Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: 71634-AFR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT ON TWO PROPOSED CREDITS IN THE AMOUNTS OF SDR 50.2 MILLION (US$77 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF KENYA SDR 26.1 MILLION (US$40 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA AND A PROPOSED REGIONAL GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 3.30 MILLION (US$5 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITY ON DEVELOPMENT (IGAD) FOR A REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT February 20, 2014 Agriculture, Rural Development, and Irrigation (AFTA3) Africa Country Department (AFCE2) Africa Country Department (AFCE1) Africa Regional Integration Department (AFCRI) Africa Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective: January 31, 2014) Currency Unit = United States Dollars (US$) US$ 1 = SDR 0.65180550 FISCAL YEAR Kenya: July 1 - June 30 Uganda: July 1 - June 30 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACTED Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development AfDB African Development Bank ALRMP Arid Lands Resources Management Project (Kenya) ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Lands ASPSC Agricultural Sector Programs Steering Committee ATAAS Agriculture Technology & Agribusiness Advisory Services (Uganda) AU African Union BoU Bank of Uganda BP Bank Procedure CAADP Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme CAHW Community Animal Health Worker CAO Chief Administrative Officer CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBK Central Bank of Kenya CBO Community-Based Organization CDD Community Driven Development CEWARN Conflict Early Warning and Response Network CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CMDDR Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa CPD Country Program Document CPP Country Programming Paper CPS Country Partnership Strategy CPSC County Project Service Committee DA Designated Account DAF Directorate of Administration and Finance (IGAD) DCU District Coordination Unit DDRM Drought Disaster Risk Management DP Development Partner DRM Disaster Risk Management DRSL Drought Resilience and Sustainable Livelihoods DSIP Development Strategy and Investment Plan EA Environmental Assessment EAAPP Eastern Africa Agricultural Productivity Program EAC East Africa Community Hi EACC Ethics & Anti-Corruption Commission (Kenya) ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EFA Economic and Financial Analysis ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework EU European Union EWR Early Warning and Response EWS Early Warning System FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FM Financial Management FMD Foot-and-Mouth Disease GDP Gross Domestic Product GHA Greater Horn of Africa GIS Geographic Information System GoK Government of Kenya GoU Government of Uganda GPS Global Positioning System HoA Horn of Africa IBAR Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ICC Inter-Ministerial Coordination Committee ICPAC IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre ICPALD IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development ICT Information and Communication Technologies IDA International Development Association IDDRSI IGAD Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative IFMIS Integrated Financial Management Information System IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IFR Interim Financial Report IGAD Inter-Governmental Authority on Development ILRI International Livestock Research Institute INGO International Non-Governmental Organization IPPF Indigenous People Planning Framework IPMF Integrated Pest Management Framework IRCM Integrated Regional Coordination Mechanism IRM Immediate Response Mechanism IRM-OM Immediate Response Mechanism Operational Manual IRR Internal Rate of Return ISSP IGAD Security Sector Program IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature KDLDP Kenya Drylands Livestock Development Project KLIP Karamoja Livelihoods Improvement Project KPPT Kenya Project Preparation Team LEGS Livestock Emergency Guidelines Standards LMIS Livestock Marketing Information System M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (Uganda) MDNKAL Ministry for Development of Northern Kenya and other Arid Lands (Kenya (former)) MIS Management Information System MKA Ministry of Karamoja Affairs (Uganda) MLD Ministry of Livestock Development (Kenya (former)) MALF Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (Kenya) MTIP Medium-Term Investment Plan NAADS National Agriculture and Advisory Services (Uganda) iii NARO National Agriculture Research Organization (Uganda) NPSC National Project Steering Committee (Kenya) NPCU National Project Coordination Unit (Uganda) NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations OIE World Organization for Animal Health OP Operational Policy ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework PA Project Account PA-SACCOs Pastoral Savings and Credit Cooperatives PCDP3 Third Pastoral Community Development Project (Ethiopia) PCU Project Coordination Unit PDO Project Development Objective PDNA Post-Disaster Needs Assessment PDU Procurement and Disposal Unit PEFA Public Expenditure & Financial Accountability PF Process Framework PFM Public Financial Management PFS Pastoral Field Schools PIF Policy and Investment Framework PIM Project Implementation Manual PMP Pest Management Plan PPA Project Preparation Advance PPR Peste des Petits Ruminants (Small Ruminants Rinderpest) PSNP Productive Safety Net Program PVS Evaluation of the Performance of the Veterinary Services (OIE tool) RAP Resettlement Action Plan RCBP Rural Capacity Building Project RIAS Regional Integration Assistance Strategy RIKM Regional Information and Knowledge Management RPF Resettlement Programming Framework RPP Regional Programming Paper (IGAD) RPF Resettlement Policy Framework RPLRP Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project RPLRP-CU RPLRP Coordination Unit (IGAD) RVF Rift Valley Fever SADC Southern African Development Community SIA Social Impact Assessment SLMP Sustainable Land Management Project SMP Standard Methods and Procedures SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples' Region SOE Statement of Expenses SPS Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary STVS Sheikh Technical Veterinary School TAD Trans-Boundary Animal Disease USAID United States Agency for International Development VMGF Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework WA Withdrawal Application WBG World Bank Group WISP World initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism WUA Water User Association iv Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Country Directors: Coln Bruce (Regional Integration) Diari6tou Gaye (Kenya) Philippe Dongier (Uganda) Sector Director: Jamal Saghir Sector Managers: Tijan M. Sallah Severin Kodderitzsch Task Team Leaders: Stephane Forman (TTL/co-TTL Uganda) Christopher Finch (Co-TTL Kenya) V AFRICA Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT .................................................................................................1 A. Regional and Country Context...............1........................ B. Situations in Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints ..... .......... 2 C. Sectoral and Institutional Context. .................................... 3 D. Rationale for a regional project and Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes ................................................... 5 II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE .............................................................7 A. PDO........................................................ 7 B. Project Beneficiaries ..................................... ........ 8 C. PDO Level Results Indicators......................8.... ............8 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................................9 A. Project Components ..................................... ....... 10 B. Project Financing ......................................... ..... 15 C. Project phases................ . ...................... ........ 17 D. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design..................... 18 IV. IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................................................................20 A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements .................... ..... 20 B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation ................................... 25 C. Sustainability ................................................. 26 V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES......................................................26 A. Risk Ratings Summary Table ...................................... 26 B. Overall Risk Rating Explanation .............................. ...... 26 VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY .........................................................................................27 A. Economic and Financial Analysis. ................................... 27 B. Technical .................................................... 28 C. Financial Management..................................... ...... 29 D. Procurement ........................................... ....... 29 vi E. Social (including Safeguards) ...................................... 30 F. Environment (including Safeguards) ................................. 32 Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation .........................................34 Annex 2: Detailed Project Description..................................................................................46 Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements ............................................................................. 65 Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF).............................................94 Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan ................................................................................98 Annex 6: RPLRP Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA)..................................................101 Annex 7: Procurement Arrangements .....................................................................................112 A n nex 8: M ap .............................................................................................................................136 vii PAD DATA SHEET Africa Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Project (P129408) PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT AFRICA AFTA3 Report No.: PAD354 Basic Information Project ID EA Category Team Leader P129408 B - Partial Assessment Stephane Forman Lending Instrument Fragile and/or Capacity Constraints [ ] Investment Project Financing Financial Intermediaries [ ] Series of Projects [ ] Project Implementation Start Date Project Implementation End Date 18-Mar-2014 30-Jun-2019 Expected Effectiveness Date Expected Closing Date 30-Jun-2014 31-Dec-2019 Joint IFC No Sector Manager Sector Director Country Director Regional Vice President Tijan M. Sallah Jamal Saghir Colin Bruce Makhtar Diop Borrower: Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, IGAD Responsible Agency: Ministry of Livestock Development (MOLD) Contact: Dr. Khadijah Kassachoon Title: Principal Secretary Telephone 254-20-2718870 Email: pslivestock@kenya.go.ke No.: Responsible Agency: Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries Contact: Mr. Vincent Rubarema Title: Permanent Secretary Telephone 256-41 432-0987 Email: crops@agriculture.go.ug No.: Responsible Agency: Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Secretariat Contact: Title: viii Telephone (253) 2135-4050 Email: mahboub.maalim@igad.org No.: Project Financing Data(in USD Million) [ ] Loan [ ] Grant [ ] Guarantee [X] Credit [X] IDA Grant [ ] Other Total Project Cost: 122.00 Total Bank Financing: 122.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 International Development Association (IDA) 122.00 Total 122.00 Expected Disbursements (in USD Million) Fiscal 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Year Annual 1.00 29.06 38.71 27.27 15.18 10.78 0.00 Cumulati 1.00 30.06 68.77 96.04 111.22 122.00 122.00 ve Proposed Development Objective(s) The objectives of the Project are 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. Components Component Name Cost (USD Millions) Natural Resources Management 29.50 Market Access and Trade 26.90 Livelihood Support 25.40 Pastoral Risk Management 10.20 Project Management and Institutional Support 25.00 Physical and Price Contingencies 5.00 Institutional Data Sector Board Agriculture and Rural Development Sectors / Climate Change 1x Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation Co-benefits % Co-benefits % Agriculture, fishing, and forestry Animal production 60 20 Agriculture, fishing, and forestry General agriculture, 40 20 fishing and forestry sector Total 100 O I certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information applicable to this project. Themes Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major theme Theme % Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 40 Environment and natural resources Other environment and natural resources 20 management management Rural development Rural policies and institutions 20 Trade and integration Regional integration 20 Total 100 Compliance Policy Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant Yes [ ] No [ X] respects? Does the project require any waivers of Bank policies? Yes [ ] No [ X] Have these been approved by Bank management? Yes [ ] No [ ] Is approval for any policy waiver sought from the Board? Yes [ ] No [X] Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Yes [X] No [ ] Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project 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 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 Legal Covenants Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Kenya - Internal auditor 18-Dec-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date, designate - or cause each Participating County to designate - an internal auditor for the respective Participating County with qualifications and experience and under the terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Kenya - Management Information 18-Dec-2014 System Description of Covenant The Recipient shall not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date have in place a computerized financial management system for the Project in a manner acceptable to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Kenya - Operations Manual 18-Jun-2015 Description of Covenant Recipient shall: (a) no later than twelve (12) months after Effective Date prepare and furnish to the Association for its review and approval, an operations manual which shall set forth detailed implementation arrangements for the IRM Part. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Procurement Specialist 18-Aug-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than one (1) month after the Effective Date, recruit a procurement specialist, with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Procurement training 19-Jan-2015 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date, provide procurement Training for staff of procurement and disposal unit of the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, in a manner and under terms of reference acceptable to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Civil engineer 19-Jan-2015 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date, recruit a civil engineer to be responsible for inter alia verifying the contractors' payments during contract execution. Xi Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Record keeping system 18-Aug-2015 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than twelve (12) months after the Effective Date, update its procurement filing and record keeping system, in form and substance acceptable to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Project accountant 20-Oct-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than three (3) months after the Effective Date, recruit a Project accountant, in accordance with the provisions of Section III of this Schedule, with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Districts' internal auditors 19-Jan-2015 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than six (6) months after the Effective Date, designate - or cause each Participating District to designate - an internal auditor for the respective Participating District with qualifications and experience and under the terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency Uganda - Operations Manual 20-Jul-2015 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall: (a) no later than twelve (12) months after Effective Date prepare and furnish to the Association for its review and approval, an operations manual which shall set forth detailed implementation arrangements for the IRM Part. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency IGAD - Procurement specialist 18-Aug-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than two (2) months after the Effective Date, recruit a procurement specialist, with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency IGAD - Procurement training 18-Sep-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than three (3) months after the Effective Date, provide procurement training to Recipient's procurement staff and members of Recipient's procurement Committee, in a manner and under terms of reference acceptable to the Association. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency IGAD - Project accountant 18-Sep-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than three (3) months following the Effective Date, recruit an accountant Xii for the Project under terms of reference and with qualifications and experience satisfactory to the Association, in accordance with the provisions of Section III of Schedule 2 to this Agreement. Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency IGAD - Audit committee 18-Dec-2014 Description of Covenant The Recipient shall, not later than six (6) months following the Effective Date, establish - and thereafter maintain at all times during the implementation of the Project-a independent audit committee with functions, composition and resources satisfactory to the Association, to be responsible for inter alia addressing and following through issues raised by both internal and external audit reports. Conditions Name Type KENYA: Project Implementation Manual Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient, through the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries, has adopted the Project Implementation Manual, in accordance with the provisions of Section I.B of Schedule 2 to the Financing Agreement. Name Type KENYA: National Project Coordination Unit and Recruitment of Key Staff Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient has established a National Project Coordination Unit and recruited the key staff, an accountant as well as environmental, social and procurement specialists, all with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Type UGANDA: Project Implementation Manual Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient, through the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, has adopted the Project Implementation Manual, in accordance with the provisions of Section I.B of Schedule 2 to the Financing Agreement. Name Type UGANDA: National Project Coordination Unit and Recruitment of Key Staff Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient has established a National Project Coordination Unit and recruited the key staff, including environmental specialist and social development specialist, all with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Name Type UGANDA: Annual work Plan and Budget Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient, through the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries, has adopted the Annual Work Plan and Budget for the first year of Project implementation, in form and substance Xiii satisfactory to the Association. Name Type IGAD: Project Implementation Manual Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient has prepared and adopted the Project Implementation Manual, in accordance with the provisions of Section I.B of Schedule 2 to the Financing Agreement. Name Type IGAD: Project Coordination Unit and Recruitment of Key Staff Effectiveness Description of Condition The Recipient has established a Project Coordination Unit and recruited the key staff, namely the Project Coordinator with qualifications, experience and terms of reference satisfactory to the Association. Team Composition Bank Staff Name Title Specialization Unit Stephane Forman Senior Technical Task Team Leader AFTA3 Specialist Christopher Finch Senior Social Co-Task Team Leader AFTCS Development Specialist (Kenya) Tijan M. Sallah Sector Manager Sector Manager AFTA3 Louise F. Scura Sector Leader Sector Leader AFTSN Oliver Braedt Sector Leader Sector Leader AFTSN Dean A. Cira Lead Urban Specialist Acting Sector Leader AFTUI Gbangi Kimboko Procurement Assistant Procurement Assistant AFTA3 Luis M. Schwarz Senior Finance Officer Senior Finance Officer CTRLA Juvenal Nzambimana Senior Operations Senior Operations AFTA1 Officer Officer Hawanty Page Senior Program Senior Program AFTA3 Assistant Assistant Nyambura Githagui Lead Social Senior Social AFTCS Development Specialist Development Specialist Pauline McPherson Senior Operations Senior Operations AFTA2 Officer Officer Pascal Tegwa Senior Procurement Senior Procurement AFTPE Specialist Specialist Edward Felix Dwumfour Senior Environmental Senior Environmental AFTN3 Specialist Specialist Jose C. Janeiro Senior Finance Officer Senior Finance Officer CTRLA Nathan M. Belete Sector Manager Previous Sector Leader, EASIS previous TTL x1v Assaye Legesse Senior Agriculture Senior Agriculture AFTA3 Economist Economist Efrem Fitwi Senior Procurement Procurement Specialist AFTPE Specialist Andrew D. Goodland Senior Agriculture Senior Agriculture AFTA3 Economist Economist Chukwudi H. Okafor Senior Social Senior Social AFTCS Development Specialist Development Specialist Svetlana Khvostova Operations Officer Operations Analyst AFTSG Patrick Piker Umah Tete Sr Financial Sr Financial AFTMW Management Specialist Management Specialist Philip Brynnum Senior Social Monitoring and AFTCS Jespersen Development Specialist Evaluation Evarist F. Baimu Senior Counsel Senior Counsel LEGAM Laketch Mikael Imru Senior Rural Senior Rural AFTA3 Development Specialist Development Specialist Francis M. Muraya Disaster Risk Disaster Risk AFTN2 Management Specialist Management Specialist Andrianirina Michel Eric Finance Officer Finance Officer CTRLA Ranjeva Rosemary Birungi Program Assistant Program Assistant AFMUG Kyabukooli Wilson Onyang Consultant Rural Development AFTA3 Odwongo (UG) Lemlem Workalemahu Program Assistant Program Assistant AFCE3 Grace Nakuya Musoke Senior Procurement Senior Procurement AFTPE Munanura Specialist Specialist Christiaan Johannes Finance Officer Finance Officer CTRLA Nieuwoudt Henry Amena Amuguni Sr Financial Sr Financial AFTME Management Specialist Management Specialist Diego Garrido Martin Senior Operations Monitoring and AFTDE Officer Evaluation Tesfahiwot Dillnessa Team Assistant Team Assistant AFCE3 Abiy Demissie Belay Sr Financial Sr Financial AFTME Management Specialist Management Specialist Meron Tadesse Techane Financial Management Financial Management AFTME Specialist Specialist Shimelis Woldehawariat Senior Procurement Senior Procurement AFTPE Badisso Specialist Specialist Lucy Anyango Musira Program Assistant Program Assistant AFCE2 xv Esayas Nigatu Consultant Consultant AFTA1 Edwin Nyamasege E T Consultant E T Consultant AFTME Moguche Roshin Mathai Joseph Results Measurement Consultant CMEAF Specialist Mateo Ambrosio Albala Consultant Consultant AFTAl Herbert Oule Environmental Specialist Environmental Specialist AFTN3 Constance Nekessa- Social Development Social Development AFTCS Ouma Specialist Specialist Non Bank Staff Name Title Office Phone City Marc Moens Senior Livestock Specialist Thomas Muenzel Sr. Economist Ingrid Mollard M&E specialist Washington DC Mohamed Manssouri Senior Advisor Katie Downie Coordinator Mohamed Sidahmed Senior Consultant, TC Focal Point for Kenya Nancy Morgan Senior Livestock Economist, alternate Focal Point for Ethiop Tommaso Alacevich Economist Julien Vallet Economist Locations Country First Location Planned Actual Comments Administrative Division Kenya West Pokot West Pokot X X Kenya Wajir Wajir X X Kenya Turkana Turkana X X Kenya Tana River Tana River X X Kenya Samburu Samburu X X Kenya Marsabit Marsabit X X Kenya Mandera Mandera X X Kenya Laikipia Laikipia X X Kenya Isiolo Isiolo X X xvi Kenya Garissa Garissa X X Kenya Baringo Baringo X X Uganda Eastern Region Bukedea District X X Uganda Northern Region Kotido District X X Uganda Eastern Region Kumi District X X Uganda Northern Region Moroto District X X Uganda Eastern Region Katakwi District X X Uganda Northern Region Nakapiripirit X X District Uganda Northern Region Abim District X X Uganda Eastern Region Amuria District X X Uganda Northern Region Kaabong District X X Kenya Lamu Lamu X X Kenya Kajiado Kajiado X X Kenya Narok Narok X X Uganda Northern Region Amudat District X X Uganda Northern Region Napak District X X Uganda Eastern Region Kween District X X xvii I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT A. Regional and Country Context 1. 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)1, the ASALs represent more than 60 percent of the total area with a pastoral population estimated at between 12 and 22 million2. 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. 2. In the ASALs, not only is pastoralism a major source of food or cash income, but it also produces 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 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. 3. 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 1.2 million people (about 3 percent of the population). Livestock production in this country contributes 14 percent and 25 percent to total GDP and agricultural GDP respectively (FAO, 2011). 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 population. Even in Ethiopia, which may join in phase 2 of the proposed 1 HoA usually refers to the following countries: Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan and South Sudan - extended to Kenya and Uganda in this case. 2 Figures variability depends on the definition of pastoralism and the source. 1 project, 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 that country's total livestock population and the livestock sub-sector accounts for an estimated 12 percent of total GDP3. 4. 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 pastoralists 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 Project (RPLRP) seeks to develop regional solutions to challenges faced by pastoralists who reside in the ASALs of Kenya, Uganda and potentially other countries from the HoA such as Ethiopia or South-Sudan, to enhance opportunities for livelihood development available to them. Within the framework of RPLRP, the project has two phases for supporting a set of activities to build the resilience of pastoralist livelihoods. The first phase of the project 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 manner.4 Other countries in the HoA, such as Ethiopia, South Sudan or Somalia would join in later phases. B. Situations in Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints 5. 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 intensity 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. 6. Assessments have shown that droughts have affected pastoralists and the livestock sector disproportionately. In Kenya for example, 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. Cabot Venton, C.; C. Fitzgibbon, T. Shitarek, L.Coulter and 0. Dooley (2012), The Economics of Resilience: lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia, DflD. 4 See Section II.C for a discussion of the other phases. 2 7. The recurrent food security crises in the region (triggered by the 2009 and 2011 droughts) are stark reminders 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 every new drought episode. The proposed RPLRP seeks to contribute to such resilience building 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. C. Sectoral and Institutional Context 8. 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. 9. 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, 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)5. The regional priorities covered market access and trade (including transport and market development, trans-boundary animal disease, pastoral mobility for trade, etc.), trans-boundary natural resource management (including water and land 5 The six outcomes that the HoA countries and development partners agreed to support in the abovementioned forums are: (i) make national and regional pastoral policy frameworks operational in line with the CAADP investment plans and consistent with the AU policy framework for pastoralism and other regional initiatives (i.e. on animal health, trade, cross-border movement of pastoralists/livestock, etc); (ii) enhance sustainable ecosystem management: integrate local knowledge to ensure that strategies fit with local and regional perspectives and priorities (i.e. agricultural research, land-use planning, environmental services, etc); (iii) secure regional trade: integrate inter-regional financial systems; support product standardization linked to SPS measures, branding at regional level; build negotiation capacity; reduce non-tariff trade barriers; and improve physical infrastructures (roads, markets, water and communication); (iv) institutionalize disaster-risk management and response: enhance early warning systems and response frameworks at country and regional levels; (v) empower pastoralist communities: strengthen producer associations; conflict resolution, including trans-boundary conflicts, related to mobility and access to grazing land, and environmental services; strengthen traditional NRM strategies; increase awareness of improved coping measures, social fund for cost-shared community-driven investments; among others; and (vi) improve alternative incomes: effective community-based animal health services; effective veterinary epidemiology program; competitive private input supply; secure access to land and water; development of irrigation; savings-driven credit schemes; among others. 3 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. 10. Based on those consultations, IGAD launched the Regional Drought 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 Programming Paper (RPP), and each country prepared and endorsed its own Country Programming Paper (CPP). RPP and CPPs are an integral part of the IGAD Drought Disaster Resilience and Sustainability Initiative (IDDRSI) which complements each other with the regional Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program (CAADP) Compact, signed in October 2013. Both are aligned with the IGAD overall strategy. 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. 11. 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 Planning6 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 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 NGOs8. 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 (P 120959)) and the current Western Kenya Community Driven Development and Flood Mitigation Project (P074106). 12. In Uganda, the RPLRP will target the arid Karamoja region, an area prone to drought as well as internal and cross-border conflicts, with a population of about 1.2 million, and the neighboring four districts in the Teso region and one in the Sebei region9. The Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) will implement the project. The 6 These two ministries include the former Ministry of State for Development of Northern Kenya and other Arid Lands (MDNKAL), the former Ministry for Special Programs, the recently created National Drought Management Authority, as well as the former Ministry of Livestock Development (MOLD). 7 These projects include the USAID-funded Kenya Drylands Livestock Development Project (KDLDP), the SIDA-Government of Kenya-funded National Agriculture and Livestock Extension Program in ASALs (NALEP) as well as other projects funded by the African Development Bank, DFID, and GIZ. 8 International NGOs working in the Kenya ASALs include the Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development (ACTED), COOPI-Italy, VSF-Suisse, VSF-Germany, CARE International, and Practical Action. 9 Teso: Amuria, Katakwi, Kumi and Bukedea - Sebei: Kween which include Im people and have transboundary dimensions. 4 Government has also appointed a special Minister for Karamoja Affairs (MKA), under the Office of The Prime Minister (OPM) to coordinate development programs in this area. In addition, the Ministry of Local Governments and OPM are implementing the EU-funded Karamoja Livelihoods Improvement Project (KALIP) and the IDA-funded Northern Uganda Social Action Fund (NUSAF). International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs), like the Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development (ACTED) and Mercy Corps amongst others are also running projects to address cross-border programs, economic issues and conflict intervention. 13. Kenya and Uganda are members of the East Africa Community (EAC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). The EAC comprises both a Custom Union and a common market. A Free Trade Agreement has also been signed under the COMESA. Despite the existing non-trade barriers, many on-the-hoof animals are traded informally among the two countries. These exchanges often involve Ethiopia, 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. D. Rationale for a regional project and Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes 14. Rationale for a regional project: Past experiences and projects in ASALs of West, Central and East Africa have demonstrated that national approaches are not sufficient to build pastoralists' resilience because they need to address regional issues with cross-border dimensions. Pastoralist communities generally live in isolated, remote and underserved areas and rely on mobility to take advantage of transient availability of water and grazing to eke out a fragile livelihood. Changing conditions due to long-term environmental degradation, climate change, increasing competition for natural resource use, constrained mobility (as a result of new settlements, large scale development schemes and border controls) have made pastoralists vulnerable and, in turn, rendered them prone to conflict and food insecurity. Most of these challenges require regional solutions since pastoralists have to engage in seasonal migration across national borders to sustain viable livelihoods. Cross border migration is also important for the efficient use and protection of rangelands in the ASALs, and for an adequate adaptation to climate change since pastoralist ecosystems transcend national borders. 15. An increase in demand for livestock and livestock products in both domestic and regional markets has also been driving changes in pastoralist livelihood systems. Most particularly, an opportunity for income growth is created as pastoralists are integrated into dynamic livestock markets. Together with ensuring mobility, access to livestock markets is a key factor in determining resilience of pastoralists' livelihoodslo. Building on the collective action of the countries in the region, the proposed project seeks to address a set of regional public goods that would address challenges and build on opportunities created by this changing environment. Trans-boundary and zoonotic animal diseases, shared rangelands and water resources, cross- border trade, market information, and pastoral risks, including shocks (droughts, conflicts) all cut 10 See Aklilu, Y. and Catley, A., Mind the Gap, Commercialization, Livelihoods and Wealth Disparity in Pastoralist Areas of Ethiopia, December, 2010. 5 across national borders and have key regional dimensions. The countries of the HoA need to work together to be more effective in their responses. The proposed project seeks to coordinate investments in shared natural resources and in sub-regional infrastructure networks, exchange knowledge and information, coordinate monitoring and responses to shocks, manage cross- border conflicts, and ultimately harmonize policies under IGAD coordination. 16. The RPLRP will boost the overall thrust of the World Bank's response in the HoA, as set out in the WBG Agriculture Action Plan 2013-15. This response aims at linking short-term crisis mitigation with long-term development objectives. The World Bank Group (WBG) has already intervened in the region by providing immediate responses", livelihoods recovery in the first two 12 13 years , and longer-term drought resilience . Climate change is expected to increase the incidence of disease outbreaks, including livestock and other vector-borne diseases. As a result, the World Bank is sustaining focus on livestock disease surveillance, especially in regions where intensive livestock systems prevail14. To protect against catastrophic losses, the WBG supports, among other actions: risk transfer products and catastrophe risk financing solutions; strengthening of hydrological and meteorological services; and expanded access to insurance. Not only will the RPLRP broaden the WBG portfolio on livelihood recovery and longer-term resilience building. This project will also support the WBG efforts towards aiding clients to define and harmonize early action frameworks and interventions to mitigate key climate- sensitive infectious diseases. By lowering the impact of livestock mortality on herders' livelihoods, the project will support climate change adaptation and drought disaster resilience. 17. Fighting extreme poverty and supporting shared prosperity are key goals of the WBGs corporate strategy. The RPLRP will contribute to supporting the global goals of the World Bank of fighting extreme poverty and shared prosperity. The investments will take place in marginal areas that have historically been under-resourced15 and where a large proportion of households are poor 6, in low-asset poverty traps and vulnerable to droughts. Resilience activities would bring wider development gains and contributions to GDP growth17. The RPLRP will invest in 11 This immediate response aims to secure nutrition, preserve purchasing power, and reduce asset depletion of the most vulnerable. e.g., support in Ethiopia through the Productive Safety Net Program III (P126430) to target chronic and transitory food-insecure populations, and in Kenya through the Cash Transfer for Orphans & Vulnerable Children Project (P11545) to preserve purchasing power. 12 These interventions aim to strengthen longer-term resilience of agriculture households, particularly in drylands, to weather shocks. e.g., support for agricultural inputs and temporary employment in Somalia through the Drought Management & Livelihood Protection Project (P128143). 13 Through investments to reduce food market uncertainty and associated food price spikes; to develop cross-border strategies for drought risk reduction. e.g., support to build social safety net programs, improve management of natural resources and rural resilience, including water and energy in Djibouti through the Crisis Response, Social Safety Net Project (P130328); the Rural Community Development Project (P117355); the Sudan Improving Livestock Production and Marketing Project (ILPMP funded by MDTF-NS - P101955); and the Power Access & Diversification Project (PO86379). 14 These activities include: surveillance and early warning systems; development of long-term regional and country-specific disease outlooks; creation of climate-sensitive disease risk maps; implementation of climate-sensitive agriculture, livestock insurance and rural finance initiatives; and strengthening veterinary services. 15 Available statistics in Kenya evidence that the population in the North Eastern Province has been severely disadvantaged by inadequate provision of public goods. Just 4 percent of the population has access to electricity, 88 percent of adults have not completed primary education. In addition, school enrolment rates are very low, 50 percent of the children are not enrolled in primary school. 16 Poverty headcount index average 30-35 percent in some of the targeted ASALs (source: Ethiopia's Progress Towards Eradicating Poverty: an Interim Report on Poverty Analysis Study, 2010/11) 17 Cabot Venton et al. 2012, "The Economics of Resilience: lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia." 6 infrastructures and deliver services to enable better market conditions and improve trading options. Besides, interventions in the ASALs have been "traditionally" prone to emergency responses, rather than preparedness and mitigation. 18. The RPLRP is fully aligned with the strategic pillars of the Regional Integration Assistance Strategy (RIAS), as it will: (i) improve the sub-regional infrastructure network, including regional rural roads and migration corridors, markets for regional trade of livestock and shared water points; (ii) build capacity for regional collaboration/coordination to prevent and manage shocks that affect livestock in the region, such as droughts or epizootics; (iii) encourage and build capacity of the RPLRP countries to deepen their collaboration with the African Union (AU) and IGAD for regional approaches; and (iv) tackle constraints related to regional public goods, including water availability for humans and livestock, and trans-boundary and zoonotic animal diseases such as Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD), Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR) or Rift Valley Fever (RVF). 19. At the country level, the RPLRP supports the principal objectives articulated in the national development strategies and policies, and is consistent with the Country Assistance Strategies (CAS) of the two countries. (a) In Kenya, the RPLRP is consistent with the Medium-Term Investment Plan (MTIP) for Growth and Food Security through Increased Agricultural Productivity and Trade 2010- 2015. Some relevant investment areas are: (i) promoting sustainable land and natural resources management; (ii) increasing market access and trade; and (iii) ensuring effective coordination and implementation. Further, the project will also align with Kenya's specific intervention framework for drought, which is currently under finalization. It also aligns with the Country Partnership Strategy's view to deepen regional integration. (b) In Uganda, the RPLRP is aligned with the four strategic objectives of the CAS: promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth; enhance public infrastructure; strengthen human capital development; and improve good governance and value for money. The RPLRP is consistent with the Agriculture Sector Development Strategy and Investment Plan (DSIP) 2010/11-2014/15, and specifically, with sub-programs on production and productivity, market access and value addition, enabling environment, and institutional strengthening. DSIP emphasizes pastoral issues and climate change. The RPLRP will directly contribute to implementing the dairy and meat action plans formulated following the DSIP. Both plans recognize the ASALs as the main sources of cattle and small ruminants in Uganda, notably the so-called "cattle corridor" including the north-eastern part of the country (Karamoja region). II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE A. PDO 20. The Project Development Objectives (PDO) are to enhance livelihood resilience of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in cross-border drought prone areas ofSelected Countries and improve the capacity of the Selected Countries 'governments to respond promptly and effectively to an Eligible Crisis or Emergency. 7 21. Selected countries are Kenya and Uganda in this first phase. Livestock is the key asset of pastoralists. It plays key functions for the pastoralists such as a source of food, input for production, risk-management and risk-coping mechanism, as well as an element of social status. Therefore, livestock sustainability is correlated with pastoral households and communities well- being. The resilience of a pastoralist household relies on the access to assets, income-generating activities, public services and social safety nets8. Livelihood resilience under RPLRP is defined as: (i) sustained and maintained assets of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists, (ii) sustained and maintained means of making a living, both measured indirectly by death rate of selected livestock kept by agro-pastoral/pastoral households targeted by the project; and (iii) strengthening of livelihood activities and income, measured indirectly by improved livestock- related income opportunities (in terms of volume and value of livestock traded in selected project-targeted regional markets). The PDO level indicators measure indirectly the three dimensions of the livelihood resilience concept under RPLRP. B. Project Beneficiaries 22. The main beneficiaries of this project will be pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in Kenya and Uganda. Based on country-driven criteria, the RPLRP has already identified the project's target areas in Kenya and Uganda, as well as Ethiopia (should the country join in the second phase). It is expected that the project will directly benefit 135,000 households (93,000 in Kenya, 42,000 in Uganda) and more than 280,000 households if we include indirect beneficiaries, whose livelihoods mainly rely on pastoral activities, including but not limited to livestock keeping, processing or marketing. Traditional pastoral systems build on a clear separation of gender-based roles to manage livestock as well as to ensure household welfare. Women will be specifically targeted, particularly in livelihood development initiatives. Women usually take care of milking, dairy processing and small ruminants marketing. Children also get involved in guarding and watering the animals as well as searching for water sources. Moreover, the project support to develop other income-generating activities will increase the options available for women to generate income sources. Finally, the development of water resources will shorten the time needed to access water points. 23. The project will also have additional secondary beneficiaries that will include services providers (both public and private) and decentralized veterinary services staff in the districts/counties along borders. IGAD will be a major institutional beneficiary of this project, as it is expected that the RPLRP, together with other major partners (German Cooperation GIZ, USAID, EU, AfDB), will strengthen the coordination and monitoring capacities of IGAD and the 'Platform'. C. PDO Level Results Indicators 24. The key PDO indicators are the following: 1 Food Security Information for Decision Making, Measuring Resilience: A Concept Note on the Resilience Tool, EC-FAO Program on "Linking Information and Decision Making to Improve Food Security". 8 (a) Percentage death rate of livestock19 kept by agro-pastoral and pastoral households targeted by the project (cattle, goats). (b) Number of livestock traded in selected project markets20 (c) Real value of livestock traded in selected project markets21 (local currency). (d) Time lapse between early warning information and response reduced22 (e) Number of direct project beneficiaries, of which female (percentage). III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 25. The RPLRP offers an innovative, comprehensive, and flexible response to pastoralists' vulnerability to drought by delivering key regional public goods to enhance their livelihoods. Building on a high-level agreement, the RPLRP embodies the first attempt in the HoA to deliver country-specific outputs directly linked to region-driven goals. RPLRP innovation also applies to the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Mobile phones have already begun to transform the lives of pastoral communities by facilitating information sharing on markets, prices, climate conditions, water availability, and conflict-affected areas. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and mapping are also being used to guide public investments and monitor results. The project will make use of these technologies and promote a wider uptake, especially in the components related to market access and trade, and pastoral risk management. 26. Key special features of the project include: * A regional approach to address issues of pastoralist mobility, market linkages, natural resource management including conflict, livestock disease surveillance and vaccination campaigns. * Use of innovations including the use of mapping to identify regionally significant gaps in investments and services that limit pastoralist mobility, access to natural resources in times of drought, and disaster response. But also use of ICT technologies and mobile phones for instance in the Early Warning or Livestock Marketing Information Systems. * A flexible Contingency emergency response window that enables countries to request the World Bank to reallocate project funds to support mitigation, response, recovery, and reconstruction for pastoral and other communities in the event of a disaster. 27. Whenever possible, the RPLRP will be implemented through a sustainable landscape approach along cross-border livestock routes and corridors. These routes and corridors will be 19 Livestock is the main asset of pastoral areas, as such this indicator is used to assess if assets are maintained and not depleted by shocks. 20 Markets to be defined, disaggregated by cross-border markets. 21 Markets to be defined, disaggregated by cross-border markets, 22 Time lapse is further defined in the Results Framework Annex. 9 central in targeting geographical cross-border clusters of sub-counties in Kenya and sub-districts in Uganda. The project will deliver investments and services using this cross-border cluster approach. Selected clusters will receive a comprehensive package of investments and services. 28. Outside the clustered sub-counties/sub-districts, the RPLRP will implement a package of strategic investments and activities to address regional issues. They will be identified through needs assessment and consultation processes with communities and other stakeholders. Identification and implementation of livelihood support activities will follow community demand driven processes building, whenever possible on already established participatory processes. The RPLRP will also support conflict management and resolution between multi-level and cross- border stakeholders, providing platforms and instruments to facilitate dialogue, planning and decision-making. At the community level, the project will empower communities to improve access to water resources, sustainably manage rangelands and secure access to natural resources in general to prevent conflicts. IGAD and the RPLRP countries will coordinate to deliver this comprehensive package at the regional and national level in a consistent manner. The role of IGAD will be central in facilitating the dialogue across levels, coordinating these interventions to avoid duplications, mismatches and inconsistencies, as well as in helping the countries to harmonize their pastoralist policies. A. Project Components 29. Component 1: Natural Resources Management (US$29.5 million). This component aims at enhancing the sustainable management and secure access of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities to natural resources (water and pasture) with trans-boundary significance. The project will include mechanisms aimed at preventing and resolving localized conflicts between settled farmers and pastoralists relative to access to natural resources, or cattle rustling. If deemed relevant, this component will work with the World Initiative for Sustainable Pastoralism (WISP) of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to disseminate knowledge, provide training and empower communities and decentralized staff from the Ministries in sustainable natural resources management. (a) Sub-component 1.1 - Water Resources Development, The activities under this subcomponent include the elaboration of a baseline study mapping ground-water resources, high-definition maps and a database system and water information system of water resources along cross-border routes; designing, building and rehabilitating water resources access facilities (water pans (37 in Kenya), small earth dams (42 in Kenya), boreholes (7223), shallow wells (18024), rock catchments (15 in Kenya) and valley tanks (13 in Uganda)25 ) as well as identifying and promoting appropriate water harvesting technologies; setting up and building capacity of communities and Water User Associations (WUAs) in water management; and training operational and maintenance staff. 23 51 in Uganda and 21 in Kenya. 24 134 in Uganda and 46 in Kenya. 25 Estimated numbers that might change during project's implementation. 10 (b) Sub-component 1.2 - Sustainable Land Management in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas. Under this subcomponent the RPLRP will support the IGAD-led refinement of regional and national maps of degraded rangelands and ecosystems with trans-boundary implications for animal movements; train and support pastoralists and agro-pastoralists in implementing participatory rangeland rehabilitation and management techniques, including area enclosure, physical and biological conservation, reseeding degraded areas, clearing invasive species and supporting soil conservation (3,42026 ha for the two countries), and build or rehabilitate forage storage structures; and support harmonization of policies on participatory rangeland management across the RPLRP countries. (c) Sub-component 1.3 - Securing Access to pastoral-related Natural Resources. This subcomponent aims to prevent conflicts and build peace between communities. The activities under this subcomponent include strengthening and harmonizing policies, conducting research on cross-border migration and mobility patterns, and profiling key stakeholders for securing access to natural resources; supporting peace building activities including information meetings, joint cross-border activities on civic education and peace campaigns, and exposure visits of community members; building capacities of communities and local governments to implement the agreed arrangements for natural resource sharing; and facilitating meetings to restore confidence of community stakeholders on traditional conflict management mechanisms. This subcomponent includes IGAD-coordinated activities to support the demarcation of traditional livestock migration routes. These activities will include provisions to guarantee the access to key water points and grazing areas, to safeguard against encroachment from settled communities and commercial enterprise. 30. Component 2: Market Access and Trade (US$26.9 million). 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. (a) Sub-component 2.1 - Market Support Infrastructure and Information System. The component will integrate the national livestock marketing information systems (LMIS) with the regional-level system, provide appropriate equipment (hard- and software), and train stakeholders on interpreting and using information from the system. Activities will include nation-wide dissemination of information through media. Based on region-wide joint identification of investment needs, through cross-border community-based consultations coordinated by IGAD, RPLRP will build, rehabilitate and equip about 28 primary market infrastructure along trade routes (such as holding/auction grounds, border check-points, regional and satellite laboratories (2)), and build capacity of market staff and officials on market management models, including inspections and certifications. (b) Sub-component 2.2 - Livestock Value-Chain Support and Improving Livestock Mobility and Trade. RPLRP will support research on and develop selected livestock-related cross- border value chains, specifically in arid and semi-arid areas. On capacity building, pastoralists and other actors (exporters, abattoirs) will be trained on cooperative 26 2,480 ha in Kenya and 940 ha in Uganda. 11 management models, and marketing. The project will finance and sponsor regional and national meetings and workshops to support the review, ratification and implementation of regional animal marketing policies and protocols, tariffs, certification systems, Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) standards, animal identification and traceability systems, and accordingly any necessary amendments to the national policies and regulations. Support includes inputs such as identification tools, radio frequency devices, and ear-tags; equipment to provide veterinary laboratory services (including reagents, microscopes, centrifuges, and disposal facilities); publications and written materials to disseminate policies, legal requirements and regulations; and capacity building activities among livestock marketing and trade stakeholders (government officials, pastoralists, private sector).The component will use disease-specific regional strategies and strengthen the quality of Veterinary Services and collaboration between countries using the results from the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) evaluation of the performance of the Veterinary Services (PVS) pathway in each country. 31. Component 3: Livelihood Support (US$25.4 million). This component aims at enhancing the livelihoods of pastoralist and agro-pastoralist communities. (a) Sub-component 3.1 - Livestock Production and Health, Under this subcomponent, RPLRP will finance region-wide harmonized vaccination campaigns for priority diseases such as PPR, FMD, CBPP, CCPP, RVF and Newcastle Disease (ND), and enhance disease and vector control and surveillance in targeted drought-prone areas. When available, vaccines will be sourced from vaccines banks recognized by International Standard Setting Organization to ensure quality of the products. This is the case for the Botswana Vaccine Institute for PPR recognized by the OIE. To enhance animal health services, RPLRP will identify and help address gaps in private veterinary service provision and, where applicable, support Community Animal Health Worker (CAHW) networks through training, supply of equipment, and assistance to link them with the public and private veterinary service providers and drug suppliers. The project will also train veterinarians and veterinary para-professionals including CAHWs, kraal leaders, and butchery workers on disease detection and reporting. RPLRP will support the development and harmonization of breeding strategies in the ASALs, and the provision of equipment and capacity building of breeding centers (including 2 germplasm multiplication centers) and community breeding groups. In addition, it will support existing pastoral field schools (PFS) and help ministries to institutionalize them, as well as other learning-by-doing methodologies to carry out on-field demonstrations, training master trainers and PFS facilitators. (b) Sub-component 3.2 - Food and Feed Production, RPLRP will support improvements in fodder bulking and conservation, establishing small-scale irrigation and water management schemes for crop and fodder production and dry season grazing on the basis of feasibility studies and consultations with local communities; prepare management guidelines and train water users associations of key infrastructures (water, fodder bank); and build and rehabilitate storage and post-harvest facilities adapted to pastoral conditions and agricultural production. Identification of infrastructures will be conducted through feasibility studies involving consultations with local communities. Capacity building activities will use community-based activities through field 12 demonstrations and pastoral groups, and provide training and equipment aimed at fodder bulking and conservation, and management of storage facilities. (c) Sub-component 3.3 - Livelihoods Diversification, by identifying and strengthening alternative livelihood opportunities. To that end, RPLRP will finance prospective activities to identify markets and develop value chains for alternative products to livestock, and will help share information about livelihood alternatives, with special attention to gender mainstreaming. 32. Component 4: Pastoral Risk Management (US$10.2 million). This component aims at enhancing drought-related hazards preparedness, prevention and response at the national and regional levels. It has three sub-components: (a) Sub-component 4.1 - Pastoral Risk Early Warning and Response System: IGAD- coordinated workshops will help harmonize methodologies for risk profiling, and establish and operationalize a region- and nation-wide Early Warning Systems (EWS). These systems will be instrumental to collect, analyze and disseminate early warning reports and information to decision makers, and to develop contingency plans and 27 guidelines . Investments will focus on expanding and rehabilitating sentinel sites to cover the project areas, procure equipment for the districts and counties (weather equipment, Global Positioning System (GPS), ICT platforms, vehicle, motorcycles, and computer hardware), building capacity on GIS and climate change mainstreaming and establish clusters of cross-border Pastoral Risks Management committees. Region-, nation-, and county-level training activities will target officers and stakeholders to undertake risk profiling, formulate and disseminate contingency plans, and identify gaps in response capacity. (b) Sub-component 4.2 - Drought Disaster Risk Management: The activities under this component include region, nation, and county-level training and capacity building activities on DDRM-related key policies and guidelines, such as Livestock Emergency Guidelines and Standards (LEGS) and Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction (CMDRR). RPLRP will help build fiduciary and administrative capacities, elaborate guidelines for receiving and disbursing contingency funds, explore prospects, and pilot financial risk transfers mechanisms (agricultural and livestock insurance scheme such as the Index Based Livestock Insurance, IBLI) in the project areas. To raise awareness among nation- and county-wide policy makers, the project will support the design of a communication strategy for EWS and implementation strategies for pastoral risk management. (c) Sub-component 4.3 - Contingency Emergency Response (US$0 sub-component): Following an adverse natural event that causes a major disaster affecting the livelihood of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in the project areas, the Government of Kenya, and Uganda may request the World Bank to re-allocate project funds to support mitigation, response, recovery and reconstruction. This component would draw resources from the unallocated expenditure category and/or allow the affected country to 27 It will implement ex-ante risk reduction measures, including innovative financing mechanisms (e.g., index-based livestock insurance, capacity building and community awareness to operationalize the Livestock Emergency Guidelines Standards (LEGS). 13 request the World Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from other components to partially cover emergency response and recovery costs. This component could also be used to channel additional funds, should they become available as a result of an eligible emergency. Detailed operational guidelines acceptable to the World Bank for the implementation of the Contingency Emergency Response component under RPLRP will be prepared during the first year of the project. Disbursements would be made against a positive list of goods, works, and services required supporting mitigation, response, recovery and reconstruction needs. All expenditures under this component, should it be triggered, will be in accordance with paragraph 11 of OP 10.00 of the Investment Project Financing and will be appraised, reviewed and found to be acceptable to the World Bank before any disbursement is made. Eligible operating costs would include incremental expenses incurred for efforts arising as a result of the natural disaster. This subcomponent will also be used to channel resources from rapid restructuring of the project to finance emergency response expenditures and meet crisis and emergency needs under an Immediate Response Mechanism (IRM). Criteria and thresholds for activating the mechanism will be developed. 33. Component 5: Project Management and Institutional Support (US$25.0 million). This component would focus on all aspects related to overall project management, including monitoring safeguards mitigation measures identified in the different frameworks disclosed, and institutional strengthening at national and regional levels for drought resilience. Given the complexity of governance issues in remote areas like the ASALs, the two countries will make strong efforts to put in place and improve governance and social accountability mechanisms, through record keeping, reporting, establishing, strengthening and operating an integrated management information system, communication strategy, and complaint and grievance mechanisms. (a) Sub-component 5.1 - Project Management, M&E, Learning, Knowledge Management and Communication. The Ministries in charge of implementing the project in the two countries will each host a national project coordination unit (PCU). This sub-component will support staff salaries, operating costs and key studies aimed at preparing or documenting project's interventions. Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) activities will include regular monitoring of implementation performance and results, annual outcome evaluations, annual thematic studies, technical audit of infrastructures, and case studies. The M&E activities will provide the basis to disseminate the lessons learned of the project at the local, national and regional level. At the three levels, learning activities will include cross-country learning activities supported by IGAD. (b) Sub-component 5.2 - Regional and National Institutional Support. It will provide technical and investment support to enhance provision of services by relevant national and regional institutions on drought resilience. This sub-component will build capacities in IGAD Secretariat and its specialized agencies, such as the IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development (ICPALD), IGAD Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC) and Conflict Early Warning and Response Network (CEWARN), and support a greater engagement of the two countries into the IGAD relevant decision- and policy-making processes on dry lands and pastoral areas. The sub- component will also promote inter-ministerial collaboration, be it among the two 14 28 countries or within each country , and among IGAD, the Governments and non-public organizations (i.e., livestock traders, pastoralists unions) in order to build these organizations' capacities. In Kenya, technical assistance will be offered to counties to strengthen county integrated planning and links with national and regional plans related to enhancing resilience and reducing vulnerability. B. Project Financing 34. The RPLRP will be financed through an Investment Project Financing (IPF) for the participating countries. 35. The financing for the first phase project will be as follows: Kenya (US$77 million equivalent); and Uganda (US$40 million equivalent). An IDA grant will also be provided to IGAD (US$5 million equivalent) to ensure smooth coordination and harmonization of interventions at the sub-regional level. The RPLRP costs are based on an IDA allocation and on an estimated grant for coordination activities at regional level, for an overall estimated budget of US$122.0 million over a five years period. Kenya has secured a Project Preparation Advance (PPA) to undertake key studies and initiate project preparation activities while Uganda relied on its funds and support from partners (FAO, Technical Consortium, IGAD). 36. Based on detailed analysis and studies, the budget assumes 5 percent of base cost for contingencies - 2 percent physical and 3 percent price. For price contingencies, both foreign and local inflation rates are estimated as average value per year29. The conversions from current US dollar values into local currencies are based on the constant purchasing power exchange rate (currency/US$). These exchange rates would adjust for the difference between local and foreign inflation. Physical contingencies are based on earlier experiences in the countries and reflect likely variations in the base cost estimates for selected cost items due to changes in quantities and/or methods of implementation. 28 For instance, in Uganda the inter-ministerial collaboration would involve MAAIF and the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM), the Ministry of Water and Environment, and the Ministries of Karamoja Affairs and Local Government. 29 The sources used are: for the US$ expected inflation rates, the World Bank Manufactures Unit Value Index (MUVI), and for the local inflation rates and the foreign exchange rate, the most recent between the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) country report and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) country report. 15 Table 1: Project Cost and Financing (US$ '000) Project cost (US$ '000) Component /Sub-component Kenya Uganda IGAD TOTAL IDA Financing Financing 1. Natural Resources Management 18,677.3 10,059.0 730.3 29,466.6 100% 1.1 Water Resources Development 7,892.0 5,007.4 325.0 13,224.4 1.2 Sustainable Land Management 9,766.6 2,377.0 105.0 12,248.6 1.3 Access to Natural Resources 1,018.7 2,674.5 300.3 3,993.5 2. Market Access and Trade 16,644.2 9,776.6 495.0 26,915.8 100% 2.1 Market Support Infrastructure and 6,926.3 8,064.1 300.0 15,290.4 Information System 2.2 Livestock Value-Chain Support and Improving Livestock Mobility and Trade 3. Livelihood Support 15,549.5 9,098.1 709.5 25,357.1 100% 3.1 Livestock Production and Health 10,768.5 6,849.8 519.5 18,137.8 3.2 Food and Feed Production 2,077.8 1,770.5 0.0 3,848.3 3.3 Livelihoods Diversification 2,703.2 477.9 190.0 3,371.1 4. Pastoral Risk Management 6,546.1 2,815.5 789.3 10,150.9 100% 4.1 Pastoral Risk Early Warning and 4,347.5 2,537.1 449.3 7,333.9 Response System 4.2 Drought Disaster Risk Management 2,198.6 278.4 340.0 2,817 4.3 Contingency Emergency Response 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (ZERO budget) 5. Project Management and Institutional 16,574.1 6,386.0 2,008.8 24,968.9 100% Support 5.1 Project Management, M&E, Learning, Knowledge Management and 12,943.9 5,620.5 1,728.8 20,293.2 Communication 5.2 Regional and National Institutions 3,630.2 765.6 280.0 4,675.8 Support Total BASELINE COSTS 73,991.3 38,135.1 4,732.8 116,859.2 100% Physical Contingencies (2%) 1,168.2 754.7 109.0 2,031.9 Price Contingencies (3%) 1,840.5 1,110.2 158.2 3,108.9 TOTAL PROJECT COST 77,000.0 40,000.0 5,000.0 122,000 37. The Kenya Government plans to contribute an additional US$21.00 million equivalent towards the project to finance its obligations including safeguards activities, maintenance of project offices, funding short training courses for project staff, salaries and facilitating incremental salaries (net of local taxes) for project staff. 38. Although IGAD has received some support from other donors to implement part of their strategy for ending drought emergency, the regional IDA Grant to IGAD makes sense and is aligned with World Bank guidelines on eligibility criteria for access to IDA Grants for Regional institutions as: (i) IGAD has the legal status and fiduciary capacity to receive grant funding and the legal authority and mandate from its Member States to carry out the activities financed, (ii) it cannot have access to IDA credit, (iii) the activities to be financed under this grant are related to 16 coordination and harmonization across the participating countries to deliver regional public goods, such as policy harmonization and conflicts prevention, and (iv) IGAD is fully associated to this IDA-funded regional operation in which 2 out of its 8 Member States are involved. C. Project phases 39. The RPLRP follows a phased approach. This approach provides flexibility in terms of: (i) allowing new countries to join the RPLRP in subsequent phases; (ii) linking country-specific outputs with broader region-wide priorities; and (iii) based on the project performance, allowing for additional phases to consolidate achievements. The project will support the following three phases: a) Phase 1: Kenya and Uganda. Three countries in the greater HoA region that have participated in the IDDRSI, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda have requested IDA assistance to support them in embarking on a regional investment project. Project preparation and appraisal has been completed in the case of Kenya and Uganda. The first phase of the project will start with investments for pastoralists' livelihood resilience in these two countries. The first phase will particularly embark on cross-country initiatives within the Karamoja cluster. b) Phase 2: Ethiopia. The second phase of the project may add Ethiopia through an additional financing. This would allow additional investments in the Karamoja cluster (which covers Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia and S. Sudan) as well as investments within three additional clusters covering Kenya and Ethiopia (the Turkana, Borena/Boran and Somali clusters). It would also allow support to national endeavors towards pastoralists' livelihood resilience in Ethiopia with regional significance across borders with Djibouti and Somalia. Project preparation for including Ethiopia into the project is progressing. It is expected that Ethiopia would be ready to join the second phase of the project in FY2015. c) Phase 3: A possible third phase could add countries such as South Sudan, Somalia or Djibouti to the project through additional financing also. South Sudan has endorsed its CPP and it is expected to initiate project preparation activities in FY2015. The country participated in most of the regional workshop organized to prepare the project under the coordination of IGAD. The third phase of the project will also deepen interventions under the first two phases and consolidate achievements. Kenya has only recently started devolution to counties whose institutional capacity remains weak. Therefore, the first phase of the RPLRP will build on centralized implementation arrangement, while building technical, fiduciary and administrative capacities at the counties level. The third phase of RPLRP could allow Kenya and Uganda to expand projects' interventions, in particular in the cattle corridor for Uganda, and introduce more decentralized implementation arrangements in Kenya. Additionally, because the RPLRP includes activities (for instance on rangelands regeneration) whose impacts need over 5 years to become visible, the third phase will help the partner countries consolidate the results achieved during the first and second phases, and further build over the subsequent outcomes. 17 40. The project design promotes cooperation among countries of the HoA and promotes coordinated actions under IGAD's common framework for drought resilience and sustainability: IDDRSI. For a country to be eligible for Bank support under the project, the following "eligibility criteria" are proposed: * Participating countries should be members of IGAD * Each country should develop a CPP for drought resilience and sustainability in line with IGAD's RPP and IDDRSI * Each country should identify cross-border clusters with any of the other RPLRP countries or neighbor to allow for coordinated cross-border investments and 30 services. 41. While the second phase could be initiated early in FY2015 when preparation of the Ethiopia component of the project is finalized, continuation into a third phase will be based on the results of an external review of the first phase at its midterm and full preparation process for interested countries. Security situations in countries such as South Sudan or Somalia will also be a decision criteria. D. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design 42. The RPLRP design and preparation builds on lessons learned from interventions in the ASALs of the two participating countries. Other similar initiatives financed by the World Bank and development partners to support pastoralists' livelihood resilience have contributed as well to the project's design. 43. The RPLRP relies on two fundamental assumptions, on which there is an increasing body of evidence. The first assumption is that enhancing resilience is more cost-effective than providing late humanitarian response. Food aid still prevails when it comes to emergency aid responses to droughts. Risk-based approaches to managing drought have not been institutionalized. The RPLRP aims to promote risk management rather than emergency response for pastoral areas. Commercial destocking of animals as an early response measure for pastoralists, and a range of specific livestock (veterinary care, livestock feeding) and water (storage, wells) interventions are necessary investments to improve the resilience of the pastoralist livelihoods. 44. The second assumption is that the pastoralists' mobility is a key factor for efficient use and protection of rangelands, and a key strategy for the pastoralists to adapt to climate change and conflicts. Given the cross-border nature of many pastoralist communities, pastoralism has special potential to benefit from regional approaches to policy reform and harmonization. The RPLRP relies on a regional approach and aims to secure access to rangelands for pastoralists. By supporting further development of regional policies, the project will also enable regional movements and livestock trade. 30 Each country would, however, also implement RPLRP interventions outside of cross-border clusters in districts it selects along cross border livestock migration or trade routes and particularly vulnerable to drought. 18 45. The experience in the ECOWAS International Transhumance Certificate shows that some parts of Africa, especially West Africa, have achieved considerable progress in terms of legislation that enables pastoral mobility. In the HoA, relevant policies can benefit from updated assessments of the economic impacts of diseases and market opportunities, epidemiological studies, and analysis of the available technical responses, including technical and economic feasibility. 46. The project also responds to several of the lessons learned from Kenya's ALRMP projects. In particular, key lessons identified in the Implementation Completion Report for ALRMP II include: a) Adaptation to longer-term climate change can be pursued jointly with management of short-term emergencies, but requires explicit attention. ALRMP II experienced the same pattern of needing to refocus efforts on drought management, recovery and protection of livelihoods versus longer-term adaptation, Its experience highlighted that implementation arrangements need to allow climate-stressed communities 'time out' to cope with emergencies. b) Conflict resolution should be integrated into natural resource management projects in fragile areas experiencing climate change stress. The projects highlighted that addressing conflicts over natural resources needs to be an integral part of projects in fragile locations that are experiencing in-migration and/or are over-populated (in relation to the resource base) and subject to increasingly adverse climate change impacts. ALRMP II sought to integrate conflict management into natural resource management, and beneficiaries pointed to resulting activities as among the project's important contributions. c) Climate change adaptation requires time, putting communities in the drivers' seat, and sound risk minimization arrangements. Development programs in areas subject to frequent droughts and that target highly vulnerable populations, as in the ASALs, require long enough implementation periods (through one, or a sequence of, projects) to have a meaningful impact in strengthening coping skills, creating resilience and undertaking sustainable adaptive responses. Involvement of communities in the process is essential. This implies decentralization of responsibilities for implementation, recognizing the reality that the project will be operating in a fragile environment and therefore creating systems conducive to reducing risks, with good management information systems that early detection of problems and corrective measures. d) It is important to design programs in ASAL areas with a focus on related governance risks. ASAL projects face particular risks reflecting the challenging environment that pastoralists inhabit, related conflict, issues of capacity, limited infrastructure, and the challenges of engaging with dispersed, mobile pastoralists. Key challenges and priorities that emerged from the ALRMP and other projects included: the need for stronger M&E and management information systems that enable government to track dispersed expenditures and investments, and link them with outputs; the need to isolate record-keeping, accounting, procurement, and other financial management problems, stop disbursements, and quickly take remedial action; the need for stronger communication and disclosure on project goals but also on local expenditures; the need for greater-than-usual supervision 19 and capacity building, especially around FM (and, where applicable, local procurement), the need to address or restrict potentially problematic categories of expenditures, such as vehicle use and imprests. 