INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.:77528 Date prepared/updated: March 13, 2013 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Moldova Project ID: P144618 Parent Project: Project Name: PHRD TA Grant for Integration of Children with Disabilities into Mainstream Schools Task Team Leader: Yuliya Smolyar Estimated Appraisal Date: April 19, 2013 Estimated Board Date: Not Applicable Managing Unit: ECSHD Lending Instrument: Sector: Other social services (80%); General education sector (20%) Theme: Social Inclusion (60%); Education for all (20%); Injuries and non-communicable diseases (20%) Financing Source Borrower 0.0 PHRD TA Program for Disability & Development 2.86 mln Total 2.86 mln Environmental Category: F - Financial Intermediary Assessment Is this a transferred project Yes [] No [X] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [X] and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: The project development objective is to demonstrate that local governments can successfully apply national policies that promote integration of children with disabilities into the mainstream education system. 3. Project Description: The proposed project would integrate children with disabilities into their community hub-schools and into community social activities. It would achieve this through local planning to apply national policies for inclusion of children with disabilities and through 20 demonstration (pilot) sub-projects to adapt mainstream schools, and to educate teachers and parents. The 20 pilot sub-projects would support investments that appear in the district plans to improve education of children with disabilities in a hub-school. The following investments would be eligible for financing: 1  Modification and refurbishment of school facilities to integrate children with disabilities for instance by construction of ramps for wheelchairs, modifications of doors, installation of hand rails, and modification of toilets.  Engineering and architectural studies for the modification and refurbishment of school facilities;  Supply of furniture, learning aids, software, and miscellaneous goods to accommodate the diverse needs of children with disabilities and to facilitate their learning;  Teacher training on how to include and teach children with disabilities;  Initial support to teachers from special education specialists;  Parent training to help their children with disabilities to learn; and  Community education on integration of children with disabilities into mainstream schools. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The sub-projects to be supported by the grant will be identified and screened during the implementation stage and will be implemented countrywide based on demand for proposed activities. Project activities will not be located in protected or culturally/socially sensitive areas. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Cesar Niculescu (ECSEN) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered (please explain why) 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 proposed project is rated Fl (Financial Intermediary) with primarily category C subprojects but also possibly some Category B subprojects (rehabilitation of facilities). The activities supported by the project would trigger the World Bank's environmental safeguard policy and procedures (OP/BP/GP 4.01) because of their potential environmental impacts. However, no major environmental issues are anticipated in the project due to small size 2 and rehabilitation nature of the subprojects. The proposed project does not entail any new construction. It would support rehabilitation of decayed community infrastructure such as schools. The possible environmental impacts may be summarized as follows: (a) degradation of the air quality, mostly through emissions from mobile sources of pollution, as well as the emission of dust particles, as the result of construction activities; (b) noise due to the rehabilitation activities; (c) dumping of construction wastes, accidental spillage of machine oil and lubricants. All these potential environmental impacts are minor and could be easily managed during the project implementation. The project would bring positive social impacts as the proposed activities would improve social conditions for the disabled children. As all proposed activities are to be implemented within the settlement boundaries, the sub-projects will not have an impact on wildlife and natural habitats and thus, OP/BP 4.04 (Natural habitats) is not triggered. There will be no impact on physical cultural resources, as most of the subprojects to be supported are related to rehabilitation activities. The project will not support any activities that require land acquisition. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: The proposed project is not expected to have any indirect or long term environmental impacts. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: The project team has analyzed the alternative of no project. Without the project there would be negative social impacts, - no improvements in the access of the disabled children to mainstream schools. 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 proposed project would be implemented by Moldova Social Investment Fund (MSIF), which has already large experience in conducting project Environmental Assessments and in ensuring implementation of environmental safeguards. MSIF employs experienced managers and engineers who are capable of enforcing safeguard policies through application of Environmental Guidelines. The Bank will supervise implementation of the EG during its regular missions. A mechanism for screening and assessing potential negative environmental impacts of the subprojects as well as developing mitigation plans was developed and implemented under MSIF II. Details of the procedures to be followed for environmental assessments and mitigation plans are described in the MSIF Project Operational Manual (POM) that was reviewed and accepted by the Bank. Each proposed subproject would follow a preliminary environmental assessment based on the World Bank’s Environmental Management Plan/Checklist for Small Works for 3 Building, Repair and Remediation that identifies potential issues and indicates the mitigation measures to address them. Application of EMP-Checklist would then be used for subprojects’ detailed designs preparation, bidding and award of the works contracts, and, subsequently, implementation of subprojects. Detailed design would include specific environmental provisions with direct reference in the bills of quantities. The works contracts would define contractors` obligations vis-a-vis the environmental mitigation measures during the construction. An evaluation of implementation of the on-going IDA-financed MSIF II project found that environmental aspects are being implemented well overall 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people: During the implementation of MSIF II project there has been close cooperation with various stakeholders. The EG were disclosed and consultations were held in the country. Participation of stakeholders in setting safeguards mechanisms continued during almost 10 years of project implementation. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop 03/10/2004 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? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop 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 policies, 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: 4 C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including Yes [X ] No [] N/A [] EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) 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 Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [X] N/A [ X ] 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 Does the EA adequately address the pest management Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Sector Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 – Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] cultural property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review 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 Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? 5 If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review and approve the plan/policy framework/process framework? OP/BP 4.36 – Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] 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 Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] 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/BP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, 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/BP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] 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 Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [ X ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? 6 Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Yuliya Smolyar February 27, 2013 Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Agi Kiss March 7, 2013 Comments: Sector Manager (acting): Penny Williams April 5, 2013 Comments: 7