INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 07-Oct-2011 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: El Salvador Project ID: P126364 Project Name: Education Quality Improvement Project (P126364) Task Team Leader: Diego Ambasz Estimated Appraisal Date: 11-Oct-2011 Estimated Board Date: 08-Dec-2011 Managing Unit: LCSHE Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Secondary education (95%), Primary education (5%) Theme: Education for all (100%) Financing (In USD Million) Financing Source Amount Borrower 20.40 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 50.00 Total 70.40 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Is this a Repeater project? No 2. Project Objectives The proposed Project Development Objective is to improve access, retention and graduation rates for secondary school students attending Inclusive Full Time Schools. 3. Project Description The proposed five-year Project would finance activities in two components: (i) adopting the IFTS model; and (ii) strengthening Governance and Public Disclosure Copy Institutional Capacity of the Education System. The first supports the creation of appropriate teaching-learning conditions in selected schools to convert them to IFTSs. The second component supports the introduction of selected governance reforms at the Central, Departmental and cluster level, which would support the implementation of the IFTS. These components are described below: Component 1: The Inclusive Full Time School Model (IFTS) # (US$66.4 million; IBRD: US$46.0 million; Government Counterpart funds: US$20.4 million) This component would support the adoption of the IFTS model in 29 municipalities distributed across 14 departments of the country. This would include support for professional development and training of teachers and school directors in the new model.; the preparation and provision of educational materials, furniture and equipment, including the provision of information technology and communications (ICT) equipment in the classrooms; and the expansion and renovation of school facilities, including specialized classrooms, sports and recreational facilities for students in grades 7 to 9. Other recurrent expenditures involved in the implementation of the IFTS include the hiring of full-time teachers in each discipline, school feeding and transportation of students who do not live within walking distance, or for extra-curricular activities and would be financed on a cost-sharing arrangement with the Bank's contribution provided on a declining basis. Component 1 would have 4 sub-components, as follows: Sub-component 1.1: Professional Development and Training (PDT) (IBRD: US$2.8 million; Government Counterpart funds: US$1.7 million); Sub- component 1.2 Educational materials and equipment (IBRD: US$4.9 million); Sub-component 1.3: Improvement of learning facilities (US$36.6 million; IBRD: US$31.0 million; Government Counterpart funds: US$5.6 million); Sub-component 1.4: Recurrent costs for Full Time School (US $20.4 million; IBRD: US$7.3 million; Government Counterpart funds: US$13.1 million). Component 2: Strengthening Institutional Capacity of MINED and Governance of School Education (IBRD: US$4.0 million) This component would finance technical assistance and training to support the effectiveness of the IFTS by strengthening the policy-making, planning, implementation and monitoring capacity of MINED and enhancing local governance mechanisms and processes to provide pedagogical and management support to the IFTS. Component 2 consists of four sub-components, as follows: Sub-component 2.1: Strengthening the Capacity of MINED (IBRD: US$0.9 million); Sub-component 2.2: Enhancing Local Governance Mechanisms to Support IFTS Clusters (IBRD: US $0.3 million); Sub-component 2.3: Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation (IBRD-US$ 2.3 million); Sub-component 2.4: Impact Evaluation (IBRD-US$0.5 million). 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) Nationwide Page 1 of 5 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ximena B. Traa-Valarezo (LCSHS) Gunars H. Platais (LCSEN) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Explanation Public Disclosure Copy Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 ✖ The interventions will imply a minimal degree of construction activities, thereby triggering OP/BP 4.01 (Environment). Mitigating steps will need to be defined during preparation, yet the bulk of activities involving any degree of construction will be mostly refurbishing and rehabilitating activities. As the exact school locations are unknown during preparation, an Environmental Management Framework will be developed and disclosed prior to Appraisal. The EMF will contain topics including but not limited to: the environmental mitigation and monitoring measures to be taken during implementation; sub- project eligibility criteria; waste disposal measures; construction site management criteria, including proper safety protocols for construction workers, and the use of personal protective equipment; dust and noise control; and institutional arrangements for supervision and oversight of environmental measures. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 ✖ The Project will include only minor construction that is not expected to cause degradation of natural habitats. Forests OP/BP 4.36 ✖ The Project will not be situated near forests and will not have any impact on forests. Pest Management OP 4.09 ✖ This Project will not include any procurement of pesticides and will not affect pest management in any way. Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 ✖ Given that construction activity will be minimal, no significant physical cultural resources issues have been identified. The EMF will contain screening criteria to avoid areas of high cultural significance and procedures for handling chance finds during construction. Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 ✖ The indigenous population in El Salvador is estimated at approximately 2% of the total population. There are three salient groups: The Nahua/Pipil (Departments of Ahuachapan, Santa Ana, Sonsonate, La Libertad, San Salvador, La Paz and Chalatenango); the Poton Lenca (Departments of Usulutan, San Miguel, Morazan and La Union); and the Cacaopera (Departament of Morazan). There is no legal recognition of Indigenous Peoples in the National Constitution; however, El Salvador ratified the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (September 2007). For the present Project, OP/BP 4.10 (Indigenous Peoples) is triggered in those pilots where students from Public Disclosure Copy indigenous communities attend the schools included in the networks under the Project. To better comply with the policy, an additional network (No. 29) was added to the previously selected 28, in the municipality with the greatest concentration of indigenous students (Izalco). Thus, the Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) includes primarily the municipality of Izalco. The IPP was formulated by the Borrower in consultation with stakeholders, i.e. school directors, parents, students, Department Directorates, local authorities, indigenous authorities, parents associations, and civil society organizations. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 ✖ MINED carried out an inventory of the land tenure status of the 478 schools to be refurbished under the project and found that the majority of schools are located on properties registered to MINED without other types of land occupation (e.g. social units or commercial activities). Whereas 478 schools have been identified for support under the Project, only approximately 180-200 will include infrastructure investments such as rehabilitation and expansion that go beyond basic refurbishments in the existing structures. For these works, the EMF will include screening criteria to screen out any investments requiring land acquisition or involuntary resettlement as defined under OP 4.12 (Involuntary Resettlement). Moreover, MINED has agreed to use the following criteria for the selection of schools eligible for rehabilitation or expansion under the Project: (i) MINED will only build new infrastructure or rehabilitate existing infrastructure on land registered as #property of MINED# and in cases where this registration is a result of a loan or use agreement (#comodato#) or voluntarily donation to MINED, additional screening criteria (see EMF) will be used to confirm that such donations were in fact voluntary. (ii) Any construction requiring land acquisition or involuntary resettlement of a social unit (one family) or commercial activities, regardless of size or land tenure status of the potentially affected people is NOT eligible for financing under the project. Page 2 of 5 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Explanation (iii) MINED will not build or expand school infrastructure on privately- owned land, unless there is a legal agreement for the use of the land primarily for educational purposes and this agreement has been reached through voluntary measures on behalf of all parties. Public Disclosure Copy Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 ✖ The proposed Project will not involve the construction of dams and will not depend upon an existing dam or the construction of a dam. Projects on International Waters OP/BP 7.50 ✖ The proposed Project will not affect international waterways. Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 ✖ The Project will not be situated in any disputed areas. 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: Social There are no large scale significant and/or irreversible impacts. The proposed Project seeks to include all children and youths attending schools included in selected geographic areas where it offers universal opportunities of access. The Project is expected to have a positive impact on the Indigenous students attending schools included in the networks selected. The Project triggers the Indigenous Peoples safeguard policy (OP/ BP4.10), and an Indigenous Peoples Plan was formulated by the borrower with the support of indigenous organizations in the education sector, particularly in the municipality of Izalco. The proposed Project seeks to promote the IFTS system in the 29 school network selected on the basis of feasibility and readiness to transform teaching/learning into a more flexible and dynamic model which can attract, retain and graduate students. It is expected that schools included in the Project have diverse socio-economic and ethno-cultural background. While synergies among schools will be important within each network to make efficient use of common resources, it will be important to ensure the Project attracts those who are excluded from the education system due to socio-economic or cultural reasons. Environment Project interventions imply a minimal degree of construction activities, thereby triggering OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, but Project activities are not expected to generate adverse environmental effects. The bulk of activities involving construction will mostly be refurbishing and rehabilitating of schools. Given exact school locations are unknown, the appropriate Environmental Assessment tool is an Environmental Management Framework (EMF) which has been prepared and will be disclosed prior to Appraisal. The EMF will provide a description of the following: the environmental mitigation and monitoring measures to be taken during implementation; sub-project eligibility criteria; waste disposal measures; construction site management criteria, including proper safety protocols for construction workers, including the use of personal protective equipment; dust and noise control; and institutional arrangement for supervision and oversight of environmental measures. Safety measures will also ensure that students and teachers attending the schools where any construction activities are taking place are not Public Disclosure Copy negatively affected. 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 EMF will provide an overview of El Salvador's environmental legislation as it applies to Project activities and the measures contractors should follow in order to be in compliance. It will provide detailed specifications on areas of potential impact and the mitigative measures that are to be implemented in case a Project-supported activity has a potential environmental impact. It provides clear instructions on the appropriate measures to be adopted with respect to construction. MINED#s Infrastructure Department, with World Bank support, will review and supervise the scope of current technical specifications and Terms of Reference for all works, thereby ensuring environmental compliance. MINED considers this an important aspect to follow-up on during supervision and evaluation. The proposed Project will support the Government in implementing measures necessary to mitigate potential environmental effects. Of particular importance is the need to ensure that construction waste is disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. On the management of environmental risks of small-scale construction works, the Project#s coordination unit will incorporate the required Bank environmental guidelines in the Project's operational manual and standard bidding documents for civil works. An Indigenous Peoples Plan (IPP) was formulated by the Borrower and other indigenous organizations in the education sector. The IPP includes culturally-adequate mechanisms to pilot a culturally-adequate school network program in Izalco. The IPP includes 5 components: (1) Promotion of the education network; (2) Sensitivity training within the MINED, to estimulate self-esteem among indigenous peoples; and training to civil society through an education campaign; (3) Research and curriculum development; (4) Elaboration of education materials; and (5) In-service teacher training. The agency responsible for the implementation of the IPP is the National Directorate of Education, and within that agency, the Direcci de Gesti Integral Ciudadana. The latter will be supported by the National Directorate of Department Management, the Department promoting the full-time schooling, school networks, and the Departmental Directorate of Sonsonate. With regard to the capacity of MINED to manage the IPP, since Page 3 of 5 2006 the Directorate of Community Management (Direcci de Gesti Integral Ciudadana) of MINED has acquired experience with implementation of the Integrated Community Development program (INCIDE), which has promoted Intercultural and Bilingual Education in indigenous schools in the Departments of Izalco and Nahuizalco, with financing by UNESCO and UNICEF. The National Directorate of Education will be the counterpart for the implementation of the IPP. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. A social assessment was carried out by the Borrower under the leadership of the Direcci de Gesti Integral Ciudadana team of MINED. The Public Disclosure Copy purpose of the assessment was twofold: (a) a desk review, to analyze the socio-economic and cultural conditions of the schools included in the Project, social problems encountered by the students (delinquency, pressure to join #maras,# seasonal migration, teenage pregnancy, which may challenge Project success; (b) free, prior and informed consultations with stakeholders and potential beneficiaries in three nuclei: one nuclei with mainstream population only, one network with few schools receiving Indigenous students; and one cluster which concentrates a large number of Indigenous students (Municipality of Izalco). Stakeholders include the Department Directorates, local authorities, indigenous authorities, school directors, parents associations, students and civil society organizations. The results of the social assessment will be discussed in a workshop with the Salvadoran authorities of the Ministries of Education and Culture, Indigenous organizations, the international cooperation, etc. The Indigenous Peoples Plan, including a social assessment to provide support to the IPP has been published in the Infoshop of the Bank and on the web pages of the MINED. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 03-Oct-2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 03-Oct-2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 06-Oct-2011 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 28-Sep-2011 Date of "in-country" disclosure 03-Oct-2011 Date of submission to InfoShop 06-Oct-2011 If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. Public Disclosure Copy 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/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] 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 Infoshop? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities been prepared for Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Signed and submitted by: Name Date Page 4 of 5 Task Team Leader: Antonella Novali 06-Oct-2011 Approved By: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Glenn S. Morgan (RSA) 07-Oct-2011 Comments: Public Disclosure Copy Sector Manager: Chingboon Lee (SM) 07-Oct-2011 Comments: The ISDS is clear and reflects the decision meeting guidance. Public Disclosure Copy Page 5 of 5