47. The experience in Uganda with the ongoing Water Management Project and the Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project (LVEMP) suggests that implementation arrangements need to make use of existing government structures and systems, as well as clearly define responsibilities between the stakeholders at the different levels. The RPLRP implementation arrangements are deliberately responsive to this need and make use of existing units, human resources and arrangements. This applies both at the regional level, where IGAD plays a key coordination role, as well as at the national level, taking into account each country's setting. 48. The Pastoral Community Development Project (PCDP) series in Ethiopia have shown that empowered pastoralist communities can be effective in planning for, investing and implementing sub-projects. These local investments need to be complemented with strategic investments to enhance the opportunities available for pastoralists. The RPLRP will invest in enabling investments such as rehabilitation of shared rangelands, livestock value chain development, control of zoonotic animal diseases, and development of regional markets. 49. The Agro-Pastoral and Land Management Project in Cameroon concluded that land use and management is a powerful tool to build consensus and reduce conflicts among land users. This project also suggested that communities benefit the most from sustainable land management practices by having reliable access to markets for their products. The access to land and water resources remains one of the main factors triggering conflicts between pastoralists and farmers. The RPLRP includes one component to enhance and secure access to natural resources, including land and water. The project includes activities to implement participatory rangeland rehabilitation and management techniques, demarcate and legalize traditional livestock migration routes, and guarantee access to water points and grazing areas. IV. IMPLEMENTATION A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements 50. This IDA-funded project 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. 51. Regional level: IGAD Secretariat will set up a Djibouti-based RPLRP Coordination Unit (RPLRP-CU) within the IDDRSI31 Regional Platform Coordination Unit, whose core functions 31 The IDDRSI Strategy aims at addressing the effects of drought and related shocks in the IGAD region. It followed an inclusive and participatory process that involved private and public stakeholders from member states, and consultations with UN agencies and donors. The strategy includes seven priority intervention areas: equitable access and sustainable use of natural resources; market access; equitable access to livelihood support and basic social services; DRM capabilities and preparedness 20 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 IGAD Divisions and 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. Figure 1: RPLRP Institutional and Implementation Arrangements for IGAD PoalicyguidancE, avars4ftt, decision makig Coordinaticn, plann ig ---n- monitorir I - Relevantpaalkdexisdrg RPLRP Coorditr of n eo ution Mangemnt eveopmntProgramming Uit 52. National level: The executing agencies are the MALF in Kenya and the MAAlF in Uganda. Figure 2 shows the basic RPLRP arrangements in the two countries (see Annex 4 for a more for effective response; generation and use of research, knowledge, technology and innovations; conflict prevention and resolution, and peace building; and coordination mechanisms, institutional arrangements and partnerships. 21 detailed depiction of the arrangements). 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 based on the existing human resources and arrangements. Figure 2: RPLRP Institutional and Implementation Arrangements per Country IGAD Kenya Uganda Ch Nationa l Project Sta CIhairPrmane Dept of Livestock, MIALF Nationa[Proec Secretalry' MAAIF NationalProject Implementation Unit Coordination Unit Host agencY State Host agency- Directorate of Department of Lvestock, MoALF Animal Resources. NLAAIF A iChnii District chir Cieofcen County Project Coordination Unit Ccageo Livestock afisService Unit] Host agency ItDistic Veterinary Office Sub-county Local Council Serices Units 3 Policyguida noe, oversight Coordination,, plannin&. decision mak~ing ------> monitoring 53. Kenya: The Project Implementation Unit (PIU) headed by a Project Team Leader (PTL) reports to the Principal Secretary responsible for Matters of Livestock in the MALF. The PTL will head a technical team of PIU members including nine senior professional experts: four component heads, an M&E officer, a project accountant, procurement specialist, safeguards specialist, communications specialist, Knowledge management specialist and a community development specialist who could double as a training and gender specialist. All PIU members will be designated by MALF staff on a competitive basis from among the Kenya Project Preparation Team in consultation and concurrence of the Association. 54. A National Project Steering Committee (NSC) will provide overall policy guidance and strategic direction, approve the annual work plans and budgets, and facilitate the implementation 22 of executive decisions of the committee. The NSC will be chaired by the Principal Secretary responsible for matters of Livestock, in the MALF. Membership will be comprised from, Principal Secretaries or their designated appointees from the (i) National Treasury, (ii) State Departments for Coordination of National Government, (iii) Devolution, (iv) Water Development, (v) Environment, (vi) Relevant stakeholders (e.g. KCA, KARI, KWS, KLMC, KLBO ILRI and Universities), (vii) one representative of non-state actors, (viii) Directors of Livestock Production, (ix) Veterinary Services, (x) Water Development, (xi) CEO of the NDMA, (xii) One County Executive Member responsible for matters of Livestock appointed by the Council of Governors, (xiii) Two pastoral associations representatives, (xiv) One male pastoralist, and (xv) One female pastoralist. The Head of Finance Unit, the Head of the Accounting and the Head of the Procurement Unit in MALF will also be invited to attend the NSC meetings. 55. 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 (CDD) type operations. The KPPT was introduced to a core set of measures 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 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 (PIM), 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 components and project units that do not comply with record-keeping, reporting, and other governance 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). 56. Uganda: The Steering Committee will be chaired by the Permanent Secretary from MAAIF, and include representatives from other ministries (Finance and Economic Development, Water and Environment, Trade, Industry and Cooperatives, Lands Housing and Urban 23 Development, Local Government), the Office of Prime Minister, IGAD Focal Person in the MAAIF, 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 project 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 the existing District Technical Committees32 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 Production Department 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 3 (Government structures), farmer groups, clans and other groupings, allowing the beneficiaries to participate in meetings, trainings and different project activities. 57. 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 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 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) strengthening and running the comprehensive national Project Implementation Management Information System; (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. 58. 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 32 District Technical Committees are composed of sector representatives from Animal health, Crop production, Environment, Works, planning, Market and trade, LCV secretary for production, RDC and CAOs. 24 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 10.0033. B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation 59. 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. This will include community participatory monitoring, such as engaging civil society organizations and other non-State actors. (c) Regional supervision and cross learning: IGAD will promote and participate in field supervisions of one country's project by the two 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 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 project. (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. 33 Should funding be reallocated within the project through IRM, the PDO and/or project results framework, as required, will be adjusted to capture use of these funds. 25 C. Sustainability 60. 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. 61. 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 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. 62. 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. V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES A. Risk Ratings Summary Table Risk Rating Stakeholder Risk M Implementing Agency Risk Capacity S Governance S Project Risk Design M Social and Environmental M Program and Donor L Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability M Overall Implementation Risk S B. Overall Risk Rating Explanation 63. At the regional level, the major risks relate to the capacity of IGAD to perform the coordination role in an effective manner. Some stakeholders at the national level may also 26 question the regional focus of the projects. At the country level, progress in the macroeconomic situation remains fragile and democratic systems are still weak, with decentralization processes incipient. The multi-sector nature of resilience and the different priorities for each country add complexity to the project. Previous experience working with World Bank procedures is diverse, just as the perception of corruption risks within each country. 64. The relevant CAS/CPSs develop risk mitigation measures, which include activities to strengthen accountability institutions and mechanisms. The program supports a wide consultation process during preparation to explain the rationale and benefits behind the supranational approach strongly supported by donors. The project includes activities for communication and information sharing such as: region-wide dissemination activities, reporting on program challenges and progress, periodic consultations with member states, and raising awareness on strategic issues at the decision and policy levels of member states and development partners. The project design will emphasize a clear definition and assignment of roles and responsibilities among the partners at the different levels, and a close monitoring of the services that IGAD will deliver with IDA funds. Capacity building and institutional strengthening will be key activities in the project. VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY A. Economic and Financial Analysis 65. Annex 6 presents the economic and financial analysis (EFA) of the project. Investments are expected to generate a number of benefits such as the reduction of animal mortality rates and increases in calving and off-take rates. Some of these parameters have been chosen as PDO-level indicators since project interventions should result in measurable impacts due to: (i) improved access to shared natural resources (water and pasture) between countries, (ii) enhanced access to productive infrastructure and livestock-related services, (iii) improved availability of animal feeds and breeds, (iv) more robust regional systems for surveillance and control of diseases (such as trans-boundary animal diseases), and (v) improved early warning and response mechanisms. The project is also expected to create a number of positive externalities, such as institutional strengthening, enhanced capacities of stakeholders, natural resources protection and biodiversity conservation. These benefits were not fully quantified due to the difficulty to attributing a monetary value to their contribution to the PDO. 66. A number of studies (see Annex 6) provide interesting insights about the cost-effectiveness of interventions in the ASALs of the HoA. Available evidence shows that: (i) late humanitarian response costs billions of dollars, which is significantly more than the cost of building resilience over 20 years; (ii) every dollar spent in commercial destocking of animals as an early response measure for pastoralists avoids US$138 of aid and losses in Kenya; and (iii) investment in a range of specific livestock (e.g., veterinary care, livestock feeding etc.) and water (e.g., storage and wells) interventions can yield benefits up to US$27 for every dollar spent. Other studies show that most non-pastoralist livelihoods in ASAL yield lower incomes than pastoralism, with the exception of urban livelihoods and irrigated farming. In some cases (low implementation costs assumption), irrigation investments in pastoral regions appear to be capable of yielding high rates of return (70 percent in Kenya). However, returns drop precipitously in the case of 27 more significant cost assumptions, with Internal Rates of Return (IRR) averaging 10 percent (medium implementation costs) and 2-7 percent (high implementation costs). 67. Given the important linkages between resilience and the preservation of capital assets, mainly livestock in pastoral areas, the EFA of RPLRP used livestock herd dynamics models (using the CIRAD/ ALIVE EcoRum LSIPT toolkit34), supported by cost-benefit analysis to assess the overall viability of the project in the 2 countries, through the calculation of RPLRP's IRRs and net present values (NPVs). The results, detailed in Annex 6, indicate that the project is economically justified. The analysis also demonstrates that the RPLRP is aligned with the World Bank's goals of fighting extreme poverty and shared prosperity. Under the current assumptions (Annex 6), IRRs in the 2 countries are in the order of 17-18 percent and the NPVs average US$10-15 million. The project is sensitive to changes in some of the project's variables (parturition and mortality rates), but returns are expected to be maintained if the investments aiming to enhance livelihood resilience are sustained. However, given the lack of accurate baseline data at the time of pre-appraisal, and the need to make numerous assumptions to describe the with-project scenario, the ex-ante results should be considered as indicative, rather than final. B. Technical 68. Regional approach: The regional nature of the project is highly justifiable given some of the trans-boundary and regional aspects of pastoralism in the HoA, with regards to disease transmission, cross-border natural resources, intra-regional transportation and trade of livestock, and knowledge. This approach does not necessarily prescribe that the target areas will be only districts or provinces along borders. If the improvement of access to natural resources (water, pasture, rangelands) should prioritize shared resources among communities from different countries, then infrastructure such as markets or slaughterhouses aiming at export/import could be financed in inland areas. 69. Conciliating mitigation and development: The RPLRP aims at realigning disaster management policies towards risk-based, livelihood approaches and early response in pastoral areas. Risk-based approaches, such as drought cycle management, were developed many years ago in East Africa, yet food aid still prevails when it comes to emergency responses. Early market-based interventions such as commercial destocking with private sector partners, combined with supplementary feeding of selected breeding stock, have been highly effective. 70. Realizing the potential ofpastoralism: The RPLRP builds on the assumption that the mobility of pastoralists is the basis for efficient use and protection of rangelands, and is a key strategy for the pastoralists to appropriately adapt to climate change and other trends. Moreover, given the cross-border nature of many pastoralist communities, pastoralism has special potential to benefit from regional approaches to policy reform and harmonization. 34 LSIPT: Livestock Sector Investment Policy Toolkit. Previous versions of this toolkit ("Lesnoff model" developed by CIRAD) were used in other Bank-financed projects' EFAs, such as the one performed for the Livestock Development and Animal Health Project (LDAHP) in Zambia. This toolkit is appropriate to assess the economics of traditional extensive livestock systems. 28 C. Financial Management 71. A Financial Management (FM) assessment was conducted on the financial management arrangements for the RPLRP. The project will be implemented by the IGAD Secretariat in Djibouti at a regional level and Uganda and Kenya at a national level. In Kenya, the project will be implemented by a PIU established under the MALF and will cover 14 counties and in Uganda by the MAAIF covering 12 districts. The assessment covered all the above mentioned implementation and institutional arrangements. However, the assessment did not cover arrangements for subcomponent 4.3 on contingency emergency response as each country will identify an IRM Coordinating Agency during the implementation of the project. Upon identifying the IRM Coordinating Agency, an FM assessment will be conducted to determine that there are adequate FM arrangements in place before funds are disbursed to the agency. 72. The objective of the assessment was to determine whether the implementing entities have acceptable financial management arrangements in place that satisfy the World Bank's Operation Policy/Bank Procedure (OP/BP) 10.00. These arrangements would ensure that the implementing entities: (i) use project funds only for the intended purposes in an efficient and economical way; (ii) prepare accurate and reliable accounts as well as timely periodic financial reports; (iii) safeguard assets of the project; and (iv) have acceptable auditing arrangements. The FM assessment was carried out in accordance with the Financial Management Manual issued by the Financial Management Sector Board on March 1, 2010. 73. In order to strengthen FM arrangements, appropriate measures have been taken and have been reflected in the respective Financing Arrangements. They are also summarized in Annex 3. 74. The conclusion of the assessment is that all the implementing entities do meet the Bank's minimum requirements under OP10.00 to implement the project. However, improvements need to be made as documented in the FM action plan (see Annex 3) to strengthen the FM arrangements. The FM residual risk for IGAD Secretariat is substantial while for Uganda and Kenya is high implying that on-site supervision of the project will have to be done at least twice a year. D. Procurement 75. Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated January 2011; and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" dated January 2011, "Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants, (the Anti-Corruption Guidelines)" dated October 15, 2006 and revised in January 2011, and the provisions stipulated in the Legal Agreement. 76. In Kenya, the procurement function will be centralized at the procurement unit of the PIU established by MAAIF. The PIU is headed by a Project Coordinator who reports to the Minister, MALF. The component heads will provide technical support to the procurement management. Currently, the PIU is being served by one procurement specialist with 8 years of project experience with another donor-supported project, albeit limited knowledge of World Bank procurement guidelines. The Ministry has a Tender Committee established based on the Public Procurement Law. Equally, the CEO normally appoints an ad hoc tender opening committee and technical evaluation committee in pursuant to the Public Procurement Law. Bidding documents 29 are prepared jointly by the technical departments supported by the procurement staff and are issued to public by the procurement unit. 77. In Uganda, the Procurement and Disposal Unit (PDU) of MAAIF will conduct procurement for the RPLRP. The PDU will require training on IDA funded procurement management. A Procurement Officer will be hired to process RPLRP contracts and build PDU staff capacity in IDA funded procurement management. In addition, the project will hire a Procurement Assistant for the project to support record keeping and link it up with the Technical Departments in MAAIF. At district level, procurement staffing was assessed to be limited in skills and numbers with most districts having only 1 out of 3 required staff. Thus, at district level services or goods shall be processed as operational expenses to be acquired under the Borrower's administrative, procurement and public financial management procedures. The work and high value goods contracts for all districts shall be consolidated and procured at national level by MAAIF. 78. IGAD: Procurement at IGAD shall be carried out centrally by the procurement unit of the IGAD Secretariat. This unit has been established and staffed recently but is not as yet included in the organizational structure of IGAD Secretariat. The study to this effect has been finalized. The procurement unit will be staffed with one additional procurement officer to handle the procurement activities of the proposed project. The Secretariat has experience in implementing donor supported projects, including IDA financed projects, but still needs to staff the procurement unit with appropriate personnel, experienced in procurements under World Bank procedures and policies. 79. The various items under different expenditure categories are described below in Annex 7. For each contract to be financed by the IDA Credits or IDA Regional Grant, the different procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually, or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. The Borrowers as well as contractors, suppliers, and consultants will observe the highest standards of ethics during procurement and execution of contracts financed under this project. E. Social (including Safeguards) 80. The Project has been assigned Environmental Category B. The project triggers the following Policies: Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP 4.04), Pest Management (OP 4.09), Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11), Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12), and Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10). The project takes a framework approach to safeguards, since the specific activities have not been identified during the project preparation. Each country has prepared an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), and an Integrated Pest Management Framework (IPMF). Uganda and Kenya have also developed respectively, an Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework (IPPF) and a Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework (VMGF) to satisfy the requirements of OP 4.10. The project safeguards instruments were prepared to clarify principles, mitigation measures, and the appropriate organizational arrangements for each implementation agency that would ensure that those affected by implementation of the project positively or negatively, have a voice and a mechanism of influencing project outcomes in line with World Bank safeguard policies. 30 81. The project will have substantial positive social impact on the livelihoods of communities in the project areas. The project design includes mechanisms for ensuring that participation of communities in management of resources, particularly natural resources, is enhanced. Social Assessments carried out during project preparation identified the main social issues that the project needs to address; it also suggested approaches to project community engagement. Previous World Bank-funded projects in similar areas and communities have helped the anticipation of the project social impacts, especially in regard to vulnerable and marginalized groups, women and young people. The RPLRP's demand driven approach will therefore enable priority setting by communities and respond to communities' needs. 82. In Kenya, the screening confirmed the presence of Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups (VMGs) in the project areas. However, since the subprojects have not been identified a VMGF, in consultation with communities, has been prepared outlining the processes and principles of determining the proposed investment impacts on vulnerable groups and how a Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Plan (VMGP) would be prepared. The VMGF will assist the project in integrating the management of issues related to the VMGs into development and operation of the proposed investments financed under the RPLRP. This document was disclosed to the public in Kenya and World Bank's Info Shop on November 28 and 29, 2013 respectively. Subprojects involving VMGs will develop the VMGPs before commencement of works and will also be publicly disclosed. Based on the project screening and the nature of proposed activities, the project activities are not expected to cause involuntary resettlement of people. Interventions are meant to strengthen existing means of livelihood by communities. An RPF has been prepared to provide guidance for handling potential temporary (and in some cases permanent) restriction of access to resources for project communities. The RPF was developed in consultation with the target communities. The RPF makes provisions to minimize any negative impacts permanent or temporary, and offers solutions to ensure livelihood restoration assistance in accordance with World Bank OP 4.12. Decision regarding location of community livelihood projects will be made with active participation of communities. The RPF is meant to guide the preparation of the Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs) including public consultations, grievance handling mechanism and disclosure plan. This Document was disclosed to in Kenya on November 28, 2013 and in the World Bank's Info Shop on November 29, 2013. 83. In Uganda, a framework for Indigenous Peoples (IPs) including the vulnerable and marginalized groups to address their issues was prepared and consulted upon. The IPPF outlines mechanisms to address issues of vulnerable and marginalized groups and determine the measures that will ensure the IPs and vulnerable groups will receive culturally appropriate social benefits and potential adverse effects are avoided, minimized, mitigated or/and are integrated in RPLRP project. The framework also defines the necessary steps to develop sub-project specific indigenous peoples and vulnerable groups' plans, ensuring that where the proposed projects affect IP and vulnerable groups, free, prior, and informed consultations with such groups are conducted. In terms of project implementation including project oversight, the district teams will be involved in siting of community livelihood projects, which will be designed in close consultation with communities in a participatory and consultative manner. The IPPF was disclosed in-country and at the World Bank's Info shop on November 29, 2013. On the issue of resettlement, it is assessed that the RPLRP interventions are not likely to cause significant impacts; a very limited land acquisition (if any) is envisaged. To cover aspects of land loss, loss of livelihood, and displacement of land use as well as any loss of access to natural resources and public parks arise, an RPF has been prepared to provide guidance during implementation (and 31 prior to any civil works) for determining the necessity of RAPs for sub-projects and the procedures for their preparation, including consultations with potentially affected individuals and households in the regions of project operation, namely: Karamoja, Teso and Sebei. This RPF was disclosed in-country and at the World Bank's InfoShop on November 29, 2013. F. Environment (including Safeguards) 84. RPLRP is expected to have a positive impact on environment by enhancing the capacities of relevant stakeholders to sustainably manage natural resources, especially rangelands and water, and by rehabilitating or developing water and pasture related infrastructure and ecosystems. The Project is classified as Environment Assessment (EA) Category B because the anticipated environmental impacts are not major, mostly site specific and can easily be avoided and/or managed. RPLRP triggers OP 4.01, as the project will support local and community investments, including some with trans-border dimensions, which might have environmental and social impacts: construction of new and rehabilitation of existing water facilities, rangeland/field demonstration plots, watershed rehabilitation activities, livestock markets and laboratories, storage facilities, among others. 85. The Project also triggers OP 4.04 - Natural Habitats, OP 4.09 - Pest Management and OP 4.11 - Physical Cultural Resources. OP 4.04: The project activities might border or operate in natural habitats or protected areas. Pastoral livestock movements are sometimes conflicting with borders of protected areas. Some sub-projects may involve management and use of natural resources such as wetlands, protected areas for communal grazing. The project does not anticipate conversion or destruction of natural habitats. No forests are expected to be affected by the proposed activities. 86. OP 4.09: The promotion of livestock and crop agriculture productivity increase may indirectly incentivize the pesticide use. Project funds might be used to purchase veterinary and anti-parasites drugs. Overall, the project is neither expected to have significant pest management issues, nor finance substantial quantities of pesticides. However, to guide the project in procurement, management and disposal of these chemicals, country specific Integrated Pest Management Frameworks (IPMFs) were prepared and publicly disclosed on January 22, 2014 in Kenya and January 24, 2014 in Uganda. The IPMFs will help manage the chemical use, guide their safe handling, storage and disposal, and include training and capacity building activities for farmers. 87. OP 4.11: Project activities do not involve major civil works, and thus are unlikely to affect physical cultural resources in the project areas. However, ESMFs include a procedure to handle "chance finds". 88. OP 4.37: The safeguard policy on Safety of Dams (OP 4.37) is not triggered. The project may include small dams, which is covered by the screening process in the ESMF. For Uganda, the project will adopt Small Dam Safety Guidelines, developed for other World Bank-financed operations. For Kenya, FAO Small Dam Safety Guidelines have been adopted and consulted upon prior to project appraisal. Relevant communities will receive periodic training basic surveillance procedures to identify and address potential problems at an early stage (e.g. silting, safety issues). 89. Specific project investments and sub-project locations cannot be defined at the time of appraisal, and will be designed during project implementation. To satisfy the requirements of OP 32 4.01, the countries have prepared ESMFs. The two ESMFs are country-specific volumes, describing the process of environmental and social assessment, which will help the implementing agencies identify, assess and avoid or mitigate the potential negative impacts of the proposed interventions. The ESMFs define uniform screening mechanisms and monitoring procedures for identification and management of potential adverse environmental and social impacts. The project will collaborate with the local authorities to assist the project in monitoring project activities in the vicinity of any natural habitats in the sub-project areas. The ESMF reports also provide Grievance Redress Mechanism with guidance on the reception, recording, handling, and reporting of complaints that may be encountered during project implementation. During project implementation and based on the environmental and social screening process provided in the ESMF, ESIAs/ESMPs shall be developed and relevant environmental assessments undertaken where necessary. Monitoring and reporting formats have been provided in the ESMF reports and shall be customized to the respective sub-projects in each identified subproject. The two ESMF reports have gone through public consultations during their preparation and were disclosed locally and in the World Bank's InfoShop prior to project appraisal on November 29, 2013. 90. The World Bank team has worked closely with the Project staff in the two countries to achieve (i) a common approach, monitoring indicators, and other necessary linkages among two ESMF reports, and (ii) a timely preparation including public consultations and disclosure prior to project appraisal. * In Kenya, the KPPT team developed an ESMF, which was disclosed in Kenya on November 26, 2013 and in the InfoShop on November 29, 2013. Based on an important consultation process, including with local communities, the ESMF provides directions to the implementing agencies on how to identify, assess and mitigate potential negative environmental and social impacts of sub projects and ensures that preparation of ESIAs and ESMPs are developed and implemented according to the Bank and Government of Kenya (GoK) guidelines. * In Uganda, the ESMF has been prepared for the project and provides guidance on how environmental and social issues shall be identified, assessed, mitigation measures developed, monitored and reported. The ESMF was prepared and disclosed in-country and at World Bank's InfoShop on November 29, 2013. Its preparation involved consultations with the relevant central government bodies, the respective District Local Governments and Local communities. 33 Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT (RPLRP) RESULTS FRAMEWORK The objectives of the Project are Pecnaedahrtoflvsokkpbyar-atrl Assthleeofdpeinfpsoalouhls'mn to enhance livelihood resilience 3 n atrlhueod agtdb h rjct(ate sesa ainladrgoa ee of pastoral and agro-pastoral gas communities in cross-border NubrlvsoktaeinslceprjcmaktAsesidrclificmopouiisfomietckn drought prone areas of Selected volume and value have improved through enhancement of Countries and improve the local, national and regional market infrastructures, market capacity of the Selected information and value chain development Countries' governments to Real value of livestock traded in selected project markets Assess indirectly if income opportunities from livestock in respond promptly and effectively volume and value have improved through enhancement of to an Eligible Crisis or local, national and regional market infrastructures, market Emergency. information and value chain development Time lapse between early wa bying information and Measure the effectiveness of the early waring and response response reduced mechanisms for disaster risk management (drought) Number of direct project beneficiaries of which female Measure the impact of the project in terms of people (percentage) directly benefitted, and the extent to which the benefits reach directly women. 35 Therefore, livelihood resilience under RPLRP is mostly defined as: (i) sustained and maintained assets of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists measured indirectly by death rate of livestock per pastoral household and birth rate per type of livestock per pastoral household; (ii) sustained and maintained means of making a living measured indirectly by death rate of livestock per pastoral household and birth rate per type of livestock per pastoral household and (iii) strengthening of livelihood activities and income measured indirectly by improved income opportunities from livestock (in terms of volume and value) measured indirectly by the total volume and real value of livestock products marketed in the targeted markets of the project. The main factors that will contribute to this resilience are continuous access to grazing land, water, livestock health services, markets, market information and contingency resources available in time of shocks. These main factors need to be addressed at a regional level to reach any critical impact for pastoralists' livelihood. 34 Component 1: Natural Resources Management Sub-component 1. 1: Water Resources Development Infrastructure for improved Number of water infrastructures along cross-border Assess the extent to which investments provide timely and access to water resources for migration routes 36 rehabilitated or newly built under the sustainable access to improved water resources and that pastoral and agro-pastoral project that aresthat are operational and sustainably recurrent cost/aci ities for maintenance of the communities realized and managed infrastructures has been taken into account sustainably managed Percentage of pastoral households with improved Assess if the access to water for pastoral households has access 37 to water through project infrastructures been improved through reducing distance to access water rehabilitation and development resources while taking into account the availability of feed Sub-component 1.2 Sustainable Land Management in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas Pastral nd gro-astral and Land area (hectares) where sustainable land management Provide an indication of the extent to which targeted practices have been adopted as a result of the project in pastoral and agro-pastoral project areas are under sutanalymaagd nceaed shared rangelands 38sustainable land management Sub-component 1.3: Securing Access to Natural Resources Access to natural resources Number of platforms solving cross-border natural Provide an indication of the extent to which communities improved and secured resources management conflicts formed and operational. have in place the necessary arrangements to improve and secure access to natural resources. Component 2: Market Access and Trade Sub-component 2.1: Market Support Infrastructure and Information Systems Market infrastructures developed Number of regional or cross-border market Assess the extent to which investments provide timely and and market information system infrastructures rehabilitated or newly built under the sustainable market services and that recurrent cost/activities improved at the national and project that are operational and sustainably managed39 for maintenance of the infrastructures has been taken into account 36 "Operational and sustainably managed" is defined as "(i) infrastructure is delivering the intended benefits, (ii) is appropriately maintained (incl. a fully functional water management committee as applicable), and (iii) the resources are paid by users (water fees) for O&M of the infrastructure". It will be measured through a percentage of collected water fees on the total fees requirement on yearly basis starting after 6 months of operations. 37,lmproved access to water" is defined as livestock water within a distance/time range that is country specific;( 5km in Uganda, 1 Okms in Kenya) to water reduced to match with the available feed resources. 38 The baseline for this indicator is expected to be zero. Sustainable Land Management practices include technologies (re-vegetation of rangelands, natural regeneration of trees or other vegetation, etc) and approaches (watershed plans, grazing agreements, closures, soil and water conservation zones, etc.) to increase land quality. 39The definition of "operational" will differ among the type of infrastructures. Some of the criteria might be that the infrastructure is delivering the intended benefits, is appropriately maintained, and the resources are allocated for future O&M of the infrastructure. It will be measured 6 months after the completion of the investment, which will provide a sense of the speed for infrastructures to be operational and will assess its sustainability over time. 35 regional level Regional marketing information (price, diseases) 40 Assess the effectiveness of dissemination of critical disseminated to partner countries in timely manners4 information for pastoral households Sub-component 2.2: Livestock Value-Chain Support andhImproving Livestock Mobilit and Trade Number of regional protocols about sanitary and phyto- Policies, regulatory framework sanitary standards ratified by the two countries Both indicators assess progress towards developing an and capacity for traders enhanced Number of stakeholderS41 trained on policy and enabling environment for livestock trade between the two regulations in the region countries. Component 3: Livelihood Support Sub-component 3.1: Livestock Production and Health Livestock health services at the Number of suspicions of outbreaks of selected diseases Measures the capacity of countries to report diseases regional, national and local level of regional importance (PPR and FMD) reported and outbreak enhanced to support greater tested in central laboratories production and productivity Percentage households targeted by the project satisfied Measures the quality of livestock health services with livestock health services Sub-component 3.2: Food and Feed Production New technologies and practices Number of new technologies demonstrated in the project Measures the range of technologies disseminated through for food and feed production and area the project for alternative livelihoods Number of alternative livelihood sub-projects realized enhanced through demonstrations and sustainably managed42 2 years after initial investments Component 4: Pastoral Risk Management Sub-component 4.1: Pastoral Risk Early Warning and Response System Regional, national and local early Reliable43 information from Early Warning System warning and response (EWS) disseminated timely44 Measure the effectiveness of the early warning and response mechanisms for disaster risk mechanisms for disaster risk management (drought) management improved 40 On prices, "disseminated" stands for publicly disclosed on the IGAD regional LMIS, and "timely" stands for weekly. On diseases, "timely" means monthly report of the disease situation in the region. 41 "Stakeholders" includes traders, services providers, policy makers, and value chain actors. 42 The definition of "sustainably managed" will differ among the type of sub-projects. A definition will have to be developed per type of sub-projects. 43 Sound and credible in a format understandable for targeted stakeholders. It will need to be further defined. 44 The information is available early enough to prepare a response from the Government 36 Sub-component 4.2: Drought Disaster Risk Management Effective disaster risks DRM policies from the two countries harmonized and Assess if the required legal and policy environment is in management policies mainstreamed place to operationalize the contingency plans operationalized and contingency Contingency plans in place in the two countries and Demonstrate if contingency plans are in place and ready to plans available IGAD be implemented 37 Results Monitoring Framework Project Development Objective (PDO): The objectives of the Project are to enhance livelihood resilience45 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. 4. Cumulative Target Values Resposibi PDO Level Results r Baseline (indicate Data Source/ ity for Data Comments/ Definitions Indicators ,Y Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Collection Percentage death rate of % Drought year livestock kept by agro- (avg. 2009, 2011) pastoral and pastoral Cattle - KEN 22 22 20.3 18.3 16.6 14.6 In the Longitudinal M&E households targeted by event of a methodology46 Officer the project (cattle, Goats - KEN 17 17 16 15 14 13 drought Progress reports goats) Cattle - UGA 13 11.5 11 In the Early Warning EW Agreed on years for event of a Committee Committees drought year 2009/2011 Goats - UGA 11 9.9 9 drought Reports, (national & baseline cattle & goats. Household district) Survey, Annual RPLRP Report on Y3 and Y5 Normal year % (avg. 2008, 2010, 2012) Cattle - KEN 10 10 9.1 8.2 7.5 7 Annual Longitudinal M&E methodology Officer Goats - KEN 12 12 10.9 9.8 8.4 8.4 Progress report Early Warning Cattle - UGA 5 4 3.5 YR3 and Committee EW Agreed on years for YR5 Reports, Committees normal year 2008-2013 Goats - UGA 5 4 3.5 Household (national & baseline cattle & goats Survey, Annual district) (Negative percentage RPLRP Report on values indicate targeted Y3 and Y5 reduction in death rates) 45 Livelihood resilience under RPLRP is defined as: (i) sustained and maintained assets of pastoralists and agro-pastoralists and (ii) sustained and maintained means of making a living, both measured indirectly by death rate of livestock kept by agro-pastoral/pastoral households targeted by the project; and (iii) strengthened livelihood activities and income measured indirectly by improved income opportunities from livestock (in terms of volume and value of livestock products that are cross-border traded in selected project markets. 46 Methodology for the longitudinal survey to be described in the PIM and M&E manual. In a nutshell, the methodology includes a regular collection (bi-monthly or monthly) of data of "sentinel herds" in and outside the project zone. 38 4. Cumulative Target Values T PDO Level Results E r Baseline (indicate Data Source/ Responsibil a a ity for Data Comments/ Definitions Indicators C,) date/period) Y2 Y Y Methodology folection __ Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 _jCollection Number of livestock Drought year traded in selected Nbr. of (avg.2009, 2011) project markets heads Live goats - % 2 3.5 5.5 7.2 9 In the PCU M&E KEN decrease event of a Markets' reports Officer Live cattle - % 1.5 3.1 4.9 6.6 7.4 drought NDMA KEN decrease Live goats - 35,003 38,503 40,813 In the Markets reports EW During drought 2009 the UGA event of a NDMA Committees number of livestock Live cattle - 31,642 33,541 35,218 drought (national & sales increased (cattle UGA district) by 17% & goat by 12%) PCU by the pastoralists to reduce losses due to death and hardships of water and pasture. Normal year Nbr. of (avg.2008-2012) heads Annual Markets' reports PCU M&E Baseline not available: Live goats - % 1 2.5 4.5 5.2 6 Progress reports Officer KEN using an expected KEN increase percent increase. Will be completed by the full Live cattle - % 0.6 2.4 4.2 5.4 6.1 baseline survey KEN increase Live goats - 29,917 31,413 32,983 34,633 36,364 38,183 Annual Markets' reports, PCU M&E UGA Household Officer Number of live animals Live cattle - 28,252 29,665 31,148 32,705 34,340 36,058 Survey, Annual traded in the improved UGA RPLRP Progress project markets to reports increase by 5% annually Real value of livestock Country Drought year traded in selected currency (avg.2009, 2011) project markets Live goats - % 2.4 4.6 7.2 8.6 9.1 In the Livestock KEN increase event of a Marketing Live cattle - % 1.7 4.9 6.9 8.5 9.4 drought Information KEN increase System Live goats - Ushs 2,012 2,465 In the Livestock EW The price live cattle and UGA (000,000) event of a Marketing Committees goats reduced by 1,424 drought Information (national & estimate of 30-35% 39 4. Cumulative Target Values PDO Level Results E = r Baseline (indicate Data Source/ Responsibil Indicators ity for Data Comments/ Definitions Inictos ,, 25 date/period) Y1 Y 3 Y 5Methodology Cleto YI Y Y3 4 Y5 4)1.Collection Live cattle - Ushs 23,102 26,529 System district) during drought year due UGA (000,000) to forced destocking 14,701 Country Normal year47 currency (avg.2008-2012) Live goats - % 1.2 3 5.4 6.2 6.6 Annual Livestock PCU Baseline not available: KEN increase Marketing M&E KEN using an expected Live cattle - % 0.6 2.4 4.2 5.4 6.1 Information Officer percent increase. Will KEN increase System be completed by the full baseline survey Live goats - Ushs 2,393 2,513 2,639 2,909 3,055 Annual Livestock EW UGA 000,000 Marketing Committees 2,393 Information (national & Live cattle - Ushs System district) UGA 000,000 21,189 22,249 23,361 25,755 27,043 21,189 Time lapse between Days KEN - 4 weeks <3 <2 Baseline Quantitative M&E early warning weeks weeks Mid term survey Officer information and Final response reduced48 Quantitative UGA - 30-45 days 25-30 14-25 1 - 14 1 - 14 1 - 14 survey, Disaster days days days days days preparedness platforms' reports Number of direct Cumulative number for project beneficiaries of No. 0 ('000) 230 770 1,280 1,522 1,700 Annual Progress report NPCU, participating countries which (percentage) Household district FAO methodology for female49 Survey, Annual M&E baseline estimation and (% (0) (30%) (>35%) (>40%) RPLRP Report officers counting female) UGA:50% of the target districts population 47 In UGANDA, the assumption is that livestock prices will remain stable for duration of project lifecycle. However increase in value will be due to increase of number of animals per year. 48 In UGANDA, this is the time lapse that the Government of Uganda, through the Ministry of Disaster Preparedness or District Local governments, will take to respond to drought crisis in the project area after early warning information is provided by EW system supported by the project. 49 In UGANDA, this indicator measures households benefitting of activities under component 1 and 3, assuming that 50% (1,142,300) of the population in project districts will be targeted in 5 years. 40 Cumulative Target Values (5 -Responsi- 5 Baseline (indicate Intermediate Results W o Data Source/ bility for Indicators date/period) Methodology Data Comments Collection Intermediate Result 1: Infrastructures for improved access to water resources for pastoral and agro-pastoral communities realized and sustainably managed Number of water No. KEN - 0 7 37 70 95 95 Annual Progress report M&E In KEN, includes: infrastructures along (date: 2013) Officer water pans, shallow cross-border migration Geo-mapped wells, boreholes, rock routes50 rehabilitated or on website catchments and earth newly built under the dams project that are that are operational and sustainably managed UGA - 0 0 89 189 189 189 Annual Household MAAIF / In UGA, includes: (date: 2013) Survey, NPCU, shallow wells, Annual RPLRP District Local boreholes and valley progress reports Government tanks reports Percentage of pastoral % Normal year distance: 5% 15% 35% 45% >50% Annual Progress report M&E households with 10 Km Officer improved access51 to KEN - 0% water through project Drought year distance: 5% 15% 35% 45% >50% infrastructures 30 Km rehabilitation and KEN - 0% development Normal year distance: 0% 50% 72% 87% 90% Annual Household MAAIF / 5-10 Km Survey, NPCU, UGA - 0% Annual RPLRP District Local progress reports Government reports Intermediate Result 2: Pastoral and agro-pastoral land sustainably management increased Land area (hectares) Z where sustainable land Has. KEN - 0 280 1,080 1,880 2,280 2,480 Annual Progress report M&E management practices (date: 2013) Officer 5o "Operational and sustainably managed" is defined as "(i) infrastructure is delivering the intended benefits, (ii) is appropriately maintained (incl. a fully functional water management committee as applicable), and (iii) the resources are paid by users (water fees) for O&M of the infrastructure". It will be measured through a percentage of collected water fees on the total fees requirement on yearly basis starting after 6 months of operations. 5""Improved access to water" is defined as livestock water within a distance/time range that is country specific (5-10 Km in Uganda, 10 Km in Kenya) to water reduced to match with the available feed resources. In UGANDA, the indicator measures HH accessing water within 5-10km distance from the location of the infrastructure (valley tank, borehole and shallow well) established by the project. 41 Cumulative Target Values Ci '5 Baseline (indicate Responsi- Intermediate Results W Data Source/ bility for Intermdate/period Comments dat/prid)Methodology Data Indicators W Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Collection have been adopted as a Geo-mapped result of the project in on website shared rangelands52 UGA - 0 40 200 600 840 940 Annual NPCU Progress MAAIF / (date: 2013) reports NPCU, District Local Government Intermediate Result 3: Access to natural resources improved and secured Number of platforms No. KEN - 0 4 8 12 16 16 Annual Progress report M&E Officer solving cross-border (date: 2013) natural resources UGA - 0 12 12 12 12 12 Annual MAAIF/NPCU, MAAIF / One platform will be management conflicts (date: 2013) District Local NPCU, established per district formed and Government District Local hence 12 platform in 12 operational. reports Government project districts Intermediate Result 4: Market infrastructures developed and market information system improved at the national and regional level Number of regional or No. KEN - 0 0 5 13 16 16 Annual Progress report Geo-mapped In KEN: include cross-border market (date: 2013) on website holding grounds, sales infrastructures yard, auction ring, rehabilitated or newly stock routes, veterinary built under the project border post control that are operational and UGA - 0 0 22 22 22 22 Annual MAAIF/NPCU, MAAIF / In UGA: include local sustainably managed53 (date: 2013) District Local NPCU, markets, Slaughter Government District Local facilities, holding reports Government ground, border check points and satellite laboratories Regional marketing Yes/No KEN - Prices: No No No Yes Yes Yes Annual IGAD website Member information (price, States and diseases) disseminated KEN - Diseases: No No No Yes Yes Yes IGAD 52 The baseline for this indicator is expected to be zero. Sustainable Land Management practices include technologies (re-vegetation of rangelands, natural regeneration of trees or other vegetation, etc) and approaches (watershed plans, grazing agreements, closures, soil and water conservation zones, etc) to increase land quality. 53The definition of "operational" will differ among the type of infrastructures. Some of the criteria might be that the infrastructure is delivering the intended benefits, is appropriately maintained, and the resources are allocated for future O&M of the infrastructure. It will be measured 6 months after the completion of the investment, which will provide a sense of the speed for infrastructures to be operational and will assess its sustainability over time. In UGANDA, the infrastructure that will be newly constructed and rehabilitation include 6 local markets, 6 Slaughter facilities, 4 holding ground, 3 check points and 3 satellite laboratories 42 Cumulative Target Values Ci '5 Baseline (indicate Responsi- Intermediate Results W Data Source/ bility for Intermdate/period Comments dat/prid)Methodology Data Indicators W Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Collection to partner countries in UGA - Prices: No No No Yes Yes Yes Annual IGAD website Member timely manners54 States and UGA - Diseases: No No No Yes Yes Yes IGAD Intermediate Result 6: Policies, regulatory framework and capacity for traders enhanced Number of regional No. 0 0 1 2 4 Annual Progress report IGAD protocols about sanitary and phytosanitary standards ratified by the participating countries Number of Nbr. 0 7,100 12,190 Annual Progress PCU Cumulative target: stakeholders55 trained reports of M&E IGAD + participating on policy and IGAD and Officers countries regulations in the participating region countries Intermediate Result 7: Livestock health services at the regional, national and local level enhanced to support greater production and productivity Number of suspicions of outbreaks of selected No. UGA - (2012) PPR: PPR: PPR: PPR: PPR: Annual Central Central Include all samples diseases of regional PPR: 1550 1,705 1,875 2,065 2,270 2,500 Laboratories Laboratory, tested whether found importance (PPR and FMD: 862 FMD: FMD: FMD: FMD: FMD: Annual reports PCU positive or negative. FMD) reported and 948 1,043 1,147 1,262 1,388 M&E Officer tested in central Assumes a 10% yearly laboratories increase of samples KEN - (2013) PPR: PPR: PPR: PPR: PPR: tested in the 2 PPR: 2,800 2,800 3,080 3,388 3,729 4,099 coountries. FMD: 11,500 FMD: FMD: FMD: FMD: FMD: 11,500 12,650 13,915 15,306 16,837 Percentage households %. KEN - 0% 80% 90% Y1, Y3, External M&E targeted by the project (date: 2013) Y5 Satisfaction Officer satisfied with livestock Survey health services UGA - 0% 80% 90% Y1, Y3, External MAAIF / (date: 2013) Y5 Satisfaction NPCU will Survey contract 54 PRICES: Disseminated= Publicly disclosed on the IGAD regional LMIS; timely- weekly; DISEASES: "timely" means monthly report of the disease situation in the region 5s Stakeholders= traders, services providers, policy makers, value chain actors 43 Cumulative Target Values Ci '5 Baseline (indicate Responsi- Intermediate Results W Data Source/ bility for Intermdate/period Comments dat/prid)Methodology Data Indicators W Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Collection external consultant to carry out the survey. Intermediate Result 8: New technologies and practices for food and feed production and for alternative livelihoods enhanced through demonstrations Number of new No. KEN - 0 3 7 11 13 14 Annual Progress M&E technologies (date: 2013) reports Officer demonstrated in the project area56 UGA - 0 5 7 10 10 10 Annual MAAIF/NPCU, MAAIF/ (date: 2013) District Local NPCU, Government District Local reports Government Number of alternative No KEN - 0 2 6 12 17 20 Annual Progress M&E Refers to number of livelihood sub-projects (date: 2013) reports Officer groups adopting realized and alternative livelihoods sustainably managed57 UGA - 0 5 10 15 15 15 Annual Household MAAIF/ 2 years after initial (date: 2013) Survey, Annual NPCU, investments RPLRP District Local progress reports Government Intermediate Result 10: Regional, national and local early warning and response mechanisms for disaster risk management improved Reliable58 information Yes/No KEN - no No Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress M&E Officer (Country must define from Early Warning (date: 2013) reports External what information, System (EWS) consultancy disseminated at which disseminated timely59 level) UGA - no No Yes Yes Yes Yes Annual Household MAAIF/ (date: 2013) Survey Annual NPCU M&E RPLRP Reports system, District Local 56 In UGANDA, the assumption is that 10 types new technologies will be demonstrated for the households to adopt and use them. 57 The definition of "sustainably managed" will differ among the type of sub-projects. A definition will have to be developed per type of sub-projects. In UGANDA, it is assumed that households will take up or initiate alternative livehood activities 58 Sound and credible in a format understandable for targeted stakeholders. It will need to be further defined. 59 The information is available early enough to prepare a response from the Government. In UGANDA, the information disseminated at the national level will be on droughts and floods. 44 Cumulative Target Values Responsi- Baseline (indicate Intermediate Results W Data Source/ bility for Intedate/period) Comments dat/prid)Methodology Data Indicators W Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Collection Government Intermediate Result 11: Effective disaster risks management policies operationalized and contingency plans available DRM policies from the Yes/no KEN - no No No Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress M&E participating countries (date: 2013) reports Officer harmonized and mainstreamed UGA - no No No Yes Yes Yes Annual Progress IGAD (date: 2013) reports Contingency plans in No KEN - 0 0 5 15 15 15 Annual Progress M&E 1 National and 1 per place in the (date: 2013) reports Officer each targeted county participating countries (14) and IGAD UGA - 0 0 1 1 1 1 Annual Progress MAAJF and (date: 2013) reports IGAD 45 Annex 2: Detailed Project Description AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT (RPLRP) A. Project Development Objective 1. The Project development objectives are 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. B. Detailed Project Description 2. The RPLRP offers an innovative, comprehensive, and flexible response to enhance drought resilience of pastoralist livelihoods. The project builds on an innovative approach by delivering regional public goods. Building on a high-level agreement, the RPLRP embodies the first attempt in the Horn of Africa to deliver country-specific outputs directly linked to region-driven goals. RPLRP innovation also applies to using ICT. Mobile phone has already begun to transform the lives of pastoral communities by speeding the information sharing on markets, prices, climate conditions, water availability, and conflict-affected areas. The project will make use of these technologies and promote a wider uptake, especially in the components related to market access and trade, and pastoral risk management. 3. The RPLRP will be implemented through a sustainable landscape approach along cross- border livestock routes and corridors. These routes and corridors will be central in targeting geographical cross-border clusters sub-counties in Kenya, sub-districts in Uganda and potentially kebeles in Ethiopia, would the country join the project in the second phase. The project will deliver investments and services using this cross-border cluster approach. The four political meta-cluster (primary Cluster) already identified by IGAD will allow further selection of the secondary clusters. Selected secondary clusters will receive a comprehensive package of investments and services. 4. Outside the clustered sub-counties/sub-districts, the RPLRP will implement a package of strategic investments and activities to address regional issues that will be identified through needs assessment and consultation processes with communities and other stakeholders. Identification and implementation of livelihood support activities will follow community demand driven processes building, whenever possible on already established participatory processes. In the case where there is no operational participatory process in place, the project will facilitate and support the establishment of such processes. 5. The RPLRP will also support conflict management and resolution between multi-level and cross-border stakeholders, providing platforms and instruments to facilitate dialogue, planning and decision-making. At the community level, the project will empower communities to improve access to water resources, sustainably manage rangelands and secure access to natural resources in general to prevent conflicts. It will build and rehabilitate markets infrastructures, as well as 46 improve the quality of veterinary services and deliver vaccination campaigns harmonized between the two countries. 6. IGAD and the RPLRP countries will coordinate to deliver this comprehensive package at the regional and national level in a consistent manner. The role of IGAD will be central in facilitating the dialogue across levels, coordinating these interventions to avoid duplications, mismatches and inconsistencies, as well as in helping the countries to harmonize their pastoralist policies. 7. To provide with flexibility during implementation, the project follows a phased approach and includes a zero-budget contingency component. Enhancing resilience in the pastoralist communities requires long-term efforts. Based on demanding countries' preparadness, the project will allow for subsequent phases to be developed, and for new countries to join in later phases through additional financing. In the event of a crisis during implementation, the zero- budget subcomponent 4.3 will enable the participating countries to reallocate project funding to respond the emergency. 8. The first phase of the project will start with investments for pastoralists' livelihood resilience in Kenya and Uganda and is described below. It will, in particular, embark on cross- country initiatives within the Karamoja cluster. Component 1: Natural Resources Management (US$29.5 million) 9. This component aims at enhancing the secure access of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities to sustainably managed pastoral-related natural resources. It supports three set of activities: (i) development of water resources, (ii) development of pasture and land, and (iii) securing access to natural resources in the ASALs and border countries. The project will include mechanisms aimed at preventing and resolving localized conflicts between settled farmers and pastoralists relative to access to natural resources, or cattle rustling. 10. This component will help update and refine the mapping systems of shared natural resources at a regional scale, including rangelands. These maps will inform the identification of sites to develop and rehabilitate water infrastructures and rangelands. The approaches, research results and innovations for the rehabilitation of the natural resources especially in the hotspots and high livestock concentration areas will be explored and scaled up. To secure access to these natural resources, this component will support the harmonization of policy and legal frameworks, as well as strategies and approaches for conflict prevention, management and resolution at the sub-regional level, with a particular focus on livestock cross-border mobility and access to natural resources. Knowledge management will be instrumental. IGAD will set up regional integrated information systems and build capacity, and countries will bring information into their planning and decision making systems. It will also build capacities of the stakeholders to sustainably manage these resources, including activities to expose the pastoral and agro-pastoral communities to experiences from other areas in the region and/or other regions. Sub-Component 1.1: Water Resources Development (US$13.2 million) 11. The first subcomponent aims at refining and disseminating regional and national maps on water resources, as well as developing and rehabilitating infrastructures for water resources with 47 regional, cross-border significance, and strengthening the community management of these infrastructures to enhance their sustainability. It will support four activities: (i) update and refine available regional mapping of water points along cross-border migration routes, (ii) domesticate available IGAD maps on water resources, (iii) support knowledge management, and (iv) coordinate identification of site for development of water infrastructure. 12. IGAD will carry out the following activities: (a) On the update and refinement of the maps, IGAD will develop the legal framework for data and map sharing, and provide the countries with a platform for sharing data on maps. (b) The technical work will be focused on improving the maps resolution, and refining maps in order to meet countries' needs. (c) Knowledge management is a cross-cutting activity to every activity in this component. Building on the existing systems, IGAD will set up an integrated information system accessible to member countries. (d) IGAD is expected to facilitate regional workshops to share best practices, and build capacity on how to effectively use maps for natural resources management. (e) Based on the previous refinement work on the maps, IGAD will inform and coordinate development of water infrastructure that will be implemented by the countries. 13. In this first subcomponent, the countries will: (a) Provide the relevant data to refine and update the maps, carry out ground truthing and further refine the new developed maps by IGAD. (b) Building on the enhanced maps, incorporate them into their planning and decision making processes. Countries will develop and rehabilitate water infrastructures. These works will be targeted and informed by the updated maps. (c) On the knowledge management, countries are expected to disseminate information for decision making, and identify and document best practices. (d) To support IGAD's activities on capacity building, the participating countries will carry out the assessment of the training needs. Sub-Component 1.2: Sustainable Land Management in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas (US$12.3 million) 14. The second subcomponent includes three outputs, related to (i) the update and refinement of regional and national maps on land resources, (ii) the rehabilitation of rangeland ecosystems with trans-boundary implications for livestock movements, and (iii) the harmonization at the national level of regional policies on rangeland management. 15. Similarly to the previous subcomponent, IGAD will: 48 (a) Develop legal framework for data and map sharing among countries, provide a platform for sharing data on maps, and scale down the maps to meet countries' needs. (b) These maps will be used to inform and coordinate trans-boundary interventions. (c) In terms of legislation and policy framework, IGAD will collect, review and harmonize the national settings to identify gaps and develop relevant policies. (d) Likewise, IGAD will transpose and accommodate supra-regional policies and guidance, such as the African Union land policy into the regions' needs. 16. Specific to this subcomponent, countries will engage as follows: (a) Provide relevant data for IGAD to enhance and refine the maps on land resources, carry out consultations on the ground, and incorporate maps into planning and decision making. (b) Use the generated information and enhanced maps to target rangelands with trans- boundary implication including livestock movements routes. These rangelands will benefit from rehabilitation and development works, using participatory approaches such as participatory rangeland management. (c) The harmonization of regional land policy across countries will need of their work to domesticate and disseminate the policies Sub-Component 1.3: Securing Access to pastoral-related Natural Resources (US$4.0 million) 17. The third subcomponent aims at securing access to pastoral-related natural resources by harmonizing conflict prevention, management and resolution strategies and approaches across border areas, and supporting an enabling policy and legal framework. Knowledge management and a regional integrated information system remain key activities. 18. Particularly, the project will facilitate the formation of a cross-boundary resilience platform along the several administrative levels in the participating countries. Support will be provided to harmonize decentralization and land use policies. These activities will build on IGAD's support to facilitate cross-boundary meetings and workshops. Countries will identify the relevant stakeholders and support the resource use committees with capacity building. With regards to the policies harmonization, IGAD will collect, review, and harmonize the policies, providing insights on gaps and developing relevant land use policies. Countries will closely support this work, providing relevant inputs and disseminating the harmonized policies on land use. This subcomponent includes IGAD-coordinated activities to demarcate and legalize traditional livestock migration routes. These activities will include provisions to guarantee access to key water points and grazing areas, to safeguard against encroachment from settled communities and commercial enterprise. Component 2: Market Access and Trade (US$26.9 million) 19. This component aims at facilitating the international and intra-regional trade of livestock and livestock products to improve the market access of the agro-pastoralists and pastoralists. The 49 component has three sub-components: (i) market support infrastructure and information system; (ii) development of livestock marketing supporting and value chain development; and (iii) Improving livestock mobility and trade in livestock and livestock products. 20. Investments in facilities and information systems under this component will be key aspects of developing and strengthening value chains. Investments will enhance physical market infrastructures, including processing facilities, in selected towns along strategic cross-border livestock routes. The component will strengthen the integration of regional and national market information systems, and explore technological options for collecting and sharing market knowledge, including information on diseases, grading and certification, taxation, and export procedures. Capacity building will target pastoral population and relevant stakeholders on information utilization. The component will strengthen the national and regional animal diseases surveillance and laboratory networks using regional strategies adopted for specific diseases and results from the World Organization for Animal Health evaluation of the performance of the Veterinary Services (OIE PVS) pathway in each country. It will support the harmonization of trade and cross border animal marketing policies (such as IGAD Livestock Policy Initiatives), tariffs, certification systems, Sanitary and Phyto-Sanitary (SPS) standards, and animal identification and traceability systems. Sub-Component 2.1: Market Support Infrastructure and Information System (US$15.3 million) 21. The investments in this sub-component will follow a gap analysis of needs detected in the cross-border market infrastructures (holding areas, cross-border markets and border veterinary offices). Based on existing work by the ADP-LAPSET initiative, cross-border consultations with the support of IGAD and community/VC actors participation, IGAD will coordinate the map and gaps analysis. These region-wide and cross-border analyses will inform countries to cover infrastructure gaps by constructing, rehabilitating, and operationalizing the already in-place infrastructure. 22. With regards to the information system, the activities under this subcomponent aim to improve the integration of the regional and national livestock marketing information systems (LMIS). IGAD will develop regional market information platform, and countries will participate in the platform design. 23. Most of the activities will have a strong national focus. Countries will: (a) Develop and integrate the relevant National Livestock Marketing Information System with the regional LMIS. (b) Develop mechanisms for dissemination of the information through electronic, print, and verbal media. (c) Build capacity of pastoral populations and relevant stakeholders on marketing information utilization and other aspects of livestock marketing and trade (auction system, grading and certification, taxation, and legal procedures for export). 50 Sub-Component 2.2: Livestock Value-Chain Support and Improving Livestock Mobility and Trade (US$11.6 million) 24. This third subcomponent has three lines of work on regional trade policies and standards, animal identification and certification systems, and region-wide animal diseases surveillance and laboratory networks. Each line strongly builds on the lead and the coordination role by IGAD. (a) IGAD will coordinate the harmonization and simplification of regional trade policies and standards in IGAD/EAC/COMESA/ SADC areas (e.g. structured trade arrangements, informal cross-border trade associations (ICBTAs), COMESA Green Pass initiative, ICPALD initiatives. The countries will review the national policies and regulations and align them with the regional policies and protocols. (b) IGAD will coordinate the activities to set and harmonize cross-border trade SPS, and other trade-facilitating tools (traceability, standards). The countries will be responsible for implementing the new standards and protocols, while at the same time make the policy, legal and regulatory requirements accessible by livestock marketing and trade participants. The participating countries will also need to build capacity of relevant government officials and private sector people working in the livestock trade on basic legal and regulatory requirements. (c) IGAD will coordinate the development of harmonized livestock identification, certification and traceability system. Countries will participate in the design and implement the identification and certification systems. Only Kenya will pilot the traceability component. (d) With regards to the marketing support, the RPLRP will promote regional unions of pastoral fora, following the cases of the pastoral forum in Ethiopia and the Sudan Pastoral Association. Capacity building will be built in cooperatives. IGAD will coordinate the formation of the regional platform, and the countries will support their relevant national chapters. (e) The final output in this subcomponent addresses concerns on animal health and on strengthening surveillance mechanisms and laboratory networks across the region. The activities include supporting cross-border surveillance teams and national and Regional Reference Laboratories in collaboration with AU-IBAR-IGAD-SMP, VET-Gov. AU-IBAR-IRCM, and OIE-FAO initiatives. Countries will be supported to upgrade veterinary laboratory services through provision of reagents, equipment and training. Component 3: Livelihood Support (US$25.4 million) 25. This component aims at enhancing the livelihoods of pastoralist and agro-pastoralist communities. This component includes three sub-components: (i) livestock production and health, (ii) food and feed production, and (iii) livelihoods diversification. 26. This component will have a strong national focus with activities such as income diversification, fodder/feed production, animal health, and breed improvement. Regional 51 diseases and best practices in providing innovative responses will be documented and exchanged to inform regional and national policy frameworks. Capacity building includes regional workshops and exchange visits, and farmer led learning experiences like pastoral field schools. Breed-related activities will build on participatory approaches, through communities based livestock breeding programs and pastoral field schools, and allow for partnering with relevant stakeholders, like the Livestock Breeders Organization and Livestock Recording Center and Kenya Agricultural Research Institute in Kenya, or the agricultural research institutions like NABUI, SERERE and KAI in Uganda. Some activities will strongly pivot around the regional coordination by IGAD, such as harmonizing and coordinating vaccination campaigns, disease surveillance, sharing of experiences and best practices in animal health service deliveries, disseminating technologies and innovations from breeding centers and food and feed conservation practices, as well as harmonizing sub-regional breeds strategies and programs on regional genetic improvement and conservation. IGAD will work closely with Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (IBAR) of the African Union, and for the activities on livelihood diversification, through its IGAD Centre for Pastoral Areas and Livestock Development (ICPALD). Sub-Component 3.1: Livestock Production and Health (US$18.1 million) 27. In this subcomponent, activities are arranged around three outputs dealing with: disease and vector surveillance and control services, access of pastoral community to animal health services, and breed improvement. 28. The strengthening and harmonization of disease and vector surveillance and control services in targeted drought prone areas will build on: (a) Documentation of priority regional diseases in pastoral communities. IGAD will convene and consolidate the existing documentation, and disseminate the list of agreed priority regional diseases. Countries will feed into this process providing and validating data on priority disease. (b) Knowledge management and documentation of best practices and innovations, e.g. use of CAHWs and pastoral field schools. This activity will include regional workshops and exchange visits. IGAD will organize a knowledge fair forum and a workshop to discuss on the domestication of the African Union pastoral policy framework, among other regional policies. The countries will similarly provide data and implement the best practices that have been identified. (c) Research on unknown camel disease. IGAD will mobilize funding for research, in cooperation with national research institutes, to identify disease surveillance issues in the current policy to share with the member states and will organize review and aligning their national legislation. National research institutes will cooperate in the research activities. 29. To enhance the capacity of the pastoral community to access animal health services, the RPLRP will work on knowledge management and deliver specific responses to diseases through vaccination campaigns. Support will be also provide to assist local production of selected 52 vaccine on the basis of a needs and risks assessment. In addition, IGAD will coordinate dialogue between member states to harmonize country specific vaccination programs, and countries will implement the campaigns. Following the country-led assessment of knowledge needs, IGAD will organize harmonization and coordination meetings, workshops as well as exchange visits to facilitate experience sharing. Countries will finance the exchange visits. Pastoral community capacity for to detect and report diseases in a timely way will be strengthened. 30. The RPLRP support to the breeding activities will follow four activities: (a) Identification of breeding centers. Based on data provided by the countries, IGAD will stock take of operational breeding centers for ASALs in the region. (b) Disseminating technologies and information. IGAD will identify appropriate technologies that can be scaled up at regional level from the breeding centers. The participating countries will adopt those technologies that fit their settings. (c) Harmonize breeding strategy for ASALs. IGAD will identify gaps in the country breeding strategies those areas, and countries are expected to review those strategies to fill the gaps. (d) Capacity building of the breeding centers. Based on the training needs identified by the countries, IGAD will provide demand driven training to the centers Sub-Component 3.2: Food and Feed Production (US$3.9 million) 31. This second subcomponent will promote and disseminate drought tolerant food and feed crop technologies. Sharing innovations and knowledge on feed and food conservation and on economic analyses of interventions will be central for the single activity of this sub-component. Based on the needs identified by the countries, IGAD will set a knowledge fair forum, and organize a workshop to share practices. The countries will provide the inputs and implement the best practices identified. The component will also invest in micro irrigation schemes to commercialize fodder production. 32. RPLRP will support improvements in fodder bulking and conservation, establishing small- scale irrigation /water management schemes for crop and fodder production and dry season grazing on the basis of feasibility studies and consultations with local communities, preparing management guidelines and training users associations for key infrastructures (water, fodder bank, etc.); undertake adaptive research and introduce drought tolerant fodder species in agro- pastoral areas; and build and rehabilitate storage and post-harvest facilities adapted to pastoral conditions and agricultural production. Identification of infrastructures will be conducted through feasibility studies involving consultations with local communities. Capacity building activities will use community-based activities through field demonstrations and pastoral groups, and provide training and equipment aimed at fodder bulking and conservation, and management of storage facilities. Sub-Component 3.3: Livelihoods Diversification (US$3.4 million) 33. The final sub-component will address knowledge generation and sharing around alternative livelihood opportunities, with special regard to gender mainstreaming. IGAD will keep a convener role to facilitate information sharing by organizing knowledge fair forum and 53 workshops. These activities will provide countries with actions and guidance to implement alternative livelihoods that can be identified and strengthened in the ASALs. As a complement to the previous activities on value chain development, in this subcomponent work will be carried out to identify international markets and develop value chains for alternative products to livestock products. The countries will identify priority products for international markets, and IGAD will carry out the market survey for identified product, and provide information on international and regional markets. Component 4: Pastoral Risk Management (US$10.2 million) 34. This component aims at enhancing drought-related hazards preparedness, prevention and management. It has two sub-components: (i) pastoral risk early warning and response systems and (ii) drought disaster risk management. 35. The component will strengthen and harmonize the early warning systems and response mechanisms at the national and regional levels. To mitigate the impact of extreme events, it will implement ex-ante risk reduction measures, including innovative financing mechanisms (e.g., index-based livestock insurance), and capacity building and community awareness to operationalize the Livestock Emergency Guidelines Standards (LEGS). The component builds on an IGAD-led EWR platform to share knowledge and innovative practices that will inform action of national authorities to deal with pastoral risk early warning and response. Harmonization of national EWR systems covers the methodologies for risk profiling on natural hazards and climate vulnerability. This component will also help mainstream and institutionalize harmonized policies related to Drought Disaster Risk Management. The activities will include developing and operationalizing contingency plans and guidelines, to be harmonized at a regional level, and setting up contingency funding mechanisms for effective responses. Sub-Component 4.1: Pastoral Risk Early Warning and Response Systems (US$7.4 million) 36. This subcomponent will finance activities to strengthen and harmonize the EWS across the region, and to build capacities to turn the EW into action: (a) Knowledge and experience sharing to identify best practices and interventions in national early warning and rapid response systems, livestock-insurance schemes, and pilot projects. IGAD will organize and facilitate events to build capacity (workshops, study tours, trainings, etc.) of national experts and senior officials. Countries are expected to later transfer and domesticate these experiences and best practices at the national level. (b) Regional and national risk profiling, e.g. natural hazards vulnerability, climate, and institutional' capacities. IGAD will harmonize the methodologies and train the member states to carry out the risk profiling. Building on the inputs provided by the countries, IGAD will later consolidate the regional risk profile. (c) Establishment of a regional EWR platform in an IGAD appointed institution and make it compatible with national systems. IGAD will establish and operationalize a region-wide EWR platform to collect and analyze information for dissemination 54 among relevant national authorities to guide their action. Countries will develop the works to link early warning information to early action among pastoralists. 37. The second output of this subcomponent aims at developing and strengthening capacities to design and implement contingency plans. A first activity will be a 'regional training of trainers' to build capacity on good practices, guidelines, Standard Operating Procedures to develop and formulate contingency plans. IGAD will organize the events and develop the guidelines and the training modules. Following these region-wide training events, the countries will further carry out the events at the national and sub-national levels. As a result of this comprehensive training process, countries will formulate and disseminate their own contingency plans. These national plans will later feed into a regional Contingency Plan to be elaborated by IGAD. Based on the existing organizational structures and capacities, and the capacities demanded to implement these regional and national plans, further assessments of training and capacity building needs will follow. Sub-Component 4.2: Drought Disaster Risk Management (US$2.8 million) 38. This second subcomponent complements the capacity developed in the first subcomponent and focuses specifically on dealing with the disaster risk management related to droughts. It covers three lines of work on ex-ante risk reduction measures, DDRM policies, and contingency funding. The first activity aims to develop ex-ante risk reduction measures for effective DRM and monitor their implementation. This activity consists on joint trainings of facilitators/trainers of IGAD and countries on DRM-related key guidelines and standards such as LEGS. The second activity supports the harmonization, operationalization, mainstreaming, and institutionalization of DDRM policies and strategies at the central and line ministry levels. IGAD will provide the training and facilitate regional workshops to support the efforts by the countries to mainstream DDRM policies and strategies into all line ministries and institutions. The third activity will address the creation and operationalization of regional and national contingency funds. Based on the guidelines and criteria prepared by IGAD, this activity will focus on building capacities at the country level to access the IGAD regional DDRM contingency fund. Countries will also create mechanisms (fiduciary and administrative capacities) for receiving and disbursing the funds. Sub-Component 4.3: Contingency Emergency Response (ZERO budget)60 39. Following an adverse natural event that causes a major natural disaster, the respective governments may request the Bank to re-allocate project funds to support response and reconstruction. This component would draw resources from the unallocated expenditure category and/or allow the government to request the Bank to re-categorize and reallocate financing from other Project components to partially cover emergency response and recovery costs. This component could also be used to channel additional funds should they become available as a result of an eligible emergency. 40. Detailed operational guidelines acceptable to the Bank for the implementation of the Contingency Emergency Response component under RPLRP will be prepared during the first year of project implementation. Disbursements would be made against a positive list of critical 6o As agreed in Addis June 2013, it needs inputs from IGAD in agreement with the countries. 55 goods or the procurement of works, and consultant services required to support the immediate response and recovery needs. All expenditures under this component, should it be triggered, will be in accordance with paragraph 11 of OP 10.00 and will be appraised, reviewed and found to be acceptable to the Bank before any disbursement is made. In accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 of OP 10.00, this component would provide immediate, quick-disbursing support to finance goods (positive list agreed with the Governments), works, and services needed for response, mitigation, and recovery and reconstruction activities. Operating costs eligible for financing would include the incremental expenses incurred for early recovery efforts arising as a result of the impact of major natural disasters. 41. Goods, Works and Services under this component would be financed based on review of satisfactory supporting documentation presented by the government including adherence to appropriate procurement practices in emergency context. All supporting documents for reimbursement of such expenditures will be verified by the internal auditors of the Governments and by the Project Director, certifying that the expenditures were incurred for the intended purpose and to enable a fast recovery following the damage caused by adverse natural events, before the Application is submitted to the Bank. This verification should be sent to the Bank together with the Application. 42. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Goods include: (i) food and agricultural inputs; (ii) inputs for livestock; (iii) construction materials; water, land and air transport equipment, including supplies and spare parts; (iv) school supplies and equipment; (v) medical supplies and equipment; (vi) petroleum and fuel products; (vii) construction equipment and industrial machinery; and (viii) communications equipment. 43. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Works may include urgent food distribution destocking of livestock, infrastructure works (repairs, rehabilitation, construction, etc.) to mitigate the risks associated with the disaster for affected populations. Specific eligible expenditures under the category of Services may include urgent studies (either technical, social, environmental, etc.) necessary as a result of the effects of the disaster (identification of priority works, feasibility assessments, delivery of related analyses, etc.). Component 5: Project Management and Institutional Support (US$25 million) 44. This component will focus on all aspects related to overall project management and institutional strengthening at national and regional levels for drought resilience. The component will have two sub-components: (i) Project Management, Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning; and (ii) National and Regional Institutional Support. It will provide technical and investment support to enhance provision of services by relevant national and regional institutions on drought resilience. Given the complexity of governance issues in remote areas like the ASALs, the two countries will make a strong effort to put in place and improve governance and social accountability mechanisms, through record keeping, reporting, establishing and operating an integrated management information system, communication strategy, and complaint and grievance mechanisms. 56 Subcomponent 5.1: Project Management, M&E, Learning, Knowledge Management and Communication (US$20.3 million) 45. The national project coordination units will be hosted by the Ministries in charge of implementing the project in the two countries. This sub-component will support staff salaries, operating costs and key studies aiming at preparing or documenting project's interventions. M&E activities will include regular monitoring of implementation performance and results, annual outcome evaluations, annual thematic studies, technical audit of infrastructures, and case studies. The M&E activities will provide the basis to disseminate the lessons learned of the project at the local, national and regional level. At the three levels, learning activities will include cross-country learning activities supported by IGAD. Subcomponent 5.2: Regional and National Institutional Support (US$4.7 million) 46. It will provide technical and investment support to enhance provision of services by relevant national and regional institutions on drought resilience. This sub-component will build capacities in IGAD and its specialized agencies, such as the CEWARN, and support a greater engagement of the two countries into the IGAD relevant decision- and policy-making processes on dry lands and pastoral areas. The sub-component will also promote inter-ministerial collaboration, be it among the two countries or within each country, and among IGAD, the Governments and non-public organizations (i.e. livestock traders, pastoralists unions) in order to build these organizations' capacities. 47. Indicative cumulative disbursement plans for Kenya, Uganda and IGAD are indicated in the table below (subject to change during project implementation): Country FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 (US$ million) (US$ million) (US$ million) (US$ million) (US$ million) (US$ million) Kenya 1.0 19.74 41.58 60.14 70.44 77 Uganda 0.0 8.8 24.50 32.12 36.30 40 IGAD 0.0 1.52 2.69 3.78 4.48 5.0 TOTAL: 1.0 30.0 68.7 96.0 111.2 122.0 57 Table 2: Breakdown of RPLRP Regional Activities Component 1: NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT61 Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities62 Subcomponent 1.1: Water Resources Development OUTPUT 1: Regional/national maps available of water resource uses and users (for investments) refined and disseminated (Al) Update and Refine available regional mapping of a) Develop legal framework for data and map sharing a) Provide relevant data water resources as a continuation of IGAD-HYCOS b) Provide for platform sharing data on maps b) Carry out ground truthing c) Improve the maps resolution -Increase scale c) Further refine the new developed maps by IGAD (A2) Domesticate available IGAD maps on water Keep refining maps to meet countries needs Incorporate maps into planning and decision making resources (A3) Support knowledge management a) Set up integrated information system accessible to a) Disseminate information for decision making member countries b) Identify and document best practices b) Facilitate regional workshops to share best practices c) Carry out training needs assessment c) Build capacity on how to effective use maps and on NRM OUTPUT 2: Infrastructures for water resources access developed / rehabilitated (Al) Coordinate identification of site for development of Use maps to inform and coordinate development of a) Use information/ maps to target development and water infrastructure water infrastructure rehabilitation of water infrastructure b) Develop/ rehabilitate water infrastructure Subcomponent 1.2: Sustainable Land Management in pastoral and agro-pastoral areas OUTPUT 1: Available regional/national mapping of land resources and use related issues refined and protected (Al) Update and Refine available regional mapping of a) Develop legal framework for data and map sharing a) Provide relevant data regional land based ecosystems b) Provide for platform sharing data on maps b) Carry out ground truthing (A2) Mapping of areas with transboundary implications a) Scale down the maps a) Incorporate maps into planning and decision on the RPD intervention areas to scale 1 :100000. b) Keep refining maps to meet countries needs making I I_ b) Disseminate information for decision making 61 Implementation will be concentrated not exclusively within identified cross-border clusters and on the livestock movement routes- inception. 62 To be executed by each participating country (Kenya and Uganda) 58 Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities62 OUTPUT 2: Rangeland ecosystems with trans-boundary implications including for Livestock movements are rehabilitated (Al) Coordinate identification of areas for development Use maps to inform and coordinate transboundary a) Use information/ maps to target rehabilitation and and rehabilitation of rangelands interventions development of rangelands with trans-boundary implication including livestock movements routes b) Develop/Rehabilitate rangeland OUTPUT 3. Policies at regional level on rangeland management are harmonized (Al) Develop / harmonize policies and legislation a) Collect ,review and harmonize Identify and provide relevant policies and legislation for b) Identify gaps and develop relevant policies harmonization (A2) Domesticate the AU land policy to the IGAD Refine AU policy to meet IGAD needs Domesticate and disseminate the harmonized policies region (A3) Knowledge management a) Set up integrated information system accessible to a) Disseminate information for decision making member countries b) Identify and document best practices b) Facilitate regional workshops to share best practices c) Carry out training needs assessment c) Build capacity on how to effectively use maps and on NRM Subcomponent 1.3: Securing Access to pastoral-related Natural Resources OUTPUT 1. Conflict prevention, management and resolution strategies and approaches are harmonised (Al) Facilitate formation of cross-boundary resilience Support the cross boundary meetings and workshops (all a) Identify stakeholders(all inclusive) of the resilience platform (all inclusive). inclusive) platform b) Support resource use committees in capacity building (A2) Knowledge management. a) Set up integrated information system accessible to a) Disseminate information for decision making member countries, b) Identify and document best practices b) Facilitate regional workshops to share best practices c) Carry out training needs assessment c) Build capacity on how to effective use maps and on NRM (A3) Set up a regional information integrated system Legal framework for data and information sharing Set up a platform for accessing, disseminating and I sharing information OUTPUT 2. Policy and legal framework for secured access to natural resources supported (Al) Support harmonization of decentralization policies a) Collect,review and harmonize the policies a) Identify and provide relevant policies and and land use policies. b) Identify gaps and develop relevant land use policies legislation for harmonization b) Domesticate and disseminate the harmonized land use policies 59 Component 2: MARKET ACCESS AND TRADE Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities63 Subcomponent 2.1: Market Support Infrastructure and Information System OUTPUT 1: Livestock Marketing Infrastructure improved (Al) Map and gap analysis of cross-border market Coordinate Map and gap analysis of cross-border market Map and gap analysis of cross-border market infrastructure (e.g. ADP-LAPSET initiative) infrastructure infrastructure (A2) Development and improvement of market support a) Construction of infrastructure where there is a gap infrastructure (holding areas, cross-border markets, b) Rehabilitate the existing infrastructure border veterinary offices, etc.)(National - Regional) c) Operationalize the infrastructure OUTPUT 2. Regional livestock marketing information system strengthened (Al) Strengthen livestock marketing information system Develop regional market information platform Participate in the design of the regional platform at regional (IGAD-LMIS and national -LMIS) (A2) Develop and integrate National Livestock Develop/upgrade National market information platform Marketing Information System s with the regional linked with the regional platform market information system (A3) Development of mechanisms for dissemination of Development of mechanisms for dissemination of the the information through electronic, print, verbal media. information through electronic, print, verbal media (A4) Capacity building of pastoral populations and Capacity building of pastoral populations and relevant relevant stakeholders on marketing information stakeholders on marketing information utilization utilization and other aspects of livestock marketing and trade (auction system, grading and certification, taxation, and legal procedures for export). Subcomponent 2.2: Livestock Value-Chain Support and Improving Livestock Mobility and Trade OUTPUT 1. Regional trade policies and standards harmonized and simplified (Al) Harmonization of regional trade policies in Coordinate Harmonization of regional trade policies Participate in harmonization of regional trade policies IGAD/EAC/COMESA/ SADC areas (e.g. structured trade arrangements (STR), informal cross-border trade associations (ICBTAs), COMESA Green Pass initiative, ICPALD initiatives 63 To be executed by each participating country (Kenya and Uganda) 60 Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities" (A2) Review of national policies and regulations and Review of national policies and regulations and align align them with the regional policies and protocols them with the regional policies and protocols (A3) Setting and harmonizing cross-border trade SPS, Coordinate Setting and harmonizing cross-border trade Implement harmonized cross-border trade SPS, and other and other trade-facilitating tools (traceability, standards) SPS, and other trade-facilitating tools trade-facilitating tools (A4) Making the policy, legal and regulatory Policy dissemination to stakeholders requirements accessible by livestock marketing and trade participants (A5) Capacity building of relevant government officials Capacity building of public and private sector on basic and private sector people working in the livestock trade legal and regulatory requirements on basic legal and regulatory requirements OUTPUT 2. Animal identification and certification systems in the region strengthened and harmonized (Al) Coordination and harmonization of livestock and Coordinate development of harmonized livestock Participate in development of harmonized livestock livestock products identification, certification and identification, certification and traceability system identification, certification and traceability system traceability system - IGAD (A2) Implementation of harmonized animal a) Implementation of harmonized animal identification identification and certification system and certification system b) Pilot Traceability6 OUTPUT 3. Regional animal diseases surveillance and laboratory network strengthened (Al) Strengthening regional diseases surveillance and Coordinate regional diseases surveillance and laboratory Implement national and regional diseases surveillance laboratory networks (cross-border surveillance teams, networks and laboratory networks national and Regional Reference Laboratories in collaboration with AU-IBAR-IGAD -SMP,VET-Gov. AU-IBAR-IRCM, and OIE-FAO initiatives). (National - regional) (A2) Upgrading of veterinary laboratory services through Upgrading of veterinary laboratory services through provision of reagents, equipment and training = National provision of reagents, equipment and training = National 6 Uganda will not execute this activity. 61 Component 3: LIVELIHOOD SUPPORT Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities65 Subcomponent 3.1: Livestock Production and Health OUTPUT 1. Disease and vector surveillance and control services strengthened and harmonized at national and regi nal levels (Al) Documentation of priority regional diseases in Convene consolidate document , and disseminate the list To provide and validate priority diseases data pastoral communities of agreed priority regional disease. (A2) Knowledge management development and To set knowledge fair forum Provide data and implement the best practices that have documentation of best practices &innovations e.g. use of been identified CAHWs, pastoral field schools and Regional workshops and exchange visits (A3) Domestication of AU pastoral policy framework Organizing the workshop and experience sharing Identification of priority need to participate on the and regional policies practices workshop (A4) Research on unknown camel disease a) Identifying disease surveillance issues in the current a) MS will compare with their national legislation and policy and share with MS domesticate b) IGAD mobilize resource for research b) MS research institute will cooperate in the research activities OUTPUT 2. Capacity of the pastoral Community to access sustainable Animal Health services enhanced (Al) Facilitate Experience sharing a) Facilitate exchange visits a) Fdenti e knowledge sharing need b) Convene harmonization and coordination meetings (A2) Harmonization and coordination of vaccination Coordinate dialogue between MS to harmonize country a) Communicate their vaccination programs specific vaccination programs. b) Roll out the harmonized vaccination programs (A3) Documentation of best practices for animal health a) To set knowledge fair forum a) Provide data and implement the best practices that service delivery b) Organizing the work shop and experience sharing have been identified practices b) Identification of priority need to participate on the workshop OUTPUT 3. Breeding strategy and breed improvement programs supported (Al) Identification of breeding centers already doing Stock taking of breeding centers in ASALs Providing available data on breeding centers breeding for ASALs in region (A2) Disseminating technologies and information from Identify appropriate technologies that can be scaled up at Adoption of the appropriate technologies these centers to MS. regional level. 65 To be executed by each participating country (Kenya and Uganda) 62 Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities65 . a) Countries provide Breeding strategies to IGAD (A3) Harmonize breeding strategy for ASALs of the Gap analysis of country breeding strategies for ASALs relevant to ASALs different countriesrevatoASL different countries b) Review breeding strategies to fill the gaps (A4) Capacity building of the breeding centers Provide demand driven training to the centers Identify the training needs Subcomponent 3.2: Food and Feed Production OUTPUT 1. Drought tolerant Food and feed crop technologies will be promoted and disseminated (Al) Sharing of technologies and innovations on feed a) To set knowledge fair forum . a) Provide data and implement the best practices that and food conservation, economic analyses of b) Organizing the work shop for experience sharing have been identified interventions practices b) Identification of priority need and participate on the workshop Subcomponent 3.3: Livelihoods Diversification OUTPUT 1: Alternative livelihood opportunities are identified and strengthened (Al) Information sharing on appropriate livelihood a) To set knowledge fair forum a) Provide data and implement the alternative alternatives with special regard to gender mainstreaming. b) Organizing the work shop for appropriate livelihoods that have been identified alternative livelihoods sharing b) Identification of alternative livelihood needs need and participate on the workshop (A2) Identification of international markets and a) Carry out market survey for identified products Identify priority products for international markets development of value chains for alternative products to b) Provide information on international and regional livestock products. markets Component 4: PASTORAL RISK MANAGEMENT Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities6 Subcomponent 4.1: Pastoral Risk Early Warning and Response Systems OUTPUT 1: EWS strengthened and harmonized in the region, and capacities built to turn EWinto action (Al) Knowledge and experience sharing to identify best Organize and facilitate capacity building (workshops, Domesticate best practices and interventions acquired practices and interventions in national early warning study tours, trainings etc.) for national experts and senior from the regional capacity building systems , National Rapid Response Systems, Livestock- officials insurance schemes / pilot projects for adoption in the 66 To be executed by each participating country (Kenya and Uganda) 63 Project regional activities IGAD activities Country activities66 region (A2) Regional and national risk profiling e.g natural a) Harmonize the methodologies for member states Carry out Risk profiling and disseminate at all levels hazards vulnerability, climate, and institutional' b) Training MS in methodology use. capacities c) Consolidate the regional risk profile (A3) Establishment of a regional EWR platform in an Establish and operationalize regional EWR platform to Link early warning information to early action among IGAD appointed institution and make it compatible with collect and analyze information for dissemination to pastoralists national systems relevant national authorities to guide action OUTPUT 2: Contingency plans developed and strengthened (Al) Regional Training of Trainers / capacity building a) Organize regional training of trainers in a) Train different levels at national level in on good practices, guidelines, SOP to develop and formulation of contingency plans contingency planning formulate Contingency Plans b) Develop guidelines and training modules b) Formulate and disseminate contingency plans at national level. (A2) IGAD to develop a regional Contingency Plan that IGAD to compile regional contingency plans Submit contingency plans to regional level is linked to national ones (A3) Analyze and build capacities of existing response Assess existing national structures' response capacity Assess existing national structures' response capacity structures at all levels Subcomponent 4.2: Drought Disaster Risk Management OUTPUT 1: Ex-ante risk reduction measures for effective DRM are developed and implementation monitored (Al) Joint trainings of facilitators/trainers of IGAD and Train the trainers. TOTs will cascade the trainings at national levels. countries on DRM-related key guidelines/standards such as: LEGS OUTPUT 2: DDRMpolicies are harmonized, operationalized, mainstreamed, and institutionalized at central and line ministry levels (Al) Harmonization and adoption of DDRM policies Facilitate regional workshops Mainstream DDRM policies and strategies into all line and strategies ministries and institutions OUTPUT 3: Contingency Funds (regional & national) created and operationalized (Al) Building countries capacities to access the IGAD IGAD to support the development of RDRM Create mechanisms (fiduciary and administrative regional DRM contingency fund (guidelines) contingency fund guidelines and country criteria for capacities) for receiving and disbursing the funds assessing those funds 64 Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT (RPLRP) I. Project Institutional and Implementation Arrangements 1. RPLRP 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 and to the countries to implement activities at the regional, national and sub-national levels. Implementation of the RPLRP will rely on existing governmental structures and community institutions. Implementation will be decentralized and sub-national governments will assume primary responsibility for executing many project activities. IGAD 2. IGAD Secretariat will set up a Djibouti-based RPLRP Coordination Unit within the IDDRSI67 Regional Platform Coordination Unit. This regional coordination unit is placed under IGAD Steering Committee and the Committee of Directors. The core functions of this Platform include: coordination of resources mobilization, regional programming and M&E services, regional knowledge management, and regional capacity development. The RPLRP Unit will coordinate the implementation of the cross-boundary interventions; provide a platform for technical assistance, and support policy dialogue with countries. 3. The executing unit for the region-level activities will be IGAD Division of Agriculture and Environment, and IGAD Divisions and specialized institutions (ICPAC, CEWARN, ISSP, ICPALD, STVS) will support the implementation. As required, these units will hire consultants, 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 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. 67 The IDDRSI Strategy aims at addressing the effects of drought and related shocks in the IGAD region. It followed an inclusive and participatory process that involved private and public stakeholders from member states, and consultations with UN agencies and donors. The strategy includes seven priority intervention areas: equitable access and sustainable use of natural resources; market access; equitable access to livelihood support and basic social services; DRM capabilities and preparedness for effective response; generation and use of research, knowledge, technology and innovations; conflict prevention and resolution, and peace building; and coordination mechanisms, institutional arrangements and partnerships. 65 Figure 3: RPLRP Implementation and Institutional Arrangements in IGAD Pol icy guidancE, oversht, d-ision makng Coordinatn, planning monitorirg Colnt ofgovernitnaaroram I Coodinatr ofRPLRP Coordinator of KoldeCapacity rgamn Coordination Dvopment PUnit Kenya 4. RPLRP will be implemented at national and county levels in Kenya. At both levels, steering committees will be responsible for major decision making, providing oversight and technical guidance for implementation of the Kenya-RPLRP. The National and County Steering Committees (NPSC & CPSC) will oversee activities funded through both the central and devolved funding mechanisms. The functions common to both NPSC and CPSC include: review and approve the annual work plans and budgets; monitor the implementation progress and reporting; oversee bi-annual joint review and implementation support missions; recommend implementation and promotion of identified best practices and policies; ensure that activities are well coordinated with other development programs, and that interventions contribute to the respective County and the National Medium Term Plan (MTP); ensure that measures are taken that will result in project sustainability. National level 5. Overall responsibility for the project relies on the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MALF), that will be the project-implementing agency at the national and county level. Within the MALF, the department responsible for livestock development will designate a project coordinator for the entire period of the project. The project coordinator shall be responsible for the day-to-day coordination of the entire project. There will also be Component Coordinators for the four components of the project. And in line with Bank guidelines the GoK will also second an environmental specialist with requisite qualifications. The necessary support staff, including an accountant and a procurement specialist, will support the coordinator. 66 Figure 4: RPLRP Implementation and Institutional Arrangements in Kenya i Policy guidance, oversight, NainlPrjc, IRM Coo dintn decision making I Ageny (TB D)] Coordination, plann~ing, Ckair Princip Secretary, State - monitoring Dept of Livestock, MALF I National Project Coordination, collaboration, linplementation Unit > resource-sharing Host agency State Relevant parallel/existing Departhment ofoLivestock, MgALF r ance rragements eCounty Stakeholder oC oodiat Forums CCoordinati (From WB ASDP') rl -------Relevantp-rllel/existin IFkak: Cbief Oficein County Project - is1 (rmWBADI C) c.g f hiefto ofir.Cut rjc dbargef tvestok afair4ervice Unit Sub-county Services Units NOTE: (1) World Bank Agricultural Sector Development Program. 6. The National Project Steering Committee (NPSC: The NPSC will be established and chaired by the State Department of Livestock, Directorate of Livestock in MALF. The committee will be responsible for technical guidance for implementation of the Kenya-RPLRP. Relevant Sub-committees will be formed to handle specific issues on behalf of the Steering Committee. The NSC will be chaired by the Principal Secretary responsible for matters of Livestock, in the MALF. Membership will be comprised from, Principal Secretaries or their designated appointees from the (i) National Treasury, (ii) State Departments for Coordination of National Government, (iii) Devolution, (iv) Water Development, (v) Environment, (vi) Relevant stakeholders (e.g. KCA, KARI, KWS, KLMC, KLBO ILRI and Universities), (vii) one representative of non-state actors, (viii) Directors of Livestock Production, (ix) Veterinary Services, (x) Water Development, (xi) CEO of the NDMA, (xii) One County Executive Member responsible for matters of Livestock appointed by the Council of Governors, (xiii) Two pastoral associations representatives, (xiv) One male pastoralist, and (xv) One female pastoralist. The Head of Finance Unit, the Head of the Accounting and the Head of the Procurement Unit in MALF will also be invited to attend the NSC meetings. The NSC will meet quarterly and be responsible for: (i) approving the annual work plans and budgets, and (ii) monitoring of the implementation progress and reporting. Other functions of the NSC will be to spearhead formation of county project teams; convene the project steering committee and other national meetings; Constitute the national project Secretariat, Facilitate implementation of relevant project interventions in the context of resilience to drought and sustainable livelihoods; and be 67 the entry point for development partners and other funding agencies in this project. Decisions of the steering committees will be implemented by a project secretariat headed by the National Project Coordinator. 7. The National Project Implementation Unit (NPIU): The NPIU will be headed by a Project Team Leader (PTL) assigned by the State Department of Livestock, Directorate of Livestock in MALF. The PTL will head a technical team of PIU members including nine senior professional experts: four component heads, an M&E officer, a project accountant, procurement specialist, safeguards specialist, communications specialist, Knowledge management specialist and a community development specialist who could double as a training and gender specialist. All PIU members will be designated by MALF staff on a competitive basis from among the Kenya Project Preparation Team in consultation and concurrence of the Association. The PIU will oversee the project implementation by backstopping and facilitating the project implementation teams at counties and sub- counties to access the project resources based on the approved activities. County Level 8. County Steering Committee (CSC): The CSC will be headed by the Chief Officer in charge of livestock. The CSC will draw its membership from community representatives through pastoral associations or the resource user associations, opinion leaders, community based organizations and other relevant stakeholders working with the community within the county. The CSC will also approve sub-projects and follow up on their implementation. 9. County Project Service Team (CPST): A CPST headed by the CPC and comprising of all implementing agencies at county level will be established. Their role will be to plan, budget and monitor implementation of project activities at county level. The RPLRP CPSC will liaise with the relevant forums (including the ASAL stakeholder forum in the respective county) for necessary inputs into project planning. 10. County Project Coordination Unit (CPCU): The CPCU will be headed by the County Project Coordinators (CPCs). Other members of the county coordination unit will include an M&E officer, an Accountant, an Administrative assistant and a Secretary. The CPCU will hold the role of CSC Secretariat. The implementation of project activities at the sub county level will be done through sub-county service units (SCSU) coordinated by the CPC. 11. In Kenya broad consultations were done with stakeholders including Kenya camel association, County Governments (Mandera, Turkana, Marsabit, Baringo and Laikipia) and Professional bodies (Kenya Animal Production Society and Kenya Veterinary Association). The inputs from the stakeholders' consultations were incorporated in the project design and includes provision for participation and engagement in prioritization of the county based investments, decentralization of implementation structures to each county, linkages of proposed investments with the county integrated plans, public participation in activity design (through participatory processes) as provide in Kenyan law, articulation of the resilience issues required in the counties, financial disbursements, to separate project accounts in the county and the need for intra-county joint planning for activities that cut across counties or international boundaries. 68 Uganda 12. The RPLRP will not create new parallel implementation structures but will build on existing ones and/or ensure consistency with those proposed in Uganda's CPP. As much as feasible, the project will make use of the same implementation structures used by projects with similar objectives in the same project area. 13. The MAAIF will be the lead executing agency responsible for coordinating the implementation all the components through its departments, other key ministries/agencies 68and districts. It will also be responsible for the integration of the national interventions into the planned regional project activities. It will ensure that the project funds are administered in accordance with the approved Loan Agreement, as well as the Government of Uganda and the World Bank's policies and guidelines. The Ministry will be accountable for authorizing and verifying project transactions and will work closely with the Bank's Project Task Team, IGAD and the lead executing agencies in the other project countries. MAAIF will establish the National Project Coordination Unit (NPCU) within its Directorate of Animal Resources for executing the implementation of the Project activities as described in the sections below. Figure 5: RPLRP Implementation and Institutional Arrangements in Uganda DRR Platform (OPM) Policy guidance, oversight, IRM Coordinating decision making 10 Agency (TBD) Coordnation, planning, Chair:Pcnnannt monitoring SSecrtary, MAAIF National Project Coordiaton, collaboration, Coordination Unit -> resource-sharing Host agency; Directormte of Animal Resources, MAAIF televant parallel/existing - --- governance arrangements Chair: Clnef Adimunstrative Officer District VA Coordination Unit *-lost agency: C- Suib-co~unty~ I -Local Councils Community Committee N >of Leaders 30L ..... I (Karamaja Parliamunt) 68 The main Ministries involved in project implementation are: Ministry of Water and Environment (Component 1); Ministry of Trade, Industry and Cooperatives (Component 2); Office of the Prime Minister (Component 4), 69 National level 14. The National Steering Committee (NSC). The main responsibilities of the NSC will include: (i) providing the overall conceptual, strategic and political guidance to the NPCU for project design, implementation and coordination of project activities; (ii) ensuring overall conformity with Government and regional policies and strategies; (iii) reviewing project progress and performance; (iv) approving the AWPBs; (v) resolving any implementation problems or conflicts; and (vi) assisting the NPCU in obtaining, whenever needed, Government support to the projects. The NSC which will meet at least twice a year, will be chaired by the Permanent Secretary, MAAIF and the NPCU will serve as its secretariat. It will include representatives from all key Ministries/Agencies involved in the Project implementation, IGAD Focal Person in MAAIF, World Bank, as well as representatives of (i) Chief Administrative Officers from Project Districts (2), (ii) Research Institutions (2), Development Partners (2), NGOs (1), CSOs (2) and the formal private sector (1). 15. The National Project Coordination Unit (NPCU). The NPCU will coordinate project planning, supervision, monitoring, evaluation, knowledge learning and management of the project activities. The NPCU will be headed by the National Project Coordinator (NPC) as the overall technical manager of the project and will comprise four heads of the project's technical components (Natural Resource Management, Marketing and Trade, Livelihoods Support and Pastoral Risk Management). While these positions will be filled by Government staff through secondments, the following NPCU technical staff will be recruited on a competitive basis: (i) a Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist, (ii) a Project Accountant, (iii) Environment and Natural Resource Management Specialist, (iv) Social Development Specialist, and (v) Assistant Procurement Officer. 16. The NPCU technical staff will carry out quarterly supervisions of project activities in the 12 districts, and participate in/hold regular meetings at regional, national and district levels to plan for the project, review project progress and participate in making recommendations on decisions related to planning and implementation of project activities. They will also be responsible for preparation of quarterly and annual project performance reports, project mid-term review, and for submission of relevant reports through the Permanent Secretary MAAIF to the World Bank. 17. Specifically, the main responsibilities of the NPCU will include: (i) supervising the implementation of activities under all components; (ii) preparing the project's annual work plans and budgets (AWPBs); (iii) operating the management information system, M&E and reporting systems; (iv) contracting out, on a competitive basis as appropriate, the implementation of various project activities to implementing partners, service providers and technical assistance experts; (v) monitoring the progress of project activities and evaluating the performance of the different actors; (vi) coordinating and consolidating periodical reports from implementing units and implementing partners; (vii) providing logistical, administrative and technical backstopping to implementing partners and district as well as sub-county level implementing agencies; (viii) serving as the secretariat to the National Steering Committee; (ix) establishing and maintaining linkages with other relevant government ministries, development partners, CSOs, NGOs, as well as with IGAD and the NPCUs and counterpart institutions in the other project countries; (x) carrying out financial management and procurement of goods and services; (xi) 70 reporting regularly to Government, IGAD and World Bank on project progress; and (xii) disseminating information about the project's rationale, concept, content and progress to the concerned stakeholders and all interested parties. 18. The Technical Coordination Meetings (TCM). In addition to the half-yearly NSC meetings, there will be quarterly TCM, with aim to discuss specific technical and coordination issues and address any constraints that may be identified. The meetings will be chaired by the NPCU and will involve the technical representatives of the key implementing agencies as well as other implementing partners. District Level 19. The District Steering Committee (DSC). At the district, the existing District Technical Committees chaired by the Chief Administrative Officer and comprising the District Agricultural Officer, Veterinary Officer, NAADS Coordinator, Production/Marketing Officer, Commercial Officer, Entomologist, Engineer, Water Officer/Engineer, Forestry Officer, Community Development Officer, Environmental Officer, a representative of Local Council Five, Secretary for Production, and the Resident District Commissioners will be be expanded to include representatives from DPs, NGOs and pastoralists/farmers associations and renamed District Steering Committees (DCSs). They will oversee the implementation of the project. The DSC will provide policy guidance and financial management of the project funds, and approve the district annual work plans and budgets. The Chief Administrative Officer will serve as the overall accounting officer of the project activities and funds in the district. 20. The District Coordination Unit (DCU). The DCU will be established under the District Directorate of Animal Resources. It will be coordinated by the District Veterinary Officer as District Project Coordinator. The district will recruit or identify an officer as Assistant M&E/Data officer, accounts assistant and extension staff. The DCU will coordinate the implementation project activities at district, sub-county and community levels. The District Project Coordinator and Assistant M&E officer will prepare district annual work plans and budgets - assisted by the NPCU, carry out district and community supervision of the project activities, produce monthly and quarterly reports, organize regular meetings, field visits and exchange tours across borders. The DCU will serve as the technical Secretariat to the DSC. Community Level 21. Project implementation at the community level will be undertaken by the existing Local Council 3 working in very close collaboration with the community committee leaders known as the Karamoja Parliament. The committee of leaders/elders is known to be very influential and powerful opinion leaders within the communities in the Karamoja region. Local communities and all beneficiary groups (e.g. agro-pastoralists/pastoralists, traders/ marketers, service providers) will be fully involved in the planning, appraisal, monitoring and evaluation of project activities at the local level as described in the PIM. 71 II. Financial Management, Disbursements and Procurement II.a Financial Management 22. A Financial Management (FM) assessment was conducted on the financial management arrangements for the RPLRP. The project will be implemented by the IGAD Secretariat in Djibouti at a Regional Level and Uganda and Kenya at a National Level. In Kenya, the project will be implemented by a Project Coordination Unit (PCU) established under the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (MALF) and will cover 14 counties69 and in Uganda by the Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF) covering 12 districtso. The assessment covered all the above mentioned implementation entities. In addition, in Uganda, a sample of three districts (Moroto, Kween and Amuria) were assessed out of the 12 districts while in Kenya, FM arrangements will be put in place in the 14 counties that will each have a County Coordination Unit (CCU) for the project. However, the assessment did not cover arrangements for subcomponent 4.3 on contingency emergency response as each country will identify an Immediate Response Mechanism (IRM) Coordinating Agency during the implementation of the project. Upon identifying the IRM Coordinating Agency, a FM assessment will be conducted to determine that there are adequate FM arrangements in place before funds are disbursed to the agency. 23. The objective of the assessment was to determine whether the implementing entities have acceptable financial management arrangements in place that satisfy the Bank's Operation Policy/Bank Procedure (OP/BP) 10.00. These arrangements would ensure that the implementing entities: (i) use project funds only for the intended purposes in an efficient and economical way; (ii) prepare accurate and reliable accounts as well as timely periodic financial reports; (iii) safeguard assets of the project; and (iv) have acceptable auditing arrangements. The FM assessment was carried out in accordance with the Financial Management Manual issued by the Financial Management Sector Board on March 1, 2010. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements 24. IGAD Secretariat, MAAIF in Uganda and MALF in Kenya will be responsible for the overall implementation of RPLRP and their accounting officers who will assume overall responsibility for accounting of the project funds will be the Executive Secretary of IGAD, Permanent Secretary of MAAIF and Principal Secretary, State Department of Livestock of MALF. The institutions will be responsible for project implementation including maintaining satisfactory FM arrangements throughout the life of the project. The institutions will constitute the operational links with IDA on matters related to the implementation of the project. 69 The 14 counties are Baringo, Garissa, Isiolo, Kajiado, Laikipia, Lamu, Mandera, Marsabit, Narok, Samburu, Tana River, Turkana, Wajir and West Pokot. 70 The 12 districts are Amudat, Nakapiriprit, Moroto, Napak, Abim, Kotido, Kaabong, Kween, Katakwi, Amuria, Kumi and Bukedea. 72 Financial Management Arrangements Budgeting Arrangements 25. For IGAD, the budgeting arrangements and overall budgeting will follow the IGAD's Financial Rules and Regulations (FRR) as well as Internal Control Policy (ICP). Delays in budget preparation and particularly the approval are common and the budget control is weak. This will be mitigated by having the budgeting procedures including preparation and monitoring in the PIM. Variances analysis and budget monitoring will be included in the quarterly IFR reports submitted to the Bank. The project accountant will prepare and monitor the budget using SUN accounting information system. 26. In Uganda, budgeting for the project in the Ministry and districts will be in line with the Government budgeting cycle. At the ministry, budgeting will be guided by the existing public financial regulatory framework. Currently Uganda is using the Budget Act 2001, Public Finance and Accountability Act, 2003 and Treasury Accounting Instructions 2003 while at the districts, it will be guided by the Local Government (Financial and Accounting) Regulations 2007 and Local Government Financial and Accounting Manual 2007. Specific budget provisions will also be included in the PIM. The risk in the budget arrangements has been related to spending more than the budget allocated but this will be mitigated through close monitoring of the budget through the quarterly IFRs submitted to the Bank. In addition, the budget planning process will be informed by approved work plans to ensure budget realism. The project accountant once on board will prepare the budget and monitor it using existing accounting information system (Output Budgeting Tool) while at district level, budgeting and monitoring may be done through Microsoft Excel spreadsheets until the project acquires an accounting information system. 27. In Kenya, budgeting is guided by the Public Finance Management Act 2012 and related regulations as well as the FM Manual developed by the MALF for projects. Specific budget provisions will also be included in the PIM. Budget execution at the county level is likely to be affected by inability of CCUs to effectively monitor implementation of activities as per work plan due to vast geographical spread between counties. The PMU will ensure adequate capacity exists at CCUs to effectively monitor budget execution. The project accountant will prepare the budget and monitor it using Microsoft Excel spreadsheets until the project acquires an accounting information system. Accounting Arrangements 28. The IGAD Financial rules and regulation (FRR) which came into force on January 2012 prescribe basic accounting policies and procedures which shall be applicable to this project. This will be supplemented by the financial management provisions of the PIM. The project accounts will be prepared using the SUN accounting information system but they will need to have a good service provider to address the challenges they have been facing in order to efficiently use the accounting software. IGAD does have qualified and experienced accountants headed by a Director of Finance and Administration in place but given the workload resulting from this project, there will be need to recruit an additional accountant within three months after effectiveness. 73 29. In Uganda, the accounting function will be managed as documented in the existing public financial regulatory framework, currently the Public Finance and Accountability Act, 2003, Treasury Accounting Instructions 2003, Local Government Financial and Accounting Manual 2007, Local Government (Financial and Accounting) Regulations 2007 and the provisions of the PIM that will include requirements specific to the Bank financed project such as accountability arrangements between the MAAIF, districts and sub-counties. Although the MAAIF has an Integrated Financial Management Information System (IFMIS), the project will be preparing its accounts using Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets as the IFMIS is still being piloted for projects in two ministries. As long as the 12 districts are not on the IFMIS they may use manual accounting systems or Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets to also prepare the project accounts until the roll out of IFMIS in the project's districts. MAAIF has qualified and experienced accountants headed by the Principal Accountant and the ministry will need to recruit an additional accountant given the workload in order to efficiently prepare the project accounts. The recruitment of this additional accountant should be done within three months after effectiveness. In order to ensure that in the 12 districts, there is a qualified and experienced accountant to account for the project funds, there will be a disbursement condition to the districts to confirm with the ministry that they have an accountant before funds are disbursed to the districts. 30. In Kenya, the MALF PCU has developed a comprehensive FM manual used for projects with adequate provisions for necessary financial controls. This will be supplemented by the PIM that will describe in detail the project's accountability system between the PCU and CCU. Accounting of the project accounts at MALF will be handled by the project FM unit that is headed by a qualified Principal Accountant with adequate experience in donor funded project. At the county level, at each of the CCU's there will be need to recruit qualified and experienced county accounts assistants' to prepare the project accounts. This will be a disbursement condition to the counties as it will be essential for the CCU's to have a person prepare the accounts before receiving funds. The ministry uses a manual accounting system which runs parallel to IFMIS. The project will need to use IFMIS for project accounting. Internal Control and Internal Audit Arrangements 31. For IGAD Secretariat, the project will be using the IGAD control policy7 nwhich is adequate to ensure a good internal control system for the project. In addition project specific controls will be documented in the financial management section of the PIM. IGAD Secretariat however has internal control weaknesses as identified in the December 31, 2012 audit report/management letter and internal audit reports that need to be addressed. Bank will monitor with IGAD using an action plan to ensure these internal control issues are addressed. It was also observed that management needs to improve on addressing audit issues and it will be critical to set up the audit committee whose policy was approved by the IGAD Council in July 2012 to follow up how management is addressing audit issues. In order to ensure this is done, setting up a functional independent audit committee will be a dated covenant to be done within six months after credit effectiveness. The management committee established by the Executive Secretary to 71 IGAD Internal Control Policy ref no IGAD/CM-41/11/WP.03/b.1/1 74 assume the role of the audit committee is a temporary solution which is not seen as independent from management and thus could lead to conflicts of interest when following up audit issues. IGAD Secretariat has an internal audit unit that is staffed with five internal auditors who do both pre and post audits. Annual audit plans include project audits. The internal audit unit has a draft Internal Audit Manual72 which needs to be approved. The internal audit charter was approved recently. Given its importance, the draft Internal Audit Manual needs to be approved within six months after effectiveness and this will be a dated covenant as they are essential to have satisfactory internal audit arrangements for the project. 32. In Uganda, the internal controls are currently documented in The Public Finance and Accountability Act, 2003, Treasury Accounting Instructions 2003, Local Government Financial and Accounting Manual 2007, Local Government (Financial and Accounting) Regulations 2007 and the provisions of the PIM that will include requirements specific to the Bank financed projects. Given the fiduciary challenges faced in the agriculture sector, as a mitigation, MAAIF Internal Auditor in collaboration with the district internal auditors will be required to conduct semi- annual internal audit reviews on the project based on risk assessments and submitting the report to the Bank within 45 days after the end of each semester. In addition, Commissioner Internal Audit in the Ministry of Finance will undertake annual internal audit review of the project and it will be essential for the project to budget for this activity. These internal audit reviews will be part of the Financial Covenants for Uganda. Material weaknesses were noted in the external and internal audit reports for both the MAAIF and districts. During the assessment at district level, it was noted that there were internal audit staffing gaps that needed to be filled and where the districts had internal auditors, their technical capacity was weak and needed to be strengthened through training. 33. In Kenya, the RPLRP FM arrangements will be mainstreamed along this elaborate internal control framework, with the PMU taking the lead in executing project activities and maintaining the necessary controls. The project FM manual contains adequate internal control measures necessary to enhance accountability over project funds. MALF has an internal audit function with qualified audit staff and adequate capacity to provide fiduciary oversight over project funds. However, there will be need to ensure every county has an internal auditor who will monitor the internal control systems of the project at county level. Delayed accountability over project funds from far-flung and conflict-prone areas carries inherent risk of misuse of funds. This will be mitigated by ensuring all accountants and internal auditors are trained on the FM arrangements of the project; internal auditors conduct quarterly audits on the project based on a risk based approach and ensure their audit reports are submitted to the PCU and available to the Bank; there is a comprehensive annual FM review done by the government internal audit office that will need resources budget for under this project; training is provided for audit committees that have been seen as not very effective in order to be functional and effective when following up audit issues with management to ensure they are addressed. Internal control weaknesses identified by external auditor such as weak imprest management system and override of controls in the payment processing system that resulted in qualified audit opinion need to be addressed. 72 IGAD draft Internal Audit Manual Volume I and II dated Aug 2011 75 Governance and Anticorruption (GAC) 34. Given that this is a high risk project that will be operating in mainly areas that are insecure in both Kenya and Uganda, it will be essential to put in place the following GAC measures in addition to strengthening audits that will be done by both internal and external auditors. The additional GAC measures that will promote social accountability include: (i) encouraging transparency when transferring funds to the districts and counties by putting information on the funds transferred on official websites and popular newspapers, displaying funds received at the county and district boards as well as project budgets and audited accounts; and (ii) developing an independent complaint handling mechanism that will ensure complaints made are attended too in a timely manner and the records of the complaints properly kept. Funds Flow Arrangements 35. Banking Arrangements: MAAIF and MALF will open Designated Accounts at their central banks, that is, Bank of Uganda and Central Bank of Kenya or commercial banks acceptable to IDA consistent with existing legislation. IGAD Secretariat will open their Designated Account at a commercial bank acceptable to IDA. All Designated Accounts will be denominated in United States Dollars. All implementing entities will have a project account denominated in local currency to be opened at a commercial bank acceptable to IDA or Central Bank in the case of Kenya and Bank of Uganda. The Designated and Project accounts should be opened after the signing of the project but before effectiveness date. The details of these bank accounts and their signatories should be communicated to the Bank. The counties and districts will also have to open project bank accounts denominated in local currency in commercial banks acceptable to IDA and cleared by the Accountant General in the case of Uganda and Kenya, and their details and signatories will have to be communicated to the MALF PCU and MAAIF. 36. Funds Flow Process: All implementing entities will use the transaction based disbursement method. Upon grant effectiveness, all implementing entities will be required to submit a withdrawal application for an initial deposit to the Designated Account in an amount to be specified in the Disbursement Letter. Replenishment of funds from the Bank to the Designated Account will be made upon evidence of satisfactory utilization of the advance, reflected in statements of expenditure (SOEs) and/or on full documentation for payments above SOE thresholds. These thresholds will be set in the disbursement letter. The supporting documentation for requests for direct payment should be records evidencing eligible expenditures (copies of receipt, supplier's invoices, etc). Subsequent replenishment applications can be submitted regularly as required based on rate of use. Upon receipt of funds at the Designated Accounts in United States Dollars, funds can be transferred in local currency to the project accounts of the implementing entities from where transfers will be made to the project accounts at the districts in Uganda and counties in Kenya. Eligible payments related to the project can be made from each of these accounts. With regard to IGAD Secretariat, it is expected that they will process payments related to the specialized environment institutions that include ICPAC, CEWARN, ISSP, ICPALD and STVS. Should the arrangements change and funds are to be disbursed to these institutions for project implementation, they will need to open a project account in a commercial bank acceptable to the Bank and provide the bank account details and their signatories to IGAD Secretariat. 76 Funds Flow Diagram for Uganda and IGAD IDA D>esignaýteLd Acco>unt (U-S$) fo>r SGAD ec retarifft an-d Pre>j- t Ac co u nt (RPL RP) fiEr WGA D Se,ýcretariat an d MAAIF Dlistrict (Uganda) Project Eligible Project Payment for Account (RPLRP) .Gods Workd consultancies & proje ct man age ime nts costs Eligible Project Payme nt for coods & project manageme nts costs Funds Flow Diagram for Kenya I DA Dlesignated Account (U~s$) -reasu ry (CBK ) Exch e q u e r (National T-reasu ry MALF Deelopment Acco>u-nt (CBK) for M^AL--BK) Paywi -e nt fo>r G- o>cd5s, Wvo>r"c, 77 Disbursement Arrangements 37. All the implementing entities will use the transaction-based method of disbursements (Statements of Expenditure - SOEs). The implementing entities may subsequently shift to report based method of disbursements before or during the midterm review after the Bank is satisfied that financial management covenants in the Financing Agreement are satisfactorily being met, that is, (i) submission of quality and timely interim financial reports; (ii) submission of timely audit reports to the Bank and there are no major accountability and internal control issues; (iii) satisfactory FM arrangements are maintained. Other methods of disbursing to the Project will include reimbursements, direct payment, and use of special commitments (e.g., letters of credit). Further disbursement details will be provided in the disbursement letter. If ineligible expenditures are found to have been made from the Designated Account or Project Accounts, the implementing entities will be obligated to refund the same. If the Designated Account remains inactive for more than six months, the project may be requested to refund to the Bank to the balance in the Designated Account. (Refer: Disbursement Handbook and World Bank Disbursement Guidelines for Projects, dated May 1, 2006). Financial Reporting Arrangements 38. All implementing entities (MAAIF, MALF and IGAD Secretariat) will submit quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs), in a format agreed with the World Bank, within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter reported on. These quarterly reports will include: * Statement of Sources and Uses of Funds; * Detailed Statement of Uses of Funds by Project Activity/Component. * Designated and Project Account bank statements as well as related bank reconciliations. 39. In addition, the counties in Kenya and districts in Uganda will have to submit IFRs to the MALF PCU and MAAIF within 30 days after the end of the quarter in order to allow time to consolidate the project's IFR that is to be submitted to the Bank within 45 days after the end of the quarter. The IFR formats of the implementing units have been agreed with the Bank before negotiations as they will form part of the minutes of the negotiations. In order to mitigate risks of delays in submitting IFRs in time to the Bank training of all project accounting staff members at the IGAD Secretariat, ministries and sub-national levels in order to strengthen their skills and report on time will be undertaken. 40. All implementing entities will prepare annual accounts within three months after the end of the financial year in accordance with accounting standards acceptable to the World Bank such as International Public Sector Accounting Standards. All the implementing entities will be responsible for ensuring their reports are audited and submitted to the World Bank within six months after the end of the financial year. 78 External Auditing Arrangements 41. The Project audits will be done for each implementing entity (MAAIF, MALF and IGAD Secretariat) for the whole project and will cover sub-national levels in Uganda (districts) and Kenya (counties). In Uganda and Kenya, the audit will be done by their respective Supreme Audit Institutions who may contract private audit firms acceptable to the World Bank to conduct the project's audit on their behalf. With regard to IGAD Secretariat, the audit will be done by a private external auditor acceptable to the World Bank. All audits should be carried out in accordance with International Standards on Auditing. All Terms of Reference for audits of the implementing entities have been agreed by negotiations. Audit reports together with management letters should be submitted to the World Bank within six months after the end of the financial year. Audit reports will be publically disclosed by the World Bank in accordance with the World Bank disclosure policy. Financial Management Action Plan 42. The action plan below indicates the actions to be taken for the project to strengthen its financial management system and the dates that they are due to be completed by. Action Date due by Responsible 1 Prepare and agree the FM provisions of the PIM. Effectiveness MAAIF, and IGAD Secretariat 2 Ensuring that in the counties in Kenya and districts in Disbursement MAAIF and Uganda, funds are not disbursed unless MAAIF and MALF MALF confirm that they have a qualified and experienced accountant in Uganda and county accounts assistants in Kenya to account for project funds. 3 Recruitment of a qualified and experienced project Within 3 months after MAAIF and accountant at MAAIF and IGAD Secretariat to strengthen effectiveness (Dated IGAD accountability of project funds. Covenant) Secretariat 4 Uganda (MAAIF) and Kenya (MALF) to acquire or have Within 6 months after MAAIF and in place an accounting information system for the project effectiveness (Dated MALF given that there will be a significant volume of Covenant) transactions when implementing the project and in order to avoid errors in the accounts, it will be critical to have a computerized accounting system. 5 IGAD Secretariat to submit the approved internal audit Within 6 months after IGAD manual as well as establish an independent functional effectiveness (Dated Secretariat audit committee that will follow up with management to Covenant for the setting ensure that audit issues are being addressed as it has been up of a functional audit noted from the assessment that there is a weakness in committee only) addressing audit issues. 6 Kenya and Uganda to designate internal auditors for Within 6 months after MAAIF and districts and counties that do not have these staff as they effectiveness (Dated MALF will be essential in monitoring the internal control systems Covenant) of the project at sub-national levels. 7 Time bound Action Plan to address internal control and March 31, 2014 IGAD accountability issues raised in internal and external audit Secretariat 79 Action Date due by Responsible reports. 8 Training of all project accountants and internal auditors in Within 6 months after MAAIF, Kenya and Uganda at national and sub-national levels effectiveness MALF and IDA about the project's FM arrangements in order to ensure that there is clarity of the accountability aspects of the project's funds. 9 Strengthening of the internal audit function in Uganda and Within 6 months after MAAIF, Kenya especially at the district and county levels in order effectiveness MALF and IDA to improve on their skills to ensure that they effectively monitor compliance of the project's internal control systems at sub-national level. 10 Strengthening the audit committee arrangements in Within 6 months after MAAIF, Uganda and Kenya at both national and sub-national levels effectiveness MALF and IDA in order to ensure there is an effective mechanism of following up audit recommendations to enhance the internal control system and accountability. 11 Developing an independent complaint handling Within 6 months after MAAIF and mechanism that will ensure that complaints made are effectiveness MALF attended too in a timely manner and complaint records are properly kept. 12 In order to mitigate risk identified in Uganda and Kenya, Annually (Financial MAAIF and conduct semi-annual financial management review of the Covenant) MALF project. This will be done under the coordination of the government internal audit office/department in Uganda. Effectiveness Conditions 43. The project to prepare a PIM with FM provisions that are acceptable to the Bank. Financial Covenants 44. Financial covenants are the standard ones as stated in the Financing Agreement Schedule 2, Section 11 (B) on Financial Management, Financial Reports and Audits and Section 4.09 of the General Conditions. In addition, for Uganda and Kenya, there will be an additional financial covenant related to having semi-annual reviews of the project (by the country's internal audit offices/departments in Uganda) to mitigate the fiduciary risk of the project. 45. Key findings are that in order to strengthen FM arrangements, the following are recommended: * Effectiveness Condition for the project will be the preparation of a PIM that is acceptable to the World Bank. As part of the PIM, we expect FM arrangements related to the project to be acceptable to the World Bank. * Disbursement Condition for Uganda and Kenya to ensure that before funds are sent to the districts in Uganda and counties in Kenya, they have a qualified and experienced accountant in place to account for the project funds. In Uganda, every district will need to have a Designated Accountant in place and one accounts assistant recruited by the project, while in Kenya there are plans to hire 14 project county 80 accounts assistants. With regard to IGAD Secretariat, it is expected that they will process payments related to the specialized environment institutions that include ICPAC, CEWARN, ISSP, ICPALD and STVS. Should the arrangements change and funds are to be disbursed to these institutions, there will be a disbursement condition that the institutions need to have at least a qualified and experienced accountant to account for project funds, the accounting policies and procedures related to those institutions should be acceptable to the World Bank and they will need to open a project bank account. Other FM arrangements related to this issue will be included in the PIM. * Dated covenants to be achieved within 3 months after effectiveness are for Uganda (MAAIF) and IGAD Secretariat to recruit an additional accountant to strengthen the accounting arrangements for the project. * Dated covenant to be achieved within 6 months after effectiveness include the following: (i) Kenya (MALF) to acquire an accounting information system for the project given that there will be a significant volume of transactions when implementing the project and in order to avoid errors in the accounts, it will be critical to have a computerized accounting system; (ii) IGAD Secretariat to approve the internal audit manual as well as establish an independent functional audit committee that will follow up with management to ensure that audit issues are being addressed as it has been noted from the assessment that there is a weakness in addressing audit issues; and (iii) Kenya and Uganda to designate internal auditors for districts and counties that do not have these staff as they will be essential in monitoring the internal control systems of the project at sub-national levels. * Other actions that will strengthen the FM arrangements of the project to be undertaken within a timeframe of six months after credit effectiveness include: (i) training of all project accountants and internal auditors in Kenya and Uganda at national and sub-national levels about the project's FM arrangements in order to ensure that there is clarity of the accountability aspects of the project's funds; (ii) strengthening of the internal audit function in Uganda and Kenya especially at the district and county levels in order to improve on their skills to ensure that they effectively monitor compliance of the project's internal control systems at sub- national level; (iii) strengthening the audit committee arrangements in Uganda and Kenya at both national and sub-national levels in order to ensure there is an effective mechanism of following up audit recommendations to ensure they are being attended to as it has been identified during the assessment that there is a significant weakness of not addressing audit recommendations which weakens the internal control system and creates accountability issues; (iv) addressing internal control weaknesses identified in external and internal audit reports; (v) in order to mitigate the project's substantial risk, as it will be operating in areas that have security concerns especially in Uganda and Kenya, it will be essential to conduct semi-annual financial management review of the project under the coordination of the government internal audit office/department and funding for these reviews should be budgeted for in the project; and (vi) as part of a critical GAC measure, developing an independent 81 complaint handling mechanism that will ensure that complaints made are attended to in a timely manner and the records of the complaints are properly kept. Supervision Plan 46. An implementation support mission will be conducted twice a year based on the risk assessment's results of the project in accordance with the Financial Management Practices Manual issued by the Financial Management Sector Board. The mission's objectives will include ensuring that strong financial management systems are maintained for the project throughout its life. However, reviews arising out of the Interim Financial Reports will be carried out regularly to ensure that expenditures incurred by the project remain eligible for IDA funding. Audit issues that may arise will be followed up to ensure they are resolved. Should the need arise, the Bank may conduct in-depth reviews and forensic audits to ensure funds are being used for purposes intended. The Implementation Status Report (ISR) will include a financial management rating for the project. FM Risk Rating 47. The conclusion of the FM capacity assessment is that all the implementing entities do meet the Bank's minimum requirements under OP10.00 to implement the project. However, improvements need to be made as documented in the FM action plan to strengthen the FM arrangements. The FM residual risk rating for IGAD Secretariat is substantial while for Uganda and Kenya is high. II.b Procurement 48. The overall responsibility for procurement of works and goods and selection of consultants will be carried out mainly at national level in each country. The summary description of implementation arrangements and assessments of the agencies/entities' capacity to handle and manage procurement in each country is provided in Annex 7, as well as the full description of it, including table of mitigation measures and procurement plans. II.c. Environmental and Social (including safeguards) 49. The Project adopted a Framework approach to safeguards, as the exact project activities can only be identified when implementation begins and project subprojects are designed. Based on this approach, the Project national teams developed a set of safeguards instruments to guide preparation of mitigation measures related to triggered environmental and social safeguards associated with RPLRP financed sub-projects once they are identified. These are two country specific ESMFs, IPMFs, RPFs, an IPPF for Uganda, and a VMGF for Kenya. 50. The important environmental issues are associated with among others the following proposed project activities: designing, building and rehabilitating water resources access facilities (water 82 pans, earth dams, boreholes, shallow wells), as well as identifying and promoting appropriate water harvesting technologies; development and rehabilitation of pasture land; construction/rehabilitation of livestock markets, border checkpoints, holding/auction grounds, slaughter facilities, rehabilitation and construction of veterinary laboratories; building and rehabilitation of storage and post-harvest facilities adapted to pastoral conditions and agricultural production and region-wide harmonized vaccination campaigns for priority diseases such as PPR, FMD, CBPP, CCPP, RVF and Newcastle Disease (ND). RPLRP is expected to have a positive impact on environment by enhancing the capacities of relevant stakeholders to sustainably manage natural resources, especially rangelands and water, and by rehabilitating or developing water and pasture related infrastructure and ecosystems. Activities planned under the RPLRP Project will vary in scale. Consequently, the significance of the direct negative environmental and social impacts is likely to be moderate; however, the cumulative impacts of subprojects may be more significant where they accumulate in one locality. The RPLRP country level implementation teams will oversee the design of subprojects on a national scale and the appropriate environmental assessment process, including mitigation measures and coordination among the relevant stakeholders during subproject preparation and implementation. 51. Implementation and overall supervision of the environmental and social aspects of the project shall be undertaken by respective implementing agencies: KTTP in Kenya, and MAAIF in Uganda, technically led by Environmental and Social Specialists. Recruitment of an Environmental and Social Specialists shall therefore be one of the priorities of the project teams before the project effectiveness. At the Local Government level, the respective local Environment Officers shall be involved in project implementation, monitoring, supervising and reporting implementation of the environmental aspects. 52. All safeguards instruments went through the public consultations as part of their preparation and were disclosed locally and in the Bank Info Shop prior to project appraisal. 53. Social safeguards issues are discussed in detail in the following sections providing country- specific approaches to handling land acquisition and involuntary resettlement, and vulnerable and marginalized groups within the project. Kenya 54. Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF): The ESMF provides directions to the implementing agencies on how to identify, assess and mitigate potential negative environmental and social impacts of sub projects and ensures that preparation of ESIAs and ESMPs are developed and implemented according to the Bank and Government of Kenya (GoK) guidelines. The ESMF also serves as an umbrella document outlining mitigation measures for potential issues related to Natural Habitats, Pest Management and Physical Cultural Resources. The ESMF was disclosed in-country on November 26, 2013 and at WB's Infoshop on November 29, 2013. Its preparation involved consultations with the relevant central government 83 bodies, the respective County Governments and Local communities. The ESMF includes a Chance Finds Procedure for cultural resources encountered during civil works, and a reference to FAO guidelines on small dam safety to address environmental issues identified during project screening. The Framework describes the implementation and reporting arrangements and establishes a monitoring indicators, responsibilities and schedule. In addition, the ESMF includes a Capacity Building program for RPLRP team and other project beneficiaries. 55. Capacity Building: The RPLRP implementing agency in Kenya - KTTP - currently has little capacity and experience implementing environmental and social management recommendations made in the ESMF, and other safeguards instruments. To improve capacity for subproject screening, reporting and management of environmental and social aspects of project activities, KTTP has committed to recruit an Environmental Management Specialist and a Social Development Specialist to fully address all environmental and social issues respectively including indigenous and vulnerability issues of the project. The Environmental Management Specialist will collaborate with County EOs on impact mitigation as well as environmental monitoring of the subprojects. Both specialists will guide KTTP and will undertake subproject screening as well as monitoring the consulting teams which will be recruited to conduct detailed studies (ESIA, RAPs etc.). 56. Pest Management: The promotion of livestock and crop agriculture productivity increase may indirectly incentivize the pesticide use. Project funds might be used to purchase veterinary and anti-parasites drugs. Overall, the project is neither expected to have significant pest management issues, nor finance substantial quantities of pesticides. However, to guide the project in procurement, management and disposal of these chemicals, an Integrated Pest Management Frameworks (IPMF) was prepared and publicly disclosed in-country and on Infoshop on January 22, 2014. The IPMF will help manage the chemical use, guide their safe handling, storage and disposal, and include training and capacity building activities for farmers. 57. Social Safeguards: OP 4.12: The project has prepared a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), which outlines the principles and procedures that will be followed in a subproject which will lead to restricted access or loss of livelihood. At the point of appraisal, the exact requirement for land acquisition and/or restriction of access to resources for the proposed subprojects is not known and it would only be known when the subprojects are identified. In accordance with the World Bank OP 4.12, each subproject which may affect land and assets (communal or individual) would undergo a screening and depending of the screening results may prepare a Resettlement Action Plan. However, the level of detail and complexity of the RAP will depend on the investment type and level of impact. These provisions are articulated in the RPF, prepared by the Kenya RPLRP team. The project implementation manual and project contracts will adopt actions and procedures defined in the RPF. 58. Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). This procedure will be simple and administered as much as possible at the subproject level by the Sub-County Resettlement and Compensation Committees (SCRCC). Below this there will be the Local Resettlement and Compensation 84 Committees (LRCCs) based in each administrative location. This particular committee will be established by the SCRCC through PAPs consultative meetings chaired by representative of implementing agency. The LRCC will be the voice of the PAPs and will work under the guidance and coordination of SCRCC in handling PAPs grievances. Many of the PAPs grievances should be addressed at their level, if not, the LRCC will assist the PAPs to address their grievances to the County Resettlement and Compensation Committee (CRCC). If this procedure fails to provide satisfactory result to the complainants, then they can seek legal address. A grievance log will be established by the SCRCC and copies of the records be kept by both LRCC and SRCC to be used for grievance monitoring which will be the responsibility of a sub - project Liaison Officer. The Kenya Constitution however does under Section 159 alternative dispute resolution mechanisms relating to land and resettlement. 59. The project triggers OP 4.10 in Kenya. During project preparation, the Government of Kenya commissioned the preparation of a Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework (VMGF) to ensure that the development process fully respects the dignity, human rights, economies, and culture of vulnerable and marginalized people and that the RPLRP sub projects have broad community support from the affected vulnerable and marginalized people. 60. The VMGF outlines the processes and principles of screening to determine if a proposed investment has adverse impacts on vulnerable communities, the preparation of a VMGP including the social assessment process, consultation and stakeholder engagement, disclosure procedures, communication and grievances redress mechanism. A detailed VMGP will be prepared for each sub project once a project location is identified and screening conducted and determination via screening is made that VMGs are present in the project investment area. 61. The VMGF recognizes the distinct circumstances that expose VMGs to different types of risks and impacts from development projects. As social groups with identities that are often distinct from dominant groups in their national societies. VMGs are frequently among the most marginalized and vulnerable segments of the population. As a result, their economic, social, and legal status often limit their capacity to defend their rights to lands, territories, and other productive resources, and restricts their ability to participate in and benefit from development. At the same time, this policy, together with the Involuntary Resettlement Policy (RPF) and Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), recognizes that VMGs play a vital role in sustainable development and emphasizes that the need for conservation should be combined with the need to benefit VMGs in order to ensure long-term sustainable management of critical ecosystems. This VMGF describes the policy requirements and planning procedures that RPLRP will follow during the preparation and implementation of sub projects especially those identified as occurring in areas where VMGs are present. It provides guidelines for free, prior and informed consultation leading to broad community support, grievance redress, and culturally appropriate benefit-sharing. 62. To ensure dedicated support and timely follow up on safeguards related issues and continuous mainstreaming of safeguards aspects into project implementation, the Project team at KTTP will dedicate staff members, to be responsible for environmental and social safeguards. 85 Other Social Issues 63. In Kenya, on the overall, some of the critical social issues relevant to the Project objective and those, if addressed comprehensively, would enhance social development outcome have to do with gender, participation, inclusion, conflict management as well as protection and security of vulnerable and marginalized groups as stated above. 64. Gender and young generation issues: it is important to understand that traditionally, there are very distinct roles for men and women, boys and girls in the livelihoods of the groups that the project is targeting. These have changed with time depending on social economic realities. Women-headed households are on the rise - death of male spouses due to conflicts and other calamities are on the increase, increasing vulnerability of women in these situations affects their participation and benefits access. Young boys are often removed from schools to take care of livestock; girls are subjected to circumcision and early marriages at the expense of education. These issues will be taken into consideration during subproject design implementation. 65. Conflict: The root cause of conflicts among pastoralists are many, land tenure systems, ethnic animosities, water and other natural resources scarcity have all shaped social values and community dispositions. The net effect to these conflicts is displacement, loss of lives and intensified poverty. The project recognizes that conflicts have the potential for undermining the gains from the project, unless addressed openly and conclusively. The project will draw from traditional approaches as well as innovative mechanisms that have emerged overtime through World Bank and other agencies efforts in these areas. These may include building the capacity of local level institutions and support to activities of women as project beneficiaries and respected peace makers in these communities, recognizing their distinct roles. 66. Exclusion: The Social Assessment provides mechanisms mitigating isolation, exclusion and enhances community participation. However, social and cultural identities of some groups make them distinct and isolate. During the design of subprojects, the project will utilize mechanisms that will help direct resources to these groups. Uganda 67. Environmental: RPLRP is expected to have a positive impact on environment by enhancing the capacities of relevant stakeholders to sustainably manage natural resources, especially rangelands and water, and by rehabilitating or developing water and pasture related infrastructure and ecosystems. 68. ESMF has been prepared for the project and provides guidance on how environmental and social issues shall be identified, assessed, mitigation measures developed, monitored and reported. The ESMF was disclosed in-country and at WB's Infoshop on November 29, 2013. Its 86 preparation involved consultations with the relevant central government bodies, the respective District Local Governments and Local communities. The ESMF includes a Chance Finds Procedure for cultural resources encountered during civil works, and guidelines on dam safety to address environmental issues identified during project screening. The ESMF also provides a Grievance Redress Mechanism with guidance on the reception, recording, handling, and reporting of complaints that may be encountered during project implementation. All the above- mentioned safeguards instruments/tools will be used to ensure proper management of the project environmental and social issues. During project implementation, and based on the environmental and social screening process provided in the ESMF, subproject specific ESMPs shall be developed and relevant environmental assessments undertaken where necessary. Monitoring and reporting formats have also been provided in the ESMF and these shall be customized to the respective sub-projects in each district. 69. Pest Management: The promotion of livestock and crop agriculture productivity increase may indirectly incentivize the pesticide use. Project funds might be used to purchase veterinary and anti-parasites drugs. Overall, the project is neither expected to have significant pest management issues, nor finance substantial quantities of pesticides. However, to guide the project in procurement, management and disposal of these chemicals, an Integrated Pest Management Frameworks (IPMF) was prepared and publicly disclosed in-country and on Infoshop on January 24, 2014. The IPMF will help manage the chemical use, guide their safe handling, storage and disposal, and include training and capacity building activities for farmers. 70. MAAIF has limited institutional environmental capacity to implement the environmental and social requirements of the project. The Ministry has experienced implementation challenges with regard to ongoing projects such as EAAPP and ATAAS (being implemented by NAADS and NARO). The key challenges under EAAPP and ATAAS include lack of Safeguards staff assigned to the project, failure to undertake environmental and social screening of the sub- projects by the Ministry, non-management of environmental and social impacts, non-submission of the required environmental reports, and lack of environmental management supervision. Building in-house capacity is the sustainable solution to this critical gap, given the continued and constant interaction and reliance of agricultural activities on the environment. Though agricultural activities cause relatively low environmental impacts, their cumulative nature over time justifies early interventions right from the planning time and throughout implementation. In this regard, MAAIF has committed to recruit both an Environmental Management Specialist and a Social Development Specialist to fully address all environmental and social issues respectively including indigenous and vulnerability issues of the project. The Environmental Management Specialist will guide DEOs on impact mitigation as well as environmental monitoring of the project. Both specialists will guide MAAIF or will undertake subproject screening as well as work with consulting teams which will be recruited to conduct detailed studies (ESIA, RAPs etc.). 71. Technical assistance to support the capacity needs of the implementing stakeholders to apply the ESMF tools and requirements will also be needed. Such technical assistance would include workshops, trainings and ESMF monitoring which are needed to ensure effective implementation 87 of the ESMF throughout the life of the Project. There is need for capacity building in environmental management at the district and sub-district levels. 72. Social safeguards: The project triggered Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) because the project will result in some land take for its interventions. It is assessed that the RPLRP's interventions are not likely to cause significant involuntary resettlement and that limited land acquisition is envisaged especially for the activities that will have civil works. The project will support activities with a focus of avoiding or minimizing involuntary resettlement; and where this is not feasible necessary steps to support displaced persons in improving or restoring their livelihoods and standards of living to real terms relative to the pre-displacement levels will be undertaken as will be guided by the prepared RPF. Therefore, where issues of land acquisition occur during implementation, the involuntary resettlement policy OP 4.12 will be triggered. Issues of involuntary resettlement may cause the following amongst other: loss of land; loss of housing, economic resources, livelihood activities, marginalize the population concerned/intended project beneficiaries, possible loss of access to natural resources and public parks as well as disturb the way of life of affected population. Unmitigated involuntary resettlement arising from implementation of RPLRP may lead to severe economic, social and environmental impacts where: production systems are dismantled; people face impoverishment if their productive assets or income sources are lost; people are relocated to environments where their community institutions and social networks are weakened; kin groups are dispersed, and cultural identity, traditional authority and the potential for mutual help are diminished or lost. In terms of project implementation including project overseeing, the district teams will be involved and siting of community livelihood projects will be decided in close consultation with communities in a participatory manner. 73. Applicable guidelines: The legislation on resettlement of the Government of Uganda (GoU) and the policy of the World Bank OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement will be the instruments that will govern any resettlement arising out of the activities of the RPLRP. A RPF has been prepared and has been disclosed both in country and at the World Bank's. The Resettlement Policy Framework (RFP) will provide safeguards against severe adverse impacts of RPLRP activities and proposes mitigation against potential impoverishment risks through prior and informed consultations by avoiding displacement of people in the first place, or minimizing the number of displaced persons, or adequately compensating the displaced persons for losses incurred, or adequately addressing adverse impacts of the intended interventions, or documenting the consultation and mitigation process. Advance implementation of the RAPs will apply to the project so as to ensure that any mitigation measures relating to involuntary resettlement are executed with efficiency and in line with the World Bank Policy on Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12). The framework proposes (where feasible and appropriate) for project to utilize government owned lands in the districts of operation to reduce exorbitant resettlement costs and minimize on the resettlement requirements. 74. Uganda has a prevailing tendency for communities to be lured in offering voluntarily land in order to attract implementation of livelihood projects irrespective of any other considerations. This dialogue and this voluntary acquisition of land is normally carried out firstly at the lower 88 local government level (sub-counties, parishes and villages), where RPRLP project is to be implemented. Any compensation process is usually undertaken within the community through this dialogue. This method of land acquisition will, certainly continue in the future. However, the later generations of the elders in the communities, are beginning to question the rights of their elders to voluntarily give up land in this manner whatever the utility of the land for their communities or the public at large. Therefore, in order to avoid any future litigation and in the case of voluntary land acquisition, evidence of the consultations process with the communities takes in as broad a spectrum of the communities (including youths and women with documentation to prove such offers). The Social assessment recommends social inclusiveness of both genders in the implementation of the project. 75. An Indigenous Peoples Planning Framework has been prepared to ensure that the World Bank's Indigenous Peoples policy (OP 4.10) is applied to RPLRP subprojects in Uganda. This framework takes into consideration both the Indigenous Peoples and vulnerable groups. A framework has been prepared because much as the project districts are known, it is not clear at this stage whether the project activities will be within the areas inhabited by the IPs or whether the siting of the projects may affect or not affect the IPs. The project is planned for the region as a whole and the actual impact can only be determined at siting of the proposed subprojects. However, it is worth noting that the project districts are located in the marginalized and vulnerable parts of Uganda. The scope of this IPPF includes: * The potential positive and adverse effects of RPLRP subprojects on Indigenous Peoples; * A plan for carrying out the social assessment for RPLRP subprojects; * A framework for ensuring free, prior, and informed consultation with the affected Indigenous Peoples' communities at each stage of project preparation and implementation; * Institutional arrangements including capacity building where necessary for screening project-supported activities, evaluating their effects on Indigenous Peoples, preparing IPPs, and addressing any grievances; * Monitoring and reporting arrangements, including mechanisms and benchmarks appropriate to the project; and, * Disclosure arrangements for Indigenous Peoples' Plans to be prepared under the IPPF. 76. The GoU implementing agency (MAAIF) in collaboration with the partner implementing agencies would ensure the following at implementation: * communities and vulnerable groups in general and their organizations are not excluded by any means in activities selection, design, and implementation processes; * even distribution of the new facilities (water points and markets) in the project areas to ensure that the IPs and vulnerable groups get equal share of new facilities in their lands. A coordinated attempt to ensure the equitable distribution of services among neighboring tribes will also further reduce the likelihood of raids erupting as a result of newly formed 89 disparities in economic assets and opportunities. Thus, MAAIF has to be mindful of the potential for harm caused by gaps in service provision; * carry out specific assessments of the impact of proposed projects on the economic and social development of indigenous peoples and the vulnerable groups as an integral part of the project cycle, through a transparent process with the free and informed participation of the affected communities. MAAIF has to ensure that the RPLRP interventions do not unnecessarily and unintentionally exacerbate factors outside the scope of planned impacts; * together with IPs and vulnerable groups, carefully screen the activities of all subprojects for a preliminary understanding of the nature and magnitude of potential impacts, and explore alternatives to avoid or minimize any adverse impacts as detailed in the ESMF and RPF; * where alternatives are not feasible and adverse impacts on IPs and vulnerable groups are unavoidable, together with IPs and others knowledgeable of IP culture and concerns should immediately make an assessment of the key impact issues and possible mitigation measures; * undertake the necessary tasks in order to adopt appropriate mitigation measures. The most important in this respect is intensive consultation with the IP communities, community elders/leaders, civil society organizations like NGOs and others who have experience working with IPs and other vulnerable groups. 77. The GoU through MAAIF committed an estimated budget of $470,000 for the implementation of the Framework and the subsequent IPPs as well as actions plans on the vulnerable and marginalized groups. However, social assessment recommends that most of the negative impacts highlighted would be integrated in the design given that the region is known to be marginalized. Therefore, the majority of the interventions will take into a perspective of addressing marginalization and vulnerability of the region, which results from long term neglect and internal and cross-border conflicts. Other Social Issues 78. In Uganda, the social assessment undertaken concluded that although the region has varied ethnicity with relatively varied social economic activities, the region practices shared pastoral livelihood (i.e. between 87 -91 percent of the communities in three sub regions are pastoralists who practice the traditional livestock production, with minimal inputs and correspondingly small outputs which depend on natural grazing and local breeds). These regions have similar terrain challenges including experiencing long dry spells, natural resources disasters and conflicts as well as consistent famine. The region is also noted as the most marginalized and vulnerable region in Uganda. The vulnerability and marginalization is more defined within the region based on ethnicity and the gender. Some ethnic groups are more dominant and prominent than others 90 based on the population and economic activities. In addition, the women are more marginalized and vulnerable compared to men since culturally they are not considered decision makers. 79. Gender roles play an important role in the decision making in the Karamoja region especially where it comes to decision making on issues that concern land and the cow as these are believed to be very serious matters whose decisions are taken by the elders (men) only. The social assessment recommended a greater inclusiveness in involving both men and women in participation, consultations and decision making in the preparation and implementation this project, which will contribute to ownership, include culturally acceptable initiatives and use local knowledge as well as narrow the gender divergence gap. Therefore, in sustainably implementing this project, women should not be left behind given the fact they are charged with all the responsibility of food behind given the fact they are charged with all the responsibility for food. Increasing population trends will affect the redistribution and development of the natural resources as the project comes with good interventions important to note is the high population growth rate which will definitely complete with the livestock for these resources especially water. 80. The SA also noted that ethnicity and culture play an important role in the acceptability of the project among the beneficiaries. In case the population realizes the project has come to erode their culture then it would not be embraced. Therefore, it is important incorporate cultural issues in project design and implementation. In conclusion, social characteristics and dynamics such as population growth trends, ethnicity, culture, education, gender, and health have a significant role they play in the successful implementation of projects like RPLRP. The project will take the advantage and opportunities presented by the social characteristics as identified in the social assessment undertaken during preparation and sub-project specific assessments to strengthen inclusiveness and define appropriate interventions. II.d. Monitoring & Evaluation 81. The RPLRP's M&E activities will: (a) generate information on progress, processes, and performance; (b) analyze and aggregate data generated at various levels (region, country and different local levels) to track progress, monitor process quality, RPLRP impacts, and sustainability and identify bottlenecks for quick resolution; and (c) document and disseminate key lessons to users and stakeholders across the countries. The system will ensure that: (a) clear responsibilities and procedures for M&E are established; (b) M&E capacity building is emphasized from the start and throughout implementation; and (c) the M&E system functions in a timely manner. 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 Horn of Africa, as per the IDDRSI. 82. Evaluation of outcome and impact: Achievement of RPLRP results will be measured by a set of qualitative and quantitative indicators (see Annex 1: Results Framework) common to all countries. A rapid survey will be conducted during preparation to determine preliminary baseline values for the indicators of the results framework and establish yearly targets for the project. A more detailed baseline survey is planned for the first year of the RPLRP and followed by yearly evaluation conducted with the same methodology for all countries. These evaluations will be 91 complemented by yearly thematic assessments (including technical audits of infrastructure, cost- benefit analysis of investments, etc.) and case studies on topics agreed to by countries, IGAD and World Bank. 83. The RPLRP M&E system will include a simple and user-friendly system for monitoring implementation progress (inputs, outputs and processes), for which reporting formats will be developed in each countries' respective monitoring, evaluation and learning manual. 84. Monitoring of inputs, outputs and processes. Monitoring implementation performance, including tracking of inputs, outputs and processes, will take stock on the existing M&E system used for PCDP-3 (currently being updated). The project will focus on keeping the system simple and interactive allowing regular reporting and learning by stakeholders at all levels. It will also be important to involve benefiting communities in the monitoring of the project activities. In Kenya, monitoring implementation performance will utilize the government's existing Results- based Monitoring and Evaluation system. 85. Regional supervision and cross learning: IGAD will promote and participate in supervision support and cross-country learning. It will include: (i) field supervisions of one country's project by the 2 countries M&E Officers, other team members and IGAD; and (ii) supportive supervision, where IGAD will provide support in supervision on specific issues as needed by the project M&E Officers ("learning by doing"). These types of activities promote cross-country knowledge sharing, triangulation of data and strengthen skills of M&E Officers and other staff of the project across countries. The project will also explore the possibility of institutionalizing cross-country exchanges involving IGAD, and participating government agencies that have been instrumental in defining regional activities during project preparation. 86. M&E regional capacity: IGAD has already planned for an M&E training for all M&E Officers of projects under member state coordination mechanism in 2013 and it is financing M&E Officers coordinating IGAD activities within each country (in the Kenya Drought Management Authority for Kenya and in the Disaster Risk Management Office for Uganda). In addition, these M&E Officers will conduct a need assessment of project M&E Officers capacity to provide tailored trainings that could potentially include: training of trainers, data analysis, Geographic Information System (GIS), Management Information System (MIS), qualitative evaluation, data auditing, managing large database, etc. As M&E is not the sole responsibility of project M&E Officers, they will also support/organize sensitization trainings to project teams and line ministries staff involved in the program. 87. Knowledge sharing beyond project countries IGAD will support the country team dissemination of lessons learned within countries and within country members. 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. 88. Management Information System: Kenya's project MIS will use the existing Kenya government systems. In the case of Uganda, the project will need to start scoping for existing system within the country. 92 Kenya 89. The Project will recruit a capable Monitoring and Evaluation Officer/ Knowledge Coordinator (M&E O/KC) with responsibilities to guide the overall M&E systems and to implement its related activities under the guidance and supervision of the Project Coordinator. The M&E O/KC will play a leading role in facilitating the core Project activities, guide the design of the participatory strategic planning and M&E systems and ensuring that stakeholder representatives are effectively involved. The M&E O/KC will ensure that the stakeholders have the appropriate skills training to enable them to effectively participate in planning, monitoring and evaluation in performing these duties. 90. Participatory Result based Monitoring and Evaluation systems (PM&E) will be developed and implemented by the project through established units at the Project Coordination Unit (CPU) and the County PCUs. The process will be geared towards institutional strengthening and empowerment of different stakeholder as a primary contribution of RPLRP's towards strengthening the capacity of the selected ASALs counties during the transitional phase of the devolution process. 91. Reporting to the Project Coordinator. The M&EO/KC will be responsible for all aspects of reporting, dissemination and sharing information and communication materials (such as posters, videos etc.), effect stakeholder planning and review meetings, and organize the external evaluation and review activities (including baseline, midterm and end of term evaluations and assessments). PMEO will ensure that the stakeholders are able to engage in learning and sharing processes that involves critical analysis of the information gathered and using this for decision- making purposes. Uganda 92. The project will recruit an M&E specialist who will be in charge of overall coordination of M&E activities, in close collaboration with the other NPCU staff. This will include supervising the District M&E Officers and the work of service providers who will be contracted to implement specific M&E activities. The M&E Specialist will also be responsible for finalizing the PME system within three months after project start-up (and making subsequent adjustments during the project life as required), supported by short-term experts and service providers. Main areas for which service providers will be contracted include: (i) implementation of baseline surveys; (ii) development and implementation of participatory planning and M&E approaches; (iii) information and communication technology development/maintenance, including database development/maintenance; (iv) technical audits of infrastructures; and (v) implementation of impact studies. 93 Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT Stage: Board Overall Rating: Moderate Description : Some national level stakeholders may question Risk Management: Strong consultative process, including several multi-country workshops regional focus of investments and reject such investments if involving senior representatives of IGAD, participating countries, NGOs and Development seen not to benefit national systems. Partners, has been built all along project preparation. IDA funds will be transferred directly to IGAD at the regional level are linked to specific services and well defined coordination activities to be delivered by IGAD. Resp: Both Stage: Preparation Due Date :31/07/2014 Status: Ongoing Implementation Country: Kenya Rating: Moderate Description : New county governments in project-affected Risk Management: the project preparation team is placing a strong emphasis on consultations areas are taking on responsibilities for multiple functions to integrate project interventions with new county integrated development plans (CIDPs) that related to agriculture and strengthening resilience, but some reflect both county and national priorities. In implementation, the project includes a strong focus counties face significant capacity gaps. On the one hand, new on capacity building, including resources under component 5 to provide sustained support for counties can complicate already complex coordination target counties to design and implement CIDPs that have strong emphases on increasing challenges across multiple stakeholders operating in the resilience and reducing vulnerability. The project is designed to provide the new counties with a ASAL region. On the other hand, newly elected county significant role in determining and overseeing interventions, while financial management and governments have significant incentives to coordinate procurement will be managed by the national PCU as county capacity is developed.. On the interventions and deliver tangible, on-the-ground results, coordination front, the PCU is actively engaging with the ASAL coordination group, county governors, and the national government, including the new Ministry of Devolution and Planning, to ensure that project activities complement other initiatives. Resp: Both Stage: Prep/Impl. Due Date: 31/07/2014 1Status: Ongoing Country: Uganda Rating: Low Description: Inadequate or ineffective stakeholder Risk Management: A strong capacity-building program at all levels. During project participation and capacity could undermine success or preparation, ample consultations with stakeholders were held including potential project sustainability of project activities, beneficiaries, project affected persons, communities, etc. Consultations will continue during project implementation, supported by a stakeholder communications strategy. 