key social sectors. Financing is provided on an emergency basis to avoid the usual time lag between the end of the relief period and reconstruction. Due to the catastrophic losses in the education and health sectors, and their core importance to Grenadian society, the focus of this project will be to rehabilitate infrastructure in these areas. Specific objectives include: (1) Supporting the Government’s overall reconstruction program through the financing of critical import; (2) Restoring school infrastructure to an operational level and ensure a prompt return of children to schools; (3) Supporting the rehabilitation of healthcare infrastructure to ensure adequate delivery of health services throughout the island. Page 2 A.3. Project Description This project will consist of four components including: (I) Financing of critical imports; (II) Assistance to the recovery of the education sector; (III) Assistance to the recovery of the health sector; (IV) Support to Project Management and Supervision. I. Financing of critical imports (US$2.0 million) . This component will finance the import of low sulfur diesel fuel necessary for electricity generation and transportation needed to maintain economic activity and to the Government’s overall reconstruction effort. The inclusion of this sole import is based on an assessment of Grenada’s monthly import bill and review of satisfactory procurement practices. II. Rehabilitation and reconstruction of schools (US$5.0 million) . One of the most urgent reconstruction priorities of the government is the rebuilding of damaged or destroyed schools. Only 2 of the 75 primary and secondary schools on the island are currently in an operational condition. Reconstruction will be implemented in two phases; an initial rehabilitation phase to make facilities operationally functional where student will be able to attend school on a shift system; and full reconstruction phase to complete repairs and bring affected schools in line with appropriate standards. This component will finance the technical assistance for the design and supervision of the reconstruction, the actual rehabilitation works, as well as the purchase of school supplies when these have been destroyed or damaged. III. Restoration of St. George’s Hospital and regional health facilities (US$2.5 million) . The principal hospital on the island suffered roof damage resulting in the loss of its laboratory facility. As this facility is essential to the island health care system it must be restored as soon as possible. In the vicinity of Grenville, on the eastern side of the island, Princess Alice Hospital has been virtually destroyed. Other health care facilities around the island have been damaged and are in need of repairs. This component will finance the technical assistance necessary to develop a strategy for addressing rehabilitation works, the physical rehabilitation of health infrastructure and the purchase of medical supplies and equipment when these have been damaged by the Hurricane. IV. Support to Project Management and Supervision (US$ 0.5 million) . While the project will be implemented by the same PCU currently implementing the ERDMP, ERP, HIV/AIDS and OECS Education projects, additional resources will be needed to face the current emergency and increased workload in processing and supervising co ntracts. This Page 3 component will finance limited office equipment and technical assistance to support implementation during the first year of the project. A.4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The project will be carried out nationwide with an emphasis on the region most affected by Hurricane Ivan, which includes the region south of a line drawn from Grenville to St. George’s. B. Check Environmental Category A [ ], B [X], C [ ], FI [ ] Comments: C. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment ( OP / BP / GP 4.01) [X] [ ] Natural Habitats ( OP / BP 4.04) [ ] [ ] Pest Management (OP 4.09) [ ] [ ] Cultural Property (draft OP 4.11 - OPN 11.03 -) [ ] [ ] Involuntary Resettlement ( OP / BP 4.12) [ ] [ ] Indigenous Peoples ( OD 4.20 ) [ ] [ ] Forests ( OP / BP 4.36) [ ] [ ] Safety of Dams ( OP / BP 4.37) [ ] [ ] Projects in Disputed Areas ( OP / BP / GP 7.60) * [ ] [ ] Projects on International Waterways ( OP / BP /GP 7.50) [ ] [ ] * By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims on the disputed areas Page 4 Section II – Key Safeguard Issues and Their Management D. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues . D.1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts. By its nature the project will have a positive social impact since it is expected to reconstruct and rehabilitate damaged schools and health centers in addition to preventing environmental degradation through debris management. Construction of new infrastructure will be limited to the replacement of destroyed schools. Damaged but salvageable schools and health centers will be rehabilitated where they stand. Debris cleanup will be managed in such a way that the problem of saturated landfills can be avoided. D.2 Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area. The initial assessment of damages in Grenada shows that building structures (housing, schools, government buildings, etc.) were particularly affected. At the same time, structures built or retrofitted in recent years under World Bank projects have all survived the storm with little or no damage demonstrating the benefits of applying recognized Hurricane resistant standards. The recovery program will ensure that such standards are used in rehabilitation and reconstruction to ensure that vulnerabilities are not rebuilt. The Task Team Environmental Specialist will conduct environmental reviews to the works that will be completed. D.3. Describe the treatment of alternatives (if relevant) As the project is expected to bring only positive impacts from the reconstruction of damaged public infrastructure, no alternatives were considered D.4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. Under ERDMP, the Government strengthened their environmental management and ability to identify areas at risk. During implementation of the Hurricane Emergency Project, the Ministry of Works will categorize at risk sites and the Task Team’s Environmental Specialist will conduct due diligence to ensure that all environmental guidelines are met on areas of proposed new construction. D.5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The key stakeholders are the citizens of Grenada, with a particular emphasis on teachers, students, school administrators and medical employees. Every citizen will be affected by the rehabilitation of the damaged health and destroyed education sectors as students will Page 5 be brought off the streets and access to health services will be restored. The Ministry of Health as well as the Ministry of Education will work closely with the PCU under Ministry of Finance to ensure that all safeguard policies are adhered to. Page 6 F. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Date of receipt by the Bank …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of “in-country” disclosure …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop …/…/… or Not Applicable For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors …/…/… or Not Applicable Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Date of receipt by the Bank …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of “in-country” disclosure …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop …/…/… or Not Applicable Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework: Date of receipt by the Bank …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of “in-country” disclosure …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop …/…/… or Not Applicable Pest Management Plan: Date of receipt by the Bank …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of “in-country” disclosure …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop …/…/… or Not Applicable Dam Safety Management Plan: Date of receipt by the Bank …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of “in-country” disclosure …/…/… or Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop …/…/… or Not Applicable If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why. Section III – Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (To be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment: Yes No Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats: Yes No Would the project result in any significant conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management: Yes No Does the EA adequately address the pest management issues? Is a separate PMP required? If yes, are PMP requirements included in project design? Page 7 Draft OP 4.11 (OPN 11.03) - Cultural Property: Yes No Does the EA include adequate measures? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? N/A OD 4.20 - Indigenous Peoples: Yes No Has a separate indigenous people development plan been prepared in consultation with the Indigenous People? If yes, then did the Regional Social Development Unit review and approve the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement: Yes No Has a resettlement action plan, policy framework or policy process been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional Social Development Unit review and approve the plan / policy framework / policy process? OP/BP 4.36 – Forests: Yes No Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams: Yes No Have dam safety plans been prepared? Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways: Yes No Have the other riparians been notified of the project? If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, then has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: Has the RVP approved such an exception? OP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas : Yes No Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared, cleared with the Legal Department and sent to the RVP? Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? BP 17.50 - Public Disclosure: Yes No Page 8 Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies: Yes No Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of the safeguard measures? Have safeguard measures costs been included in project cost? Will the safeguard measures costs be funded as part of project implementation? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Francis Ghesquiere, LCSFU 10/13/2004 Project Safeguards Specialist 1: Project Safeguards Specialist 2: Project Safeguards Specialist 3: Approved by: Name Date Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Juan D. Quintero, Sr. Environmental Specialist, LCSEU 10/13/2004 Comments: Sector Manager: John H. Stein, LCSFU 10/13/2004 Comments: