PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID) APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: PIDA975 Public Disclosure Copy Project Name Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project (P129408) Region AFRICA Country Africa Sector(s) Animal production (60%), General agriculture, fishing and forestry sector (40%) Theme(s) Rural services and infrastructure (40%), Other environment and natural resources management (20%), Rural policies and institutions ( 20%), Regional integration (20%) Lending Instrument Investment Project Financing Project ID P129408 Borrower(s) Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Implementing Agency Ministry of Livestock Development (MOLD), Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, Inter-Governmental Authority on Development Environmental Category B-Partial Assessment Date PID Prepared/Updated 20-Jan-2014 Date PID Approved/Disclosed 24-Jan-2014 Estimated Date of Appraisal 20-Jan-2014 Public Disclosure Copy Completion Estimated Date of Board 18-Mar-2014 Approval Decision I. Project Context Country Context A. Regional and Country Context Pastoralism, the extensive, mobile rearing of livestock on communal rangelands, is the prevailing livelihood and production system practiced in the world’s Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs). Recent estimates indicate that there are about 120 million pastoralists / agro-pastoralists worldwide, of which 50 million reside in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). In the Horn of Africa (HoA) , the ASALs represent more than 60 percent of the total area with a pastoral population estimated at between 12 and 22 million . Worldwide, pastoralists constitute one of the poorest population sub-groups. Among African pastoralists, the incidence of extreme poverty ranges from 25 to 55 percent. In the HoA, the percentage is estimated at 41 percent. In the ASALs, not only is pastoralism a major source of food or cash income, but it also produces Page 1 of 11 inputs for further production and is a source of transport and draught power. It is a way of life comprising intricate production strategies, complex social relationships and risk-management mechanisms. Pastoralism also plays a crucial role in maintaining and even improving the Public Disclosure Copy ecosystem, contributing to soil fertilization, water infiltration and maintaining biodiversity. Livestock is the mainstay of pastoralist communities and provides subsistence, cash income and an element of social status. In Africa, livestock or livestock-related activities contribute at least 50 percent of the total value of marketed output and subsistence production consumed by an average pastoralist household. Livestock provides nutrients and proteins, especially for children, as well as cash to trade for staple crops and services. Other than for subsistence, pastoralists use their livestock as investments, to generate revenue and, through herd diversification, to hedge off risk. Camels, cattle, sheep or goats complement each other as a risk-coping mechanism. Each species has a different return on capital, reacts differently to droughts or water scarcity, produces food in different seasons, is affected by different diseases, and reproduces at a different pace. The herd also provides pastoralists with social status. In traditional African pastoralist societies, herd management and property determine households’ ability to exchange and establish ties with community members. The arid and semi-arid regions of the HoA, including Kenya, and Uganda are among the poorest in these countries. In Kenya, the ASALs are home to about 10 million people of Kenya’s 42 million people, and approximately to 70 percent of the national livestock herd; pastoralism makes a significant contribution to the economy with livestock production accounting for 50 percent of agricultural Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In Uganda, the ASALs are concentrated in the Karamoja region, and are home to around one million people (about 3 percent of the population). Livestock production in this country contributes 5.9 percent and 14.4 percent to total GDP and agricultural GDP respectively (FAO, 2005). The growth of the livestock sector from 2001 to 2010 averaged three percent per year (DSIP, Uganda, 2011), consistently higher than other agricultural sub-sectors. Despite their considerable economic contributions to African countries, though, pastoralists live under enormous stress and constitute the most vulnerable segment of Africa’s Public Disclosure Copy population. Even in Ethiopia, pastoralists and agro-pastoralists represent an important part of the population, constituting an estimated 15 percent of Ethiopia’s 82.6 million population. These regions register the highest levels of the poverty head count index in the country (36 and 33 percent in the Afar and Somali Regions respectively). Livestock from pastoral areas accounts for an estimated 40 percent of the country’s total livestock population and the livestock sub-sector accounts for an estimated 12 percent of total GDP. Seasonal and cross-border mobility is a crucial feature of pastoralism allowing pastoralists to carry out livestock-based livelihoods in the ASALs, to cope with droughts and to manage conflicts over natural resource use. The ecosystems from which pastoralist derive their livelihoods often go beyond national borders as do the market networks for livestock that provide them with opportunities for income growth. The proposed Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Program (RPLRP) seeks to develop regional solutions to challenges faced by pastoralists who reside in the ASALs of Kenya and Uganda and to enhance opportunities for livelihood development available to them. Within the framework of RPLRP, the program has two phases for supporting a set of activities to build the resilience of pastoralist livelihoods. The first phase of the program will provide a comprehensive package of investments and services to targeted cross-border clusters across Kenya and Uganda as well as a set of strategic investments and activities to address regional issues in selected counties/districts of these two countries. IGAD and the two countries will coordinate to deliver this comprehensive package at the regional and national level in a consistent Page 2 of 11 manner. Other countries in the HoA, such as Ethiopia, South Sudan or Somalia may join in later phases. Public Disclosure Copy B. Situations in Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints Livelihood systems in the drought-prone arid lands of the HoA have historically been under- resourced, leaving their population more vulnerable to external stressors. Over the last decade, droughts of varying intensit y and increasing frequency have hit the HoA. These perennial drought crises have severely impoverished the natural resource base of the ASALs, rendering pastoralists’ traditional livelihoods throughout the HoA increasingly tenuous. Funds for emergency response have been more readily available than those directed toward disaster preparedness and risk mitigation, even though the expenses associated with emergencies are far higher. Climate change will likely worsen and intensify the frequency and magnitude of droughts and floods in the region. Assessments have shown that droughts have affected pastoralists and the livestock sector disproportionately. In Kenya, the recently conducted Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) states that 3.7 million people were affected by the 2011 drought. The economic impact of the drought totaled over US$12 billion, of which US$8.5 billion corresponded to the impact on the livestock sector. The current food security crisis in the region (triggered by the 2011 drought) is a stark reminder that the root causes of vulnerability in the ASALs need more attention. It is not only recurrent drought episodes, but also households’ vulnerability to droughts that has thrown the region into repeated food crises. Once recovery objectives are achieved, and amid waning media attention, the international community has often lost sight of longer-term resilience building initiatives. However, following the 2011 drought, the international community remains strongly committed to focus on medium- and long-term resilience building, to avoid food security crises following any new drought episode. The proposed RPLRP seeks to contribute to such resilience building Public Disclosure Copy initiatives whilst also including a built-in contingency emergency response mechanism to enable the participating countries to reallocate funds to deal with any serious natural catastrophe that may disrupt such efforts and cause hardship to the project’s beneficiaries. Sectoral and institutional Context Seasonal and cross-border mobility are a crucial feature of pastoralist livelihoods and coping mechanisms against droughts and conflicts. The ecosystems from which pastoralist derive their livelihoods often go beyond national borders as do the market networks for livestock that provide them with opportunities for income growth. Yet most resilience-building interventions work at the national and sub-national levels. International experience has demonstrated that national approaches are not sufficient to build robust pastoral livelihoods and that, to do so, it is necessary to draw on opportunities that have cross-border dimensions. Addressing cross-border issues calls for well-coordinated responses at the regional level. Towards this end, the Nairobi Heads of State Summit in September 2011 mandated the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) to coordinate regional interventions to build drought resilience in the HoA. Under this mandate, IGAD convened a series of high-level and technical consultations to prepare a comprehensive investment program for the pastoral areas of the HoA. These consultations involved governments, regional economic communities, civil society organizations, Page 3 of 11 development partners, research institutions and academia. Six major outcome areas with core interventions were agreed as critical for the long-term development of the ASALs in the Greater Horn of Africa (GHA) . The regional priorities covered market access and trade (including transport Public Disclosure Copy and market development, trans-boundary animal disease, pastoral mobility for trade, etc.), trans- boundary natural resource management (including water and land access), trans-boundary migration and livelihood strategies, and trans-boundary conflicts and disaster risk management. Key regional interventions would include policy work, infrastructure development, institution building and capacity development. Based on those consultations, IGAD launched the Regional Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Platform (the ‘Platform’), which assembled all relevant stakeholders promoting investment planning, knowledge sharing, and coordination of interventions. With close support from several development partners, IGAD led the joint elaboration of a Regional Program Paper (RPP), and each country prepared and endorsed its own Country Program Paper (CPP). RPP is an integral part of the IGAD Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative (IDDRSI) and will feed into the regional Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) Compact, currently under finalization. Several development partners (the European Union (EU), Finland, Germany, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and the African Development Bank (AfDB) among others) are already embarked on strengthening IGAD capacity. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has supported the establishment of a “Technical Consortium” led by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) including the various Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers and FAO, to provide technical assistance to IGAD and HoA countries in the preparation of investment plans. In Kenya, following the March 2013 elections, the Government has recently consolidated several ministries that supported Kenya’s ASALs. These include the Ministry of Devolution and Planning and the new Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MALF). Following the devolution mandated by Kenya’s 2010 Constitution, forty-seven counties were created after the March 2013 Public Disclosure Copy elections. These counties will take on major responsibilities for agriculture and local service delivery. Various projects and programs are implemented by the ministries and development partners , as well as by International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) and local NGOs . The project will target most of the northern and northeastern counties, which are ASALs and will incorporate lessons from the past Arid Land Resources Management Projects (ALRMP I (P001331) and II (P120959)) and the current Western Kenya Community Driven Development and Flood Mitigation Project (P074106). In Uganda, the RPLRP will target the Teso and Sebei regions as well as the arid Karamoja, an area prone to drought as well as internal and cross-border conflicts, with a population of about 1.2 million. The Government has created a special Ministry of Karamoja Affairs (MKA), in addition to the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF). The two ministries implement the Karamoja Livelihoods Improvement Project (KLIP). INGOs, like the Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development (ACTED) and Mercy Corps are also running projects to address cross-border programs, economic issues and conflict intervention. Kenya and Uganda are members of the East Africa Community (EAC), which comprises both a Custom Union and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) where a Free Trade Agreement has been signed. Despite the existing non-trade barriers, many on-the-hoof animals are traded illegally among the two countries. These exchanges often involve Ethiopia, Page 4 of 11 Somalia and Sudan as well. These uncontrolled yet authorized movements of pastoralists and herds respond primarily to the erratic pattern of rainfalls, making the trade even more complicated to regulate. Public Disclosure Copy II. Proposed Development Objectives To enhance livelihood resilience of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in cross-border drought prone areas of selected countries and improve the capacity of the selected countries’ governments to respond promptly and effectively to an eligible crisis or emergency. III. Project Description Component Name Natural Resources Management Comments (optional) This component aims at enhancing the secure access of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities to sustainably manage natural resources with trans-boundary significance (water and pasture). Component Name Market Access and Trade Comments (optional) This component aims at improving the market access of the agro-pastoralists and pastoralists to the intra-regional and international markets of livestock and livestock products. Component Name Livelihood Support Comments (optional) This component aims at enhancing the livelihoods of pastoralist and agro-pastoralist communities from livestock, crops and alternative income generating activities related interventions. Component Name Public Disclosure Copy Pastoral Risk Management Comments (optional) This component aims at enhancing drought-related hazards preparedness, prevention and response at the national and regional levels. Component Name Project Management and Institutional Support Comments (optional) This component would focus on all aspects related to overall project management, including monitoring safeguards mitigation measures identified in the different frameworks disclosed. IV. Financing (in USD Million) Total Project Cost: 122.00 Total Bank Financing: 122.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 For Loans/Credits/Others Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 International Development Association (IDA) 122.00 Total 122.00 Page 5 of 11 V. Implementation Institutional and Implementation Arrangements Public Disclosure Copy This IDA-funded program supports a regional approach to enhancing livelihood resilience for pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in drought prone areas in the HoA. This operation combines assistance to IGAD to perform a coordination role with support to countries to implement activities at the regional, national and sub-national levels. Regional level: IGAD Secretariat will set up a Djibouti-based RPLRP Coordination Unit (RPLRP- CU) within the IDDRSI Regional Platform Coordination Unit, whose core functions include: coordination of resources mobilization, regional programming and M&E services, regional knowledge management, and regional capacity development. The RPLRP-CU will be placed under IGAD Steering Committee and the Committee of Directors, and will coordinate and facilitate the implementation of the cross-boundary interventions, provide a platform for technical assistance, and support policy dialogue with countries. The executing units for the region-level activities will include the IGAD Division of Agriculture and Environment to execute the relevant project activities. The environmental sections of IGAD specialized institutions (ICPAC, CEWARN, ISSP, ICPALD, STVS) will support the implementation. As required, these units will hire consultants, Community-Based Organizations (CBOs), local/international NGOs or consulting firms to implement the activities. Operationally, IGAD will liaise with the countries through designated political and technical focal points. IGAD Directorate of Administration and Finance (DAF) will receive the funds and facilitate the implementation of the activities. The relevant M&E units of IGAD Planning and Coordination Section and of each specialized agency will monitor and supervise the project implementation. National level: The executing agencies are the MALF in Kenya and the MAAIF in Uganda. The RPLRP implementation will use the government institutions. Steering committees and PCUs will be established at every relevant administrative level. The coordination units will be staffed as needed Public Disclosure Copy based on the existing human resources and arrangements. Kenya: the Agricultural Sector Programs Steering Committee (ASPSC) coordinates all agriculture related programs and projects. ASPSC will approve the annual work plans and budget, and recommend endorsement to the Inter-Ministerial Coordination Committee (ICC), which will provide overall policy guidance and facilitate the implementation of executive decisions. A National Project Steering Committee (NPSC) will work as a technical coordination committee, comprising relevant stakeholders (e.g., KCA, KARI, KWS, KLMC, KLBO and Universities), relevant NGOs and beneficiaries through pastoral associations and individuals. In Kenya, the project will build on the ongoing devolution process to county governments that will take place over a three-year period. Upon satisfactory application by individual county governments, the national government will conditionally transfer project functions to the county government(s). The program will establish a County Project Service Committee (CPSC) headed by a coordinator and comprising all implementing county-based agencies. The CPSC will link closely with existing County stakeholder forums, such as those spearheaded by the Agricultural Sector Development Project. Kenya Governance risks and mitigation measures. During project preparation, extensive discussions were held with the Kenya project preparation team (KPPT) to define governance risk, including lessons and key measures needed to address risks that have emerged in other projects involving decentralized service delivery and expenditures. This also includes community-driven development Page 6 of 11 (CDD) type operations. The KPPT was introduced to a core set of meas ures identified by the World Bank’s Kenya Country Team as priorities for such projects, including enhanced record-keeping, reporting, third-party monitoring, social accountability (information disclosure and complaint Public Disclosure Copy handling), sub-project geo-mapping, and enhanced supervision. In response, the KPPT has developed a set of detailed governance risk mitigation measures in the Kenya project implementation manual, which are also summarized in the Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF). These include developing guidelines and systems for enhanced record-keeping, management information system (MIS) reporting, disclosure of project information, and complaints handling to identify improvements to enhance project performance and governance. Initial guidelines have been articulated in the Kenya RPLRP Project Implementation Manual, Financial Management (FM) Manual, and Procurement Manual/Plan. In particular, the project will place a strong emphasis on building requisite FM and procurement capacity and will be subject to enhanced FM supervision and rolling annual audits by the Kenya National Audit Office (KENAO). Detailed guidelines for record-keeping are being designed for each level of the project, which will be an integral part of project management and supervision, and provisions will be put in place for disbursements to be suspended to project units that do not comply with record-keeping requirements. An automated MIS will be designed to generate reports that link project expenditures and outputs by component and sub-component across counties. Project reporting templates will be developed to ensure that sub-project information is captured and can be displayed in ways that compare performance across categories of sub-projects, and can be made public. These reports will be disclosed regularly to target communities and to the public in user-friendly formats via signboards, local and national media including newspapers, and via a web-based