IDA13 IDA GRANTS -- IMPLEMENTATION IN FY03 International Development Association October 2003 Table of Contents IDA Grants under the IDA13 Arrangements ..........................................................................1 Main Features of the IDA Grant Guidelines for FY03 ........................................................... 1 Grant Implementation and Usage in FY03 ..............................................................................2 Staff Survey on Grants.. .............................................................................................................7 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................8 Table 1: Grant Usage in FY03.. ................................................................................................3 Figure 1: Sectoral Distribution of Projected Grants Usage in FY04.. ..................................4 Annex I: FY03 IDA Grant Commitments by Category and Country.. ...............................9 Annex II: FY03 IDA Grants by Project ................................................................................ 10 IDA GRANTS -- IMPLEMENTATION IN FY03 1. Under IDA's Thirteenth Replenishment, a share of IDA's operational financing (18 to 21 percent) is being provided as grants. On June 3, 2003, at an Informal Board meeting, the Executive Directors discussed the experience during the first year of grant implementation.' Executive Directors discussed the extent to which HIV/AIDS projects should be grant financed; whether or not a higher priority should be given to the debt-vulnerable countries, and the practice of targeting the level of grants at the mid-point of the range authorized in IDA1 3. This paper updates the FY03 grant implementation paper discussed by the Board in the light of final grant outcomes, and summarizes the implementation approach adopted in FY04, based on guidance from the Board discussion. IDA Grants under the IDA13 Arrangements 2. The objective of the expanded use of grants is "increasing the concessionality of the financing used to address the hardships facing . . . the poorest and most vulnerable IDA countries." Under IDA1 3, "Deputies provided the Executive Directors and Management with guidance in determining the use of grants, emphasizing the need for flexibility in the management of grants . . . and the primary role of the PRSP and the CAS in setting the priorities for the use of grants." Under IDA1 3, there are five categories for grant eligibility: (1) HIV/AIDS projects/programs, (2) natural disaster reconstruction, (3) poorest countries, (4) poorest and debt- vulnerable countries, and (5) post-conflict countries. Specific caps were set for the amounts of grants (as a share of a country's overall IDA allocation) for countries in each grant category. While particular sectoral uses for grant-eligible IDA countries were not required, "investments in improving education, health and the provision of clean water and sanitation would be an important aspect."2 Main Features of the IDA Grant Guidelines for FY03 3. The Grant Guidelines for FY03 sought to balance the use of grants among various categories, and also across the three years of IDA1 3. Management's goal was to extend approximately one third of the grant envelope in the first year of IDA13. For FY03, the midpoint (19.5 percent) of the grant range was targeted. HIV/AIDS projects in eligible countries were to be fully financed by grants, given the severity of the epidemic and a general international consensus that action against HIV/AIDS should be urgently supported, preferably on a grant basis. A notional amount of $75 million was set aside for natural disasters, based on past experience with natural disaster financing. The rest of the FY03 grants were allocated proportionately to eligible countries as a percentage of their performance-based allocation: 29 ' "IDA Grants Implementation in FY03 and Consideration for FY04 Guidelines", May 20, 2003, IDA/SecM2003- 0295. ' Additions to IDA Resources : Thirteenth Replenishment Supporting Poverty Reduction Strategies, July12,2002 lDA/R2002-0136, paras. 82 and 83. -2- percent for post-conflict and poorest debt-vulnerable countries, and 17 percent for other poorest countries.3 Grant Implementation and Usage in FY03 4. Grant usage began slowly during the first half of FY03. IDA1 3 negotiations did not conclude until the decision on grants was reached shortly after the beginning of FY03, allowing little lead time to set up and disseminate information about the grant implementation scheme within the Bank. Further, the availability of grant funds was limited (to a small IDA12 carryover and IBRD net income transfers) for a number of months until the replenishment's advance contribution scheme came into effect on December 13,2002. 5. Throughout FY03, grant usage was monitored closely. Monthly reports on grants were compiled, and quarterly implementation reviews were conducted with regional Vice-Presidents' offices. When country eligibility changed or where actual lending programs (financing needs, the scheduling of projects/programs over the IDA13 period, and the nature of the pipeline) differed significantly from projections at the beginning of FY03, mid-year adjustments were made. 6. As Deputies stipulated and to maintain IDA's financial and operational integrity, grants are subject to the same rules and policies, wherever applicable, as IDA credits, under the IDA13 arrangements and the Grant Guidelines. Allocation of grants to specific projects and programs has been governed by country assistance strategies -- on the basis of individual country's circumstances, priorities and preferences -- and by the nature of projects in the pipeline in FY03 and beyond. These two important principles will continue to apply for the rest of IDA1 3 period. 7. At the end FY03, total IDA commitments amounted to $7.4 billion, of which $1.2 billion was in the form of grants, resulting in a 17 percent grant ratio. (Annex I provides grant usage by country and category, and by project for FY03). In FY03, a total of 142 IDA projects were committed, of which 46 projects used grants. In the first two months of FY04, there were 6 projects (of which 3 HIV/AIDS projects) that used grants. 8. Table 1 shows average grant ratios by categories, (as a percentage of total IDA commitments in that category), and the share of each grant category in total FY03 IDA commitments. Grant sharesby country category were generally above the ratios foreseen in the FY03 Grant Guidelines (except for post-conflict, see para. 20) when grants for HIV/AIDS and natural disaster reconstruction programs are taken into account. There were inevitable variations among countries within the same category with respect to grant usage, reflecting the timeline of IDA projects/programs and the nature of IDA commitments in individual countries, 3 See the FY03 IDA Grant Guidelines, op.cit., for further details. -3- Table 1: Grant Usage in FY03 Grant Shares by Grant Share of Overall Category IDA13 Financing - G rants Category FYO3 / Actual Post-Conflict up to 40% 25% (26%) 1.5 - 4% 4% (4%) Natural Disaster Reconstruction up to 100% 39% 1% 1% Tlotal HIV/AIDS Projects N/A N/A 4.5% 3.2% HIV/AIDS projects in all IDA-only countries 3% - HIV/AIDS projects in 0.1% blend countries ______. -...- HIV/AIDS projects for up to ,oo% Regional Projects 100% N/A 0.2% Debt Vulnerable IDA-only ccluntries with GNkapita Up to40% 27% (38%) 8% 6% (8%) ecquaI to or less than $360 0 ther IDA-only Countries w ith GNkapita equal to Up to 23% 19% (23%) 3 - 3.5% 3% (4%) 01. less than $360 Tcotal ** N/A 18 - 21% 17% -. r I he numbers in parenthesis are the shares of grants in countries' IDA commitments when HIV/AIDS programs and natural disasters operations are taken into account. ** Numbers may not add up due to rounding. 9. Most grants (over 50 percent) have been used for social sectors (including HIV/AIDS), reflecting PRSP/CAS and country priorities (Figure 1). Five percent of grants have been -4- disbursed in FY03, as compared to 23 percent for credits, reflecting the larger share of quick- disbursing instruments, such as adjustment programs, used in credits. Grant use has been mainly concentrated in Africa (about 82 percent), followed by South Asia (about 14 percent). Figure 1: Sectoral Distribution of Projected Grants Usage in FY03 10. Of the 46 projects that involved grant financing, 27 projects were fully financed by grants (including eight HIV/AIDS projects). These have been mostly interventions for which grants are well suited, and many are for social sectors and post-conflict related operations. In some cases, grants were blended with credits becauseit was not possible to match the size of suitable projects to that of a country's grant allocation (e.g., Tajikistan-Education Modernization Project) and because grant frontloading was not deemed appropriate; in other cases,the decision was made to make the best use of country's grant allocation among different projects by using grants to finance innovative poverty-alleviation initiatives and specific social components (e.g. Cambodia- Health Sector Support Project and Cambodia-Provincial and Peri-Urban Water and Sanitation Project4). 11. Experience with the first year of implementation has proven grants to be useful in providing IDA with some operational flexibility, particularly in special circumstances of heavy indebtedness, such as Ethiopia. At the same time, the initial phase of grant implementation has In this project, a small grant provided the opportunity for an innovative pilot intervention directly benefiting the poor. The grant component was used to subsidize poor households with water supply connections and to provide matching grants for the households to construct sanitation facilities. -5- provided a basis for reflection on emerging issues, which influenced the design of the grant guidelines for FY04, as explained below. 12. Overall Grant Target. As mentioned above, in FY03 overall grant usage was relatively low at 17 percent, owing to limited grant availability in the first quarter of FY03, and the slippage of some HIV/AIDS projects that were planned for the last quarter of FY03. The target for the IDA1 3 period is to provide 18 to 21 percent of IDA assistance as grants. Therefore, to compensate for the low FY03 level, the FY04 grant usagehas been planned at about 22 percent. 13. HIV/AIDS. In the last three years, the Bank accounted for five percent of the worldwide HIV/AIDS related disbursements at $208 million.' During the same period, it committed $874 million for HIV/AIDS projects. The availability of IDA grants for HIV/AIDS projects did not influence the composition of IDA's country programs in FY03, as these were driven mainly by PRSP and CAS priorities. IDA programs in this area amounted to about $214 million in FY03, as compared to an average of $300 million during the two previous fiscal years when IDA grants were not available. 14. In FY03, grant funding for 100 percent of HIV/AIDS project amounts in IDA-only countries, as well as 25 percent of those in blend countries, was set aside and earmarked for these projects. HIV/AIDS grants were also additional to grants allocated on the basis of other eligibility criteria. This practice has increased the grant ratios of countries that had HIV/AIDS projects, somewhat at the expense of countries that did not have such projects. To remedy this situation, in FY04, HIV/AIDS grants are no longer taken off the top, which leaves a larger pot of grants to be allocated to grant-eligible countries. HIV/AIDS projects in IDA-only countries are, thus, being financed out of higher country allocations6 rather than from earmarked funds as in FY03. This approach is likely to provide greater flexibility in the programming of IDA grants at the country level. For blend countries, the practice of financing 25 percent of HIV/AIDS programs with grants, will continue. 15. An issue that arose was how to assist countries in non-accrual status in the fight against AIDS. It is firmly established policy that the Bank does not extend financing to countries in non- accrual, and this policy applies to both IDA credits and grants. At the same time, it is important that IDA's inability to act in a non-accrual country not compromise the effectiveness of regional HIV/AIDS projects. Management plans to make IDA grant financing available for regional HIV/AIDS projects where the benefits accrue to the whole region and are indivisible. In such cases, grants will be provided through a regional organization or another country participating in the project. This is the case, for example, for the inclusion of Togo in the Lagos/Abidjan Corridor Project, likely to go to the Board in November 2003. A similar issue arose with the Caribbean regional project to Prevent and Control HIV/AIDS, where the Region includes non- accrual IDA countries as well as IBRD countries, and where the regional approach is a critical complement to HIV/AIDS eradication at the national level. UNAIDS, "Report on the State of HIV/AIDS financing", June 25,2003. 6 In the case of some small countries where the FY04 grant allocations were not sufficient to fund the HIV/AIDS programs, grant allocations were increased to cover the cost of HIV/AIDS project. -6- 16. At the same time, management will provide administrative budget support to prepare HIV/AIDS projects in non-accrual countries, so that the country teams can explore financing by these countries' bilateral partners, as well as by the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria (GFATM). This budgetary support is consistent with the LICUS framework, whereby IDA intensifies its non-financial activities to assist capacity-building and help bring these countries back on track. Under the LICUS initiative, IDA is also exploring possible ways to assist countries in non-accrual status to implement credible basic reform programs that will allow them to re-engage with international donors and, over time, clear arrears and accessregular IDA financing. 17. Natural Disasters. Under IDA13, grants for natural disasters are notionally set at one percent of total IDA commitments. Administratively managing these grants under this ceiling is complicated becauseresource requirements for natural disasters are inherently unpredictable. In FY03, $65 million was used for this category of grants, close to the notional set-aside of $75 million for the first year. (There was a bunching of operations in this category earlier in FY03, and to keep the total within the ceiling, IDA financed about 40 percent of natural disasters projects by grants, rather than the 50 percent specified in the FY03 Grant Guidelines). In FY04, the target is to finance 40 percent of natural disaster projects as grants. 18. Debt Sustainability. Under the IDA 13 arrangements, the volume of grants available to a debt-vulnerable country is not to exceed 40 percent of its performance-based IDA allocation. As mentioned above, in some cases, such as Ethiopia, the country -- constrained by debt sustainability considerations -- can not utilize its total performance-based IDA allocation until it reaches its HIPC completion point, although the country has significant development financing needs. In such cases, heavy frontloading of grants may be permitted to avoid disrupting operations. IDA grants alone, however, cannot provide a comprehensive and a long-term solution, as the debt sustainability issue goesbeyond IDA grants. 19. Over the long run, debt sustainability poses a particularly difficult challenge to debt- vulnerable countries because they face two big uncertainties -- an external debt stock that exacerbatestheir vulnerability to negative shocks, and a narrow export base composed of a few primary commodities subject to volatile world prices. While debt relief may reduce the current debt stock to sustainable levels, it does not guarantee debt sustainability over the longer term. Resolving the debt sustainability challenge will require appropriate economic policies, including prudent borrowing, sound debt management, and efforts to diversify the export base in debt- vulnerable countries. Also important will be the removal of barriers to trade in industrial country markets, and increased volume and concessionality of overall external financing. Ongoing joint work by the IMF and the Bank (to be available in early 2004) is expected to provide various options to addressdebt-sustainability issue. 20. Post-Conflict Countries. In FY03, the overall grant ratio for this group of countries fell short of the FY03 guidelines. This was mainly driven by DRC, and somewhat by Eritrea, whose IDA commitments were bunched in the first quarter of FY03 during which only limited IDA13 grants were available. For some other countries in this group, such as Afghanistan, grants constituted 40 percent of the commitments, while for Angola they reached 67 percent because of operational needsthat required some frontloading. -7- 21. Operational Improvements. Some practical problems that arose in the course of FY03, are expected to be addressedas follows during FY04: l Operational Jlexibility. Regions will have greater flexibility in FY04 to manage their grant allocations within guidelines, subject to remaining within the FY04 overall target of 22 percent grants. They will have greater ability to balance country grant allocations in line with IDA commitments for individual countries, and country and program priorities (such as debt-vulnerability, HIV/AIDS programs, etc.). In the Africa Region, for example, FY04 notional grant amounts are based on each country's confirmed IDA program until the third quarter. In January 2004, the Region will take stock of the grant utilization and re-allocate/re-balance after factoring in confirmed operations for the last quarter. l Grant financing structure. Grant usage within country programs will continue to be governed by countries' situations and strategic priorities, as described in the CAS, the TSS, or other documents. Where appropriate, operations will be fully funded by grants, and blended grant/credit funding will be used where this is the operationally sensible way to deliver grant assistance within the country programs and in line with project objectives. Where specific components of an operation are grant financed, they will be identified in the project documentation presentedto the Board. l Monitoring and Evaluation The FY04 grant guidelines require uniform explanations of grant operations in project documentation: identification of the grant category or categories, the strategic rationale for grant allocation in the country program, the expected benefits of grant financing in each operation, and description of monitoring and evaluation arrangements for the project as a whole, including grant-financed components. Monitoring and evaluation aspects include: (a) specific quantitative indicators connected to time-bound results expected from the project; (b) baseline data; and (c) a plan to assess project performance periodically against defined benchmarks. Staff Survey on Grants 22. As stipulated in the FY04 Grant Implementation Guidelines, a staff survey on grants was launched. Overall, the survey indicates that IDA grants were well received by recipient countries, other donors, and by IDA staff. The majority of Country Directors (CDs) indicated that the introduction of grants did not affect IDA programming or clients' priorities regarding the choice of projects/programs, as these were driven by national Poverty Reduction Strategies and CASs. Feedback suggests that grants provide governments and Bank staff with some flexibility in designing programs that include capacity-building components, particularly since governments may be less keen to take on credits for "soft" sectors, particularly for technical assistance. Many CDs have indicated the usefulness of grants in countries that have fragile economies and face debt sustainability issues. At the same time, some voiced concerns about diminished reflows and their possible impact on the size of IDA. -8- Conclusion 23. The first year of IDA1 3 grant implementation has been a period of learning. At the end of FY03, the grant ratio was 17 percent of total IDA commitments. As a result, for FY04, the grant ratio has been targeted at 22 percent. In FY03, there were variations in grant usage among countries in the same categories because IDA commitments are not evenly distributed over the IDA13 period, particularly for smaller countries. The FY04 grant allocations have already taken into account these variations, and similar adjustments will be made for FY05. Nonetheless, some differences could remain at the end of IDA1 3 period, given lending uncertainties and country circumstances. -9- Annex I Table 1 - FY03 IDA Grant Commitments by Category and Country (US% Million) Total Grants Share Category Country HIV/ AIDS i $;:z;i;s Total IDA 1 Total IDA as % ofGrants ,DA Ijwithout HIV/AIDS Grant commitments ; and Natural Commitments Disasters A.fghanistan 86.8 215 40% - 40% Angola 33.0 50 67% 67% Burundi Congo, DR 23.7 44.0 454 78 iI 31% 10% .-.---3;;; Congo, Republicof 13.0 41 / 32% 32; 60 25% _ 25% Guinea-Bissau - / - i Kosovo - 11.0 11 100% 100% Sierra Leone - I 40.0 105 38% 38% Sri Lanka 12.6 ! 52.4 233 23% -- 17% `otal Post-C Ionflict I-Burkina -haso I 12.6 I 0.0 1 318.9 .^ i 1.246 / 26% / 25% I I - i 48.1 j 160 1 30% I .-3O% Ethiopia 24.0 / 216.8 ; 404 / 54% 1 48% - Gambia, The _ 1 - I Kyrgyz Republic - I - i 28 0% 0% Debt Malawi - / 21.0 48.2 , 137 35% 20% Vulnerable Mali - I - and Poorest Niger 25.0 1 60.0 / 60 100% 58% - DA Countries(SaOTome & Principe 1 - 1 - ! - 1 - i - 1 - ~~~ Rwanda I 30.5 1 30.5 / -.-i!&-p; ' 0% I Tajikistan 7.0 / 35% [Uganda I 75.0 / 407 1~ 18% 18% IZambia ! 42.0 1 20.0 / 83.0 1 150 56% 14% `otr I Debt Vulnerable I 97.5 i 65.0 I 568.6 / 1,480 38% 27% Benin I - 10 0% 0% Cambodia 2.0 1 12.8 j -..69.----19% 16% - Central African Republic -- !, - A.-+- 17% 1 -----fix Chad COIJ ,111 t-2 \. Mauritania $360/annum) Myanmar I 1 k!sp- -.-.-I- .--..-..:.-i - 1 25.2 I 97 26% 26% ISomalia i1 1 _ / I ! Sudan I _ i I -.--+-- .----_: .____ _-L - Tanzania - ! / 32.0 250 13% i 13% `rn!Tl __ _ I - I - / jI -3 - I `otal Poorest Countries 57.0 I 0.0 i 298.1 i 1.280 / 23% I I 9% Regional Africa - II 15 / 0% i 0% Operations OECS Countries y---l' I I - I - Western Africa - ! -/_! _ `otal Regional Guinea Operations 20.3 0.0 0.0- ! I 20.3 - i 25IS 80% 0% Ii ;; Other Djibouti 12.0 _ / 12.0 I 23 52% 0% Countries Moldova _ 5.5 j - I 5.5 25 ; 22% 0% Pakistan 9.3 ! - 9.3 297 I 3% 0% -- `otal Other Countries 47.1 II 0.0 I 47.1 370 I 13% 0% `otal IDA Grants and Commitments 1 214.2 / 65.0 : or Grant Eligible Countries `otal FY03 ID4 Commitments (includes IDA Guarantee) 1 7,358! 17% j -lO- Annex II Page 1 of 2 Table 2 - FY03 IDA Grants by Project (US% million) Debt Natural Poorest Post `Total IDA IDA rotal IDA Cowmy Name Project Name Board Date Vulnerable HIV/AIDS Disasters Countries Contht Grant Credit Commit Afghanistan National Emergency Employmen06/24/2003A 0 0 0 0 I9 I9 20 39 Program for Rural Access Project Burkina Faso Competitweness and Enterprise 03/04/2003A 6 0 0 0 0 6 25 31 Development Project Burkma Faso Transport Sector hJCCt 04/08/2003/I 43 0 0 0 0 43 50 92 Cambodia Health Sector Support Project 12/l 9/2002A 0 2 0 8 0 IO I7 27 Cambodia Provincial and Peri-Urban Water 04/22/2003A 0 0 0 3 0 3 I7 20 and Sanitation Project Chad Education Sector Reform 0311812003A 0 0 0 23 0 23 I9 42 Congo, Emergency Multisector 08/06/2002A 0 0 0 0 44 44 410 454 Democratic Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Republic of Project Congo, Republic ofEmergency Recovery and 06/24/2003A 0 0 0 0 13 I3 28 41 Community support hJCCt Ghana Second Health Sector Program 02/06/2003A 0 0 0 32 0 32 57 90 Support Project Ghana Poverty Reduction Support 06/24/2003A 0 0 0 37 0 31 88 I25 FlIlk3~Clllg Malaw Emergency Drought Recovery I 1/`05/2002A 0 0 21 0 0 21 29 SO Project Malawi Third Social Action Project 06/10/2003A 27 0 0 0 0 27 33 60 Nepal Power Development Project OY2212003A 0 0 0 25 0 25 so 76 Paktstan HIV/AIDS Preventton Project 0610512003A 0 9 0 0 0 9 28 37 Tqlkistan Education Modernization ProJect 05/15/2003A 7 0 0 0 0 7 I3 20 Tanzania Poverty Reduction Support CrediOS12912003A 0 0 0 32 0 32 100 132 Uganda Second Local Government 05/29/2003A 75 0 0 0 0 75 SO I25 Development PrOJcCt Zambia Emergency Drought Recovery I l/19/2002.4 0 0 20 0 0 20 30 50 Project Zambia Copperbelt Environment Project 03/20/2003A 21 0 0 0 0 21 I9 40 Subtotal 178 11 41 161 76 467 1,084 1,551 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Afghanistan Health Sector Emergency 06/05/2003A 0 0 0 0 60 60 0 60 Reconstruction and Development Project Afghanistan Second Emergency Public 06/24/2003A 0 0 0 0 8 s 0 8 Adminstration ProJect Angola Emergency Demobilization and 03/27/2003,& 0 0 0 0 33 33 0 33 Remtegration PrOJeCt Burundi Second Health and Populatton 01/l 612003.~ 0 0 0 0 IO IO 0 IO Project Burundi Second Social Action ProJect - 04/08/2003.4 0 0 0 0 I4 I4 0 14 Supplemental Financing Djiboutt HIV/AIDS, 14alana and 0512912003.~ 0 I2 0 0 0 12 0 12 Tuberculosts Eritrea Emergency Reconstructmn 0611912003.4 0 0 0 0 IS IS 0 I5 ProJect Ethmpia Emergency Drought Recovery 03127I2003.4 36 0 24 0 0 60 0 60 Project Ethtopia Pastoral Community 05:20!2003A 30 0 0 0 0 30 0 30 Development ProJect Ethlopta Road Sector Development 06/I 712003A 127 0 0 0 0 127 0 127 Support Project Ghana Promoting Pannerships with 03/10/2003A 0 0 0 5 0 5 0 5 Traditional Authorities Project Gumea Multi-Sectoral HIV/AIDS Projectl2/13/2002A 0 20 0 0 0 20 0 20 -ll- Annex II Page 2 of 2 Table 2 - FY03 IDA Grants by Project (USS million) Debt Natural Poorest Post Total IDA IDA rotai IDA Country Name PTOJeCtName Board Date Vulnerable HIV/AIDS Disasters Confhct Grant Credit Commit KOSoVO Education Partiapatton 051 I312003A 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 5 Improvement Project KOSO>O Economic Assistance Grant IV 06117120031\ 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 (United Nations Interim Admmistration Mission) KOSOVCI Energy Sector Techmcal 0611712003A 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 Assistance 11 (United interim Adminisnatmn Mission) Moldova .41DS COnbOi PIOJeCt 061lOi2003A 0 6 0 0 0 6 0 6 Mozambique Public Sector Reform Project 03/18/2003A 0 0 0 26 0 26 0 26 Mozambique HIV/AIDS Response Pro.ject 0312812003A 0 55 0 0 0 55 0 55 Ntger Community Action Program 03/20/2003A 35 0 0 0 0 35 0 35 Support Niger Support Project Multi-Sectoral 04/04/2003A 0 25 0 0 0 25 0 25 STliHlViAIDS Program Rwanda HIV/AIDS Project 0313 li2003A 0 31 0 0 0 31 0 31 Sierra Leone Health Sector Reconstruction and 0212512003A 0 0 0 0 20 20 0 20 Development Project Sierra Leone Rehabilitation of Basic Education 0212512003A 0 0 0 0 20 20 0 20 Project Su Lanka National HIV/AIDS Prevention 12117/2002A 0 I3 0 0 0 13 0 13 Project Sri Lanka Second Commwty Water Supply 0510612003A 0 0 0 0 40 40 0 40 and Sanitation ProJcct Zambm National Response to HIV/AIDS 1213012002A 0 42 0 0 0 42 0 42 PTOJeCt Subtotal 228 203 24 81 231 766 0 166 Total FY03 IDA Grant Commitments 4U6 214 65 241 306 1,233 1,084 2,316