mapping platform. The KPPT also agreed to map sub-project activities with support from the World Bank Team. Detailed risk mitigation measures agreed are listed in the ORAF (see Annex 4). Uganda: The Steering Committee will be chaired by the Permanent Secretary from MAAIF, and include representatives from other ministries (Water and Environment, Lands Housing and Urban Development, Karamoja Affairs, Local Government), the Office of Prime Minister, IGAD Focal Public Disclosure Copy Person in the Ministry, two representatives of Chief Administrative Officers (CAOs) from Project Districts and two representatives from Research Institutions. The NPCU is hosted by the MAAIF and will be responsible for program implementation, budget execution, project supervision and monitoring and for reporting annually and quarterly to the World Bank. At the district level, District Steering Committees (DSCs) would build on and replace the existing District Technical Committees chaired by the CAOs. They would also be expanded to include representatives from DPs, NGOs and pastoralists/farmers associations. These DSCs will oversee the project implementation. The committees will provide policy guidance and financial management of the project funds. A District Coordination Unit (DCU) will be established under the Directorate of Animal Resources at districts and coordinated by Veterinary Officer as Project Coordinator. The DCU will coordinate project implementation at district, sub county and community levels. At the local level, the Project Implementation at the Community level will be undertaken by the existing Local Council 1s, 2s & 3s (Government structures), farmer groups, clans and other groupings, allowing the beneficiaries to participate in meetings, trainings and different project activities. Uganda Governance risks and mitigation measures: During the project preparation process, the MAAIF and project preparation team were introduced to the work done in Kenya to define governance risk, including lessons and key measures needed to address risks that have emerged in other projects involving decentralized service delivery and expenditures, including other Kenya Community-Driven Development (CDD) type operations. Discussions were also held with World Page 7 of 11 Bank staff and GoU officials working on the Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF 2) which has been implemented in some parts of the RPLRP project districts (especially the Karamoja districts) over the past decade. The objective was also to derive useful lessons from this on-going Public Disclosure Copy Bank funded project in Uganda. Accordingly a core set of measures were agreed upon to be implemented for the mitigation of RPLRP governance and corruption risks. These include: (i) enhanced record-keeping, reporting, and social accountability (information disclosure and complaint handling); (ii) sub-project geo-mapping for sub-project information accessibility; and (iii) enhanced supervision. Key activities to reinforce identified measures include: (i) establishment and running of a comprehensive MIS;(ii) formulation and implementation of a project Communication Strategy, aimed at disseminating information about the project’s objectives to do to all beneficiaries at central level and in the ASALs; and (iii) to build on the advanced work already being implemented by the NUSAF 2, together with the Office of the Inspectorate of Government (IG), to establish and operate a complaints handling and grievance mechanism which would allow any potential beneficiary to report directly on unsatisfactory or governance and corruption related malpractices. Arrangements for Subcomponent 4.3 Contingency Emergency Response: To enable the access to the IRM, each country will define an IRM Coordinating Agency and expenditure management procedures during project implementation. These arrangements will be reflected in an ‘Immediate Response Mechanism Operational Manual’ (IRM-OM). The IRM-OM will elaborate on the financial management, procurement and disbursement arrangements, as well as coordinating mechanisms, and roles and responsibilities of relevant implementing and oversight bodies. Should the IRDM be coordinated by a central agency not involved in the ordinary activities of the project implementation (such as the Ministry of Finance), the IRM-OM will set out who in practice will be responsible for implementing the contingent emergency component. The IRM-OM will be prepared separately and approved by the World Bank, in line with the flexibility provided under paragraph 11 of OP 10.00 . Results Monitoring and Evaluation Public Disclosure Copy The RPLRP’s M&E activities will: (a) generate information on progress, processes, and performance; (b) analyze and aggregate data generated at region, country and local levels; and (c) document and disseminate key lessons to users and stakeholders across the countries. The project- level M&E will draw on and strengthen national and regional systems to monitor results and needs across the ASAL areas in the HoA, as per the IDDRSI. To enhance the project transparency, the RPLRP activities will be geo-coded onto a map overlaid with key development indicators. This information will be accessible through platforms along the lines of the Mapping for Results initiative. (a) Evaluation of outcome and impact: Achievement of RPLRP results will be measured through qualitative and quantitative indicators (see Annex 1: Results Framework) common to all countries. During preparation, a rapid survey will inform the preliminary baseline and the yearly targets. More detailed surveys, yearly evaluations and thematic assessments will follow in the subsequent years. (b) Monitoring of inputs, outputs and processes. The RPLRP M&E system will include a simple and user-friendly system for monitoring implementation progress (inputs, outputs and processes) and reporting formats will be developed in each countries’ respective monitoring, evaluation and learning manual. (c) Regional supervision and cross learning: IGAD will promote and participate in field Page 8 of 11 supervisions of one country’s program by all 3 countries’ M&E Officers, and other team members, and will train and provide backstopping support to project M&E Officers (“learning by doing”). Cross-country exchanges involving IGAD and government agencies will be explored during the Public Disclosure Copy project. (d) M&E regional capacity: IGAD has already planned training activities for all M&E Officers and is financing country-based M&E Officers who are coordinating IGAD activities. M&E Officers will assess capacity needs to provide tailored trainings to project teams and line ministries staff involved in the program. (e) Knowledge sharing beyond project countries: IGAD will support the country teams in disseminating lessons learned within countries and among member States. It will also be the recipient of all countries’ evaluation and progress reports and will be able to share results and best practices across countries. Sustainability Institutional Sustainability: The RPLRP will build capacity of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists communities to maintain investments in their livelihoods, with emphasis on managing their natural capital. The RPLRP will also strengthen sub-national-, national- and regional-level institutions by reinforcing coordination and collaboration across levels (contributing to ongoing devolution processes, where applicable) and expanding links with other institutions and partners. Rather than creating new implementation structures, the project will build on existing ones, ensure consistency with those proposed in each country’s CPP, and try to use the implementation structures of projects with similar objectives. The role of implementing institutions will also be enhanced as service providers. The RPLRP aims to strengthen and consolidate the M&E systems, by developing capacity at various levels. Economic Sustainability: The RPLRP aims at building pastoral and agro-pastoral communities’ resilience, that will translate into (i) a reduction of animal mortality rates during droughts, due to Public Disclosure Copy improved access to natural resources for grazing, animal health services and drought tolerant fodder; (ii) higher off-take rates during droughts due to improved early warning systems and response mechanisms (e.g., commercial destocking in line with LEGS); and (iii) a faster recovery period due to the improved access to primary and secondary markets to facilitate restocking. The built-in farmers’ empowerment and participation through pastoral field schools will ensure that the technology, knowledge and support provided by the project respond to farmers’ choices and preferences. Physical Sustainability: All pastoralists and agro-pastoralists groups will receive support from advisory services to enhance dimensions of physical sustainability related to land and water management. In addition, pastoralists and agro-pastoralists groups will be trained in environmental safeguards to ensure that investments are environmentally sound. VI. Safeguard Policies (including public consultation) Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 ✖ Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 ✖ Forests OP/BP 4.36 ✖ Pest Management OP 4.09 ✖ Page 9 of 11 Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 ✖ Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 ✖ Public Disclosure Copy Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 ✖ Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 ✖ Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 ✖ Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 ✖ Comments (optional) VII. Contact point World Bank Contact: Stephane Forman Title: Sr Technical Spec. Tel: 5327+6039 / Email: sforman@worldbank.org Borrower/Client/Recipient Name: Ministry of Finance Contact: Mr. Keith Muhakanizi Title: Permanent Secretary Ministry of Finance Tel: 256-4144230163 Email: finance@finance.go.ug Name: Ministry of Finance and Economic Development Contact: Dr. Kamau Thugge Title: Principal Secretary Ministry of Finance and Economic Devpt Tel: 254-020-2252299 Public Disclosure Copy Email: ps@treasury.go.ke Implementing Agencies Name: Ministry of Livestock Development (MOLD) Contact: Dr. Khadijah Kassachoon Title: Principal Secretary Tel: 254-20-2718870 Email: pslivestock@kenya.go.ke Name: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries Contact: Mr. Vincent Rubarema Title: Permanent Secretary Tel: 256-41 432-0987 Email: crops@agriculture.go.ug Name: Inter-Governmental Authority on Development Contact: Mr. Mahboub Maalim Title: Executive Secretary Tel: 253-356994 Email: igad@igad.org Page 10 of 11 VIII. For more information contact: The InfoShop The World Bank Public Disclosure Copy 1818 H Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20433 Telephone: (202) 458-4500 Fax: (202) 522-1500 Web: http://www.worldbank.org/infoshop Public Disclosure Copy Page 11 of 11