94 Resp: Both Stage: Due Date: Status: Ongoing 2. Imlmetn AgnyRss(nluigfdcay Capacity Country: Kenya Rating: Substantial Implementation capacity is mixed, and the Ministry is Risk Management: The project will fund significant capacity building activities, including staff simultaneously consolidating three former ministries as well recruitment and training to build capacity of staff in financial management, procurement, social as devolving multiple staff to the county level in line with the accountability, and safeguards. Constitution. Capacity of some staff, particularly on procurement and FM (accountants and internal auditors), could affect the pace and quality of project implementation, as well as delay the planned activities. With regard to FM, capacity shortages especially at county levels related to Resp: Government Stage: Implementation Due Date: 31/12/2015 Status: Ongoing accountants and internal auditors need to be filled, there is need to acquire a computerized accounting information system for the project and weak audit committees need strengthening through training. Country: Uganda Rating: Substantial Implementation capacity is mixed. Weak capacity of some Risk Management: The project will fund significant capacity building activities, including staff directorates and districts especially financial management recruitment and training to build capacity of staff in safeguards, procurement, and financial staff (accountants and internal auditors) could affect the pace management. It will sup 3ort the roll out of existing systems such as PIMIS, IFMIS and OBT. and quality of project implementation, as well as delay the planned activities. There will be need to roll out the existing Resp: Government Stage: Implementation Due Date: 31/12/2015 Status: Ongoing computerized accounting information system for the project and audit committees need strengthening through training. Governance Country: Kenya Rating: Moderate RPLRP operations may experience political and bureaucratic Risk Management: Drawing on the experience of other projects which have experienced interference with attempts at elite capture. governance challenge, RPLRP in Kenya will place a strong emphasis on designing strong monitoring systems, public disclosure, and governance and reporting arrangements that reduce opportunities for elite capture. The criteria that have been designed to guide sub-projects and activities, with a focus on those with regional dimensions, particularly the emphasis on investments along livestock corridors, and building this into project design and into the monitoring framework, will reduce opportunities for elite capture. Resp: Government Stage: Implementation Due Date: 31/12/2015 Status: Ongoing Country: Uganda Rating: Substantial 95 While overall governance-related issues may not affect Risk Management: A strong training program is envisaged as part of the project to ensure projects specifically, low accountability and enforcement quality staff are attracted and maintained. serves as a hindrance to Government's growth agenda. servs a a hndrnce o Gverments gowthageda. Procurement assessment identified risk of delays in contract management. This risk will be National and international reports and surveys based on mitigated by training of staff and providing additional support supervision consultants during the nationally generated data indicate that corruption can affect construction phase. every institution in the country, and are most rife in procurement, privatization, administration of revenues and public expenditures, and public service delivery. Some corruption scandals have occurred thereby hindering attempts to raise the bar and address lower level corruption. Bribery remains the most common form of corruption and Government needs to enforce compliance to the country's regulations on corruption. Resp: Both Stage: Implementation Due Date 31/12/2015Status: Ongoing Design Rating: Moderate Description : The complexity and cross-sectoral nature of Risk Management: The preparation has been conducted in a very participatory manner, issues affecting pastoral and agro-pastoral communities' promoting meetings/discussions/conferences between the participating countries to agree on resilience to droughts are reflected in overall project priority activities to be supported by the project. IGAD coordination role has been important. design complexity. On the other hand, implementation capacity, particularly at local levels is relatively weak. While project implementation will be through existing government structures, strong project teams will supplement government implementation capacity. Priorities may differ from one country to the other, but agreements on a common framework for the project have been found. Resp: Both Stage: Preparation Due Date : 28/02/2014 Status: Ongoing Social and Environmental Country: Kenya & Uganda Rating: Moderate Lack of adequate capacity and political will to implement Risk Management: The environmental and social risk associated with the investments, social and environmental risk mitigation measures identified including water supply and sanitation infrastructure, will be managed through use of ESMF, through environmental and social assessments could lead to RPF, IPPF and related safeguards instruments (EA, EMP, RAP and IPP). An environmental and an elevated level of residual impacts from implementing social management framework, strategic environmental assessment, and resettlement policy project activities, or undermine project results if the necessary framework will guide project implementation. Site specific environmental and social land, forest and wetland management measures are not fully assessments and resettlement action plans will be prepared for specific project investments. implemented. Training programs will be carried out to improve capacity, particularly in new and decentralized institutions. The nature and scale of proposed investments are not likely to pose significant social and environmental risks. IDA will carry out close, field based implementation support and supervision. Resp: Government Stage: Prep./Implem. Due Date : 31/12/2015 Status: ongoing Program and Donor Rating: Low 96 Description : The HoA crisis has brought many donors to Risk Management: Many partners and donors meetings have been organized and this will support increased resilience in the ASALs. Coordination of continue. The exchange of information has been good, and the establishment of an IGAD interventions is crucial and IGAD's capacity to play this role platform to coordinate interventions related to dry lands in the HoA will improve the sharing of is currently limited. information. Resp: Both Stage: Prep./Impl. Due Date: 31/12/2015 Status: Ongoing Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability Rating: Moderate Description : This project follows large commitments from Risk Management: The project will build capacity in the Ministries and in the IGAD for better IGAD member state governments to increase investments and planning, coordination and monitoring of activities. WB will sit in the IGAD platform Steering to focus on the long term in ASALs - to increase resilience of Committee, together with many other partners and donors, and ensure that sustainability of communities to shocks. Donors and partners are engaged in interventions is a priority for IGAD and member States. supporting the countries but recurrent droughts may handicap building-up communities' assets for long term resilience. Weak decentralized capacities and issues of data quality in the ASALs could lead to uncertainty in the reliability of the Resp: Clients, line Stage: Implementation Due Date : 31/12/2015 Status: Not yet due Program's results. ministries, IGAD Other 4. Oveal Imlmna iRs Implementation Risk Rating: Country: Kenya/Uganda/IGAD Rating: Substantial The Program involves some substantial impact risks, such as (a) the possibility of conflict and deteriorating security situations in RPLRP program areas that would disrupt implementation and supervision/monitoring of activities and use of funds; (b) weak implementation and financial management capacity, (c) disruption of livelihoods due to drought. Managing these risks requires extensive implementation support and complementary operations 97 Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT Strategy and Approach for Implementation Support 1. The strategy for supporting project implementation will focus on successfully mitigating the risks identified at various levels and supporting the risk management proposed in the ORAF and will consist of: (i) implementation support missions carried out jointly with FAO when technical needs arise, and (ii) technical assistance in areas of weaknesses and where new approaches/procedures have been introduced. 2. Implementation Support Missions: The supervision strategy will use a number of instruments to review progress and respond to implementation issues; including: a. Joint Review and Implementation Support (JRIS) Missions: the World Bank Task Team will conduct semi-annual review and implementation support missions to review overall RPLRP implementation performance and progress towards the achievement of the PDO. The support from FAO-TCI will be sought for when needed. b. Mid-term Review (MTR): An MTR will be carried out mid-way in the implementation phase. It will include a comprehensive assessment of the progress in achieving RPLRP objectives as laid out in the results framework. The MTR will also serve as a platform for revisiting design issues that may require adjustments to ensure satisfactory achievement of the Project's objective. c. Other complementary reviews: Each year, the World Bank and MoFA will consider the need for additional analytical, advisory and knowledge sharing activities and/or third party reviews. Third party reviews will be especially useful for follow-up of RPLRP activities in areas affected by conflict. Such reviews will be planned for over and above the semi-annual JRIS missions. d. Implementation Completion: At the close of the project, each Government and the World Bank will carry out separate implementation completion reviews to assess the success of the Project and draw lessons from its implementation. 3. The implementation support and oversight missions would have the combined aim of reviewing the quality of implementation, providing solutions to implementation problems and assessing likelihood of achieving the PDO. More specifically, they would: (i) review component wise implementation progress (through its results chain) including institutional development aspects; (ii) provide solutions to implementation problems as they arise; (iii) review with the PCU the next six months action plan and disbursement programs; (iv) review the fiduciary aspects including disbursement and procurement; (v) verify compliance of project activities with the Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies; (vi) review case studies and survey results to measure results indicators to determine progress towards the PDO against the targets set within the results framework and the quality of implementation; and (vii) review the quality of capacity building activities, which are crucial for an effective implementation of the project. The missions would combine comprehensive field visits, field based focus group discussions and 98 interactive workshops with stakeholders for feedback, regional workshops as well as national workshops to highlight implementation issues, pick up on implementation lessons emerging and share mission recommendations including agreements on way forward actions. It will also include reviews of quarterly/annual reports and various studies. 4. Technical Assistance: Implementation support will include technical support from the World Bank and FAO-TCI task teams on critical aspects, particularly in terms of deepening the CDD approach, ensuring proper financial management and procurement and, given that social safeguards are newly being triggered, in terms of follow-up on social development issues. The objective of the technical support would be to help the project teams to internalize good practices, and to resolve implementation bottlenecks as they are identified during JRIS missions. Technical assistance will include training workshops to develop core resource teams within implementing units and project teams; helping to finalize manuals, review and advise on terms of reference for required studies and technical support missions. Implementation Support Plan 5. Technical Rigor: The Bank managed task teams will comprise team members with appropriate technical skills and experience commensurate with RPLRP requirements. The Bank task team members (including the task team leader, financial management, procurement, and safeguards specialists) are in large part based country-based in Addis Ababa, Nairobi and Kampala. The Bank will, however periodically draw on international experience (particularly from World Bank headquarters, south-south exchanges and support from the FAO Investment Center) to complement the in-country staff. 6. Focus of support: The first two years of implementation would see more technical support, later on focusing more on routine progress monitoring, trouble shooting and results framework based assessments. The implementation support missions to each country will be on a semi-annual basis, followed by regional workshops to discuss and exchange on the progress and challenges for each country. The support missions will be complemented by regular short visits by individual specialists to follow up on specific thematic issues as needed. 7. Fiduciary Reviews and Support: The Bank will provide risk-based implementation support, on financial management and procurement arrangements to the country teams and to the Djibouti-based IGAD PIU. a. During the implementation support missions, the project financial management specialist based in the country office will review the FM systems, including capacity for continued adequacy, evaluating the quality of the budgets and implementing agencies' adherence thereto, reviewing the cycle of transaction recording until the final end of report generation, evaluating the internal control environment including the internal audit function, reviewing IFRs and/or annual Financial Statements, follow up on ageing of the advance to the Designated Account, follow up on both internal and external audit reports and periodically assess the project's compliance with the FM manual as well as the financial agreement. 99 b. On the procurement front the Bank will provide implementation support to the client through a combination of prior and post reviews, procurement training to project staff and relevant implementing agencies; and periodic assessment of the project's compliance with the procurement manual. Implementation support missions will be geared towards: (a) reviewing procurement documents; (b) providing detailed guidance on the Bank's Procurement Guidelines; and (c) monitoring procurement progress against the detailed Procurement Plan. Following the recommendations of the fiduciary assessments of the Implementing Agencies, and in addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the semi-annual supervision missions will include field visits, of which at least one mission will involve post review of procurement actions. 8. Environmental and Social Safeguards: The Bank safeguards team consisting of social and environmental specialists will guide the project teams in applying the agreed safeguards instruments; and, during implementation support missions, review compliance. 9. The main focus in terms of support to implementation in the first two years will be as per the table below: Time Focus Skills Needed First 12 * Project start up, * Agriculture and Pastoral months * Support to preparatory activities (sensitization, community Livelihoods consultations and planning, institution building, strengthening * Livestock implementation capacity including M&E), * Financial Management * Support to finalization of manuals * Procurement * Guidance on applying safeguard instruments * Environment * Development of impact evaluation methodology and oversight of * Social Development. baseline survey * Public Sector * Procurement, FM, M&E and safeguards training of staff at all Development levels * CDD * Establishing coordination mechanisms with complementary * M&E projects 12-48 * Monitoring implementation performance including progress. * Agriculture and Pastoral months * Review strength of grassroots institutions, quality of Livelihoods participatory processes, and capacity building initiatives; * Livestock * Review of annual work plans and disbursement schedule * Financial Management * Review quality of quarterly/annual reports, data and various * Procurement produced studies * Environment * Assess quality of implementation process and data collected * Social Development. * Review of audit reports and JFR. * Public Sector * Review adequacy of the FM system and compliance to financial Development management covenants * CDD * Assess quality of safeguards instruments as they are applied * M&E 100 Annex 6: RPLRP Economic and Financial Analysis (EFA) AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOOD RESILIENCE PROJECT I- Overview 1. This Annex presents the economic and financial analysis (EFA) of the World Bank-funded Regional Pastoral Livelihoods Resilience Program (RPLRP). The Project Development objectives (PDO) are 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. To achieve this PDO, the project will invest in a number of activities, implemented across five components, namely (i) Natural Resources Management (NRM), (ii) Market Access and Trade (MAT), (iii) Livelihood Support (LS), (iv) Pastoral Risk Management (PRM), and (v) Project Management and Institutional Support (PMIS). Given the important linkages between resilience and the preservation of capital assets, mainly livestock in pastoral areas, the EFA mainly used livestock herd dynamics models (using the CIRAD/ ALIVE EcoRum/ LSIPT toolkit73), supported by cost-benefit analysis to assess the overall viability of the project, through the calculation of RPLRP's internal rates of return (IRRs) and net present values (NPVs). 2. The activities under the five components will contribute to building the resilience of pastoral and agro-pastoral communities in the arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) regions of Kenya and Uganda i.e. to support these communities to anticipate, manage, adapt to, cope with and recover from risks to livelihoods, droughts in particular. Investments are expected to generate a number of benefits such as the reduction of animal mortality rates and increases in calving and off-take rates. These have been chosen as PDO-level indicators since project interventions should result in measurable impacts due to: (i) improved access to shared natural resources (water and pasture) between countries, (ii) enhanced access to productive infrastructure and livestock related services, (iii) improved availability of animal feeds and breeds, (iv) more robust regional systems for surveillance and control of diseases (such as trans-boundary animal diseases -TADs), (v) improved early warning and response mechanisms. The project also creates a number of positive externalities, such as institutional strengthening, enhanced capacities of stakeholders, natural resources protection and biodiversity conservation. These benefits were not fully quantified due to the difficulty to attributing a monetary value to their contribution to the PDO. 3. The results indicate that the project is economically justified. However, given the absence of accurate baseline data at the time of preparation (when this analysis was undertaken)74, and the need to make numerous assumptions to describe the with-project scenario, the ex-ante results should be considered as indicative, rather than final. Under the current assumptions, LSIPT: Livestock Sector Investment Policy Toolkit. Previous versions of this toolkit were used in other Bank-financed projects' EFAs, such as the EFA for the Livestock Development and animal health project in Zambia. This toolkit is appropriate to assess the economics of traditional extensive livestock systems. 74 The baseline survey will be performed during implementation. 101 IRRs in 2 RPLRP countries are in the order of 17-18 percent and the NPVs are in the order of US$10-15 million. The project is sensitive to changes in some of the project's variables (parturition and mortality rates), but returns are expected to be maintained if the investments * * 75 aiming to enhance livelihood resilience are sustained. III- Economics of pastoralism 4. The drylands of the Greater Horn of Africa (HoA) are inhabited by over 25 million pastoralists, whose livelihood depends on livestock-related activities (Cabot Venton et al., 2012). The main livelihoods systems in the ASALs include commercial pastoralism, traditional pastoralism, mixed farming (agro-pastoralists) and ex-pastoralism (those who have moved/dropped out of pastoralism and live from petty income-earning activities) (Catley et al. 2012). 5. More particularly in Kenya, the ASALs are home to about 10 million people of Kenya's 42 million people, and approximately 70 percent of the national livestock herd. Similar to other countries of the HoA, pastoralism in Kenya makes a significant contribution to the economy with livestock production accounting for 50 percent of agricultural GDP (Cabot Venton et al., 2012). 6. 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 contributes 5.9 percent and 14.4 percent to total GDP76 and agricultural GDP respectively (FAO, 2005) and the livestock sector has been growing at an average 3 percent per year over the decade 2001- 2010 (DSIP, Uganda, 2011). This is consistently higher than the performances of other sub- sectors of agriculture. II- Economic rationale for investments in ASALs 7. There is a strong economic rationale for the World Bank to invest in the development of public goods in ASALs, more particularly those proposed under the project. RPLRP's interventions will contribute to the global goals of the World Bank about fighting extreme poverty and shared prosperity. More particularly, the investments will take place in marginal areas that have historically been under-resourced77 and where a large proportion of households are poor 7, in low-asset poverty traps and vulnerable to droughts. Resilience activities would bring wider development gains and contributions to GDP growth79. Besides, 75 Economic analysis for program investments in S. Sudan have not been undertaken as related preparation of the S. Sudan component of the program has not begun. 7 Dairy, pigs and poultry production being high in Uganda, pastoralism may only contribute partially to this figures Available statistics in Kenya evidence that the population in the North Eastern Province has been severely disadvantaged by inadequate provision of public goods. Just 4 percent of the population has access to electricity, 88 percent of adults have not completed primary education. In addition, school enrolment rates are very low, 50 percent of the children are not enrolled in primary school. 78 Poverty headcount index average 30-35 percent in some of the targeted ASALs (source: Ethiopia's Progress Towards Eradicating Poverty: an Interim Report on Poverty Analysis Study, 2010/11) 79 Cabot Venton et al. 2012, "The Economics of Resilience: lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia" 102 interventions in the ASALs have been "traditionally" directed towards emergency responses rather than preparedness and mitigation. 8. In the HoA, the incidence of extreme poverty is estimated at 41 percent, and areas found in the ASALs of Kenya and Uganda are among the poorest and most vulnerable. For instance in Kenya, three fourth of the population in the North-Eastern Province and over half the population in the Eastern Province live below the national poverty line (Poverty and Inequality Assessment, 2009). 9. With regard to the vulnerability to droughts, the Post-Distaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) carried out by the Government of Kenya (GoK) indicated that the agriculture sector has been affected severely by the recurrent droughts occurring between 2008 and 2011. According to the PDNA, Kenya experienced damages and losses due to the 2008-2011 droughts amounting to Ksh969 billion, of which Ksh832 billion (equivalent to 86 percent) were experienced in the agriculture sector. Within the agriculture sector, losses and damages related to livestock are most severe (accounting for 72 percent), amounting about US$8.5 billion. Alternatively, in the Karamoja region of Uganda, available evidence for the ASALs shows that in the event of droughts, crop production is highly affected through severe reductions in crop harvests while livestock livelihoods are least affected. IV- Economics of resilience: a literature review 10. A number of studies on the economics of resilience in the ASALs of the HoA (more particularly Ethiopia and Kenya) provide interesting insights about where investments should be made to achieve cost-effective interventions. In Kenya, Cabot Venton et al. (2012)o demonstrated that (i) late humanitarian response costs billions of dollars, which is significantly more than the cost of building resilience over 20 years (when the benefits of increased resilience are incorporated, these findings are only more pronounced); (ii) investment in commercial destocking of animals as an early response measure for pastoralists is highly cost-effective (every dollar spent avoids US$138 of aid/losses in Kenya), (iii) investment in a range of specific livestock (e.g. veterinary care, livestock feeding etc.) and water (e.g. storage and wells) interventions can yield benefits up to US$27 for every dollar spent8. Other studies report that the benefit-cost ratio of destocking interventions in terms of aid and investment averages 41:1 (Tufts, 2007), whereas the benefit-cost ratio of supplementary cattle feeding during drought was 1.6:1, with relatively solid results against changes in feed prices increases (Tufts, 2008). 82 11. Similarly, Headey et al. (2012) , in a paper edited by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), showed that a number of investments are necessary to transform the 80 "The Economics of Resilience: lessons from Kenya and Ethiopia" 81 The analysis is approached first from a bottom-up perspective, relying heavily on data generated through Household Economy Analysis (HEA). HEA is a livelihoods-based framework for analysing the way people obtain access to the things they need to survive and prosper. It was designed to help determine people's food and non-food needs in response to an event such as drought, and is built up based on household level evidence. The analysis is also approached from a top-down perspective, using national level data on the cost of drought. 82 IFPRI, 2012, Enhancing Resilience in the Horn ofAfrica, an Exploration into Alternative Investment Options. 103 pastoralist sector into a more resilient economic system. These investments could potentially be focused at promoting: (i) commercial pastoralism (which is characterized by higher off- take rates than traditional pastoralism), (ii) natural resources management and (iii) economic diversification. All of these have demonstrated high potential for increasing the welfare of individuals and communities in ASALs (Headey et al., 2012). The literature, in particular Headey's analysis, demonstrates, based on a rationale grounded in the economic theory, that most of non-pastoralist livelihoods in ASALs yield lower incomes than pastoralism, with the exception of urban livelihoods and irrigated farming. In some cases (low implementation cost scenario), irrigation investments in pastoralist regions appear to be capable of yielding high rates of return (70-80 percent in Kenya). However, these returns drop precipitously in the medium and high implementation cost scenarios, with IRRs averaging 10 percent in the former and 2-7 percent in the latter. Last but not least, analysis of investments in irrigation have been shown to have limited ability to enhance resilience, with investments having the potential to profitably absorb only 3 percent of the estimated pastoralist population. 12. Decision analysis tools are currently being developed to measure the impact of investment on enhanced resilience in the HoA. The ongoing preparation of the Flagship Report about the "Economics of resilience in the dry-lands ofSub-Saharan Africa ", coordinated by the World Bank, is developing a framework of analysis that can further assess the relative effectiveness of resilience policies thus potentially informing the suitability and cost-effectiveness of alternative investments. This report will provide the likely cost of the investments needed at the national, sub-regional and regional levels to reduce vulnerability to desirable levels and provide some insights about how to balance investments across livestock and non-livestock sectors. Complementing the Flagship Report study, research carried out by the Technical Consortium (a collaborative platform between FAO and CGIAR, coordinated by ILRI) aim to develop a methodology for prioritization of investment for interventions that influence resilience and forecasting impacts. These investment planning tools will further facilitate assessing potential impacts of investments by sector on enhancing resilience. 13. This EFA does not attempt to substitute on-going research. Rather, this EFA, using an existing framework in a livestock investment toolkit, focuses on analyzing the expected returns of the RPLRP investment, based on the main expected impact of the project (reduction in household herd mortality rate), as described in the results framework. It also uses the model to undertake simulations which are described in sections IX and X. V- Identification of benefits 14. Project activities financed under RPLRP are expected to generate three main benefit streams: (i) on-site private and community-level benefits, such as increased production of livestock and livestock products, increased livestock productivity due to increased parturition rate, increased animal live weight, decreased livestock mortality and morbidity, and increased agricultural yield for selected food fodder crops resulting from the diversification of 83 livelihood activities . Other direct project benefits include improved incomes, which in turn generates additional social benefits in the form of increased food security and nutrition; (ii) 8 Not quantified in the analysis, see explanation in the paragraph below. 104 public benefits at national and regional levels, such as reduced transboundary animal diseases, strengthened capacity of public services and institutions including participating ministries and regional economic community such as IGAD and its specialized agencies, more particularly the ICPALD and CEWARN; (iii) more global benefits, such as natural resources protection, enhanced bio-diversity and resilience to climate change risks. Other economic benefits, arising from improved animal productivity and health, include spill-over effects on consumers through relatively lower meat prices as supply increases, less health related illnesses through investments in strong value chains and food safety, and veterinary drug and feed suppliers who would expect higher demand for their services. VI- Methodology and assumptions for the evaluation of project benefits 15. Measuring resilience to shocks. FAO has developed a conceptual framework and tested practical methods for measuring household resilience to food insecurity (Alinovi, L., Mane, E., Romano, D.)84. The resilience framework looks at the root causes of household vulnerability and highlights factors that make households resilient to food security shocks and stresses. These factors include: (i) income and access to food, (ii) assets (such as livestock), (iii) social safety nets (such as food assistance and social security), (iv) access to basic services (such as water and health care), (v) households' adaptive capacity which is linked to education and diversity of income sources; and (vi) the stability of all these factors over time. Given that social safety nets and access to basic services are not directly addressed by the RPLRP, this project will mainly have an impact on livestock assets, incomes and diversity of income sources. Livestock herd projection models will be used to assess the stability of these factors over time. 16. Herd projection models. Livestock production in extensive pastoral systems is the dominant livelihood and economic activity in the ASALs. Consequently, the quantification of benefits from livestock activities will be at the centre of the project's EFA. Herd growth projection models in Kenya and Uganda for cattle and small ruminant (sheep and goats) populations85 have been designed to estimate the "with project" and "without project" situations for a typical household over a 20-years period. The herd growth projection model uses the EcoRum/LSIPT interface (a toolkit developed by CIRAD and ILRI under the ALIVE program 86) for simulating bio-economic performances of herds of tropical domestic ruminants in pastoral systems. Demographic projections are critical for assessing the livestock asset depletion through time (livestock asset stability). From the projections, it is possible to calculate equivalent meat production and secondary productions (milk, hides and skins, manure, organic matters), and, from these outputs, derive incremental income/financial benefits streams (incomes stability). 84 Alinovi, L., Mane, E. and Romano, D. (2010) "Measuring Household Resilience to Food Insecurity: an Application to Palestinian Households", in Agricultural Survey Methods, by Benedetti et al. (eds.), John Wiley & Sons, April 2010. A number of other FAO/EU papers reflect some applications of these frameworks in Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan 85 Camels were not considered in the analysis, due to (i) their capacity of being resilient in times of shocks and (ii) RPLRP investments mainly targeting cattle and small ruminants. CIRAD recently revised the tool, as part of ALIVE's Livestock Sector Investment and Policy Toolkit (LSIPT). 105 17. Herd composition per household. While it is impossible to reflect in the analysis all the diversity of wealth characteristics (livestock holdings per pastoral and agro-pastoral households) for each pastoral wealth group category (very poor, poor, middle and better-off) in all the different targeted regions of Kenya and Uganda, the analysis has attempted to model the typical livestock holdings per household in the two countries of the project, based on the data available in the USAID/FEWSNET "Livelihoods Profiles" literature. Table 1 below describes the average wealth characteristics by type of livestock keeping household (HH) for each RPLRP country. Table 1. Wealth characteristics per household in Kenya and Uganda Kenya 1/ Uganda 2/ Sheep and goats/ HH 50 50 Cattle/ HH 5 5 Notes: 1/ estimated data using "USAID Livelihoods profiles" and discussions with livestock experts from K-NPPT 2/ no data available, estimation based on USAID livelihoods profiles data for Karamoja in Kenya 18. With and without project scenarios. For each "typical" pastoral household, efforts were made to carefully assume the "without project" conditions (counterfactual) and forecast the "with project" situation. For both scenarios, cattle and small-ruminants production parameters, such as average annual mortality rates, parturition rates, lactation rates and average annual off-take rates or live weights, together with herd structure and demographic parameters, were discussed extensively with pastoralists, livestock specialists and economists from the National Project Preparation Teams (NPPTs) and FAO during project preparation (tables in annex provide a full list of assumptions for cattle and small ruminants production)7. When data was not available or scarce, the analysis used literature data from FAO's "Systematic Review of Cattle and Small Ruminants Productions Systems in Sub- Saharan Africa" or other grey literature sources". Benefits at the household level, as provided by EcoRum/LSPIT, were extrapolated at the assumed total number of beneficiaries in each country. 19. In both scenarios, the probability of droughts and rain failures to occur is assumed to be one every three years in the targeted ASALs (according to the estimates reported in most of the Country Programming Papers- CPPs89). In the "without project" situation, droughts contribute to modest herd growth-rates, due to low reproductive efficiency including low conception and calving rates and long calving intervals, increased calf and adult mortality rates, but also lead to low animal prices, pastoral households selling weak and unhealthy animals in order to buy staple cereals. In the "with project" situation, the analysis will assume that all project activities will combine to build pastoral and agro-pastoral Because it is almost impossible to estimate these parameters for all cattle and small-ruminant breeds existing in the project areas, the model used average estimates for both cattle and breeds. 88 Sector Wide Approach for the Development of the Arid and Semi-Arid Lands, FAO TCI technical support mission on livestock marketing (10-28 April 2010), discussion paper. 89 CPPs report that the chances of drought occurring in parts of the region have increased from a probability of one in every six to eight years to a probability of one in every two to three years (based on a study performed by the African Development Bank). 106 communities' resilience (i.e. improved capacity to anticipate, absorb, cope with and respond to shocks) that would translate into (i) a reduction of animal mortality rates and increased animal parturition rates during and after droughts, due to improved access to natural resources for grazing and water, access to drought tolerant fodder and animal health services, (ii) higher animal prices during and after droughts due to improved average live weight for each animal class of age, early off-take of animal and production of well-finished animals. In both scenarios, a compensatory growth period was assumed (zero off-taking of cattle females) to reflect the coping strategies of pastoralists after drought years. 20. Linkage with the results framework (RF). Mortality rates and the total number of beneficiaries are used as PDO-level indicators in the results framework. The Baseline Study will further describe the counterfactual in normal years and during droughts. When more accurate baseline data from the study will be available, the EFA could be re-run to improve the robustness of results. 21. Project beneficiaries. It was conservatively assumed that 93,000 pastoral households would be targeted in Kenya and 42,000 pastoral households in Uganda. These beneficiaries are distributed in 14 counties in Kenya and 12 districts in Uganda. It was supposed that benefits would accrue incrementally over the project years. Consequently, in each country, it was assumed that 10 percent of the expected total number of project beneficiaries in year 1 would be reached, 20 percent in year 2, 40 percent in year 3, 60 percent in year 4 and 100 percent in year 5. 22. Alternative livelihoods activities (under sub-component 3.3) are not known ex-ante, since they will be determined through the value chain analysis performed during implementation in the 2 countries, and will also arise -in a second stage- from the beneficiary participatory planning processes. For this reason, a full quantitative evaluation of economic and financial benefits of component 3 activities cannot be easily done at the ex-ante level because it has not been possible to predict: (i) which investment activities will be pursued by the beneficiaries and (ii) the cost of investment packages (construction, equipment and material, working capital requirements etc.). Financial analysis (using, for example, the Rural Invest toolkit90), however, will be systematically done when assessing/studying the most appropriate value chains for alternative livelihoods in the project areas. VII- Prices 23. In Kenya, prices were obtained through the national Livestock Market Information System (LMIS) by the project preparation Team and from secondary data (prices data from other projects and direct interviews with the project beneficiaries). In Uganda, no LMIS being available, price data is being directly collected within relevant Government institutions, through the Economist of the Uganda National Project Preparation Team. 24. A particular focus was put on collecting, and distinguishing between, average livestock prices with and without a drought. Specific efforts were made to assess the average animal 90 Software developed by the Investment Centre of FAO 107 price variability in the project areas over a significant period of time (reviewing prices over a 10 year period to ensure coverage of at least two to three drought years). It was also assumed that livestock prices in Kenya and Uganda reflect their market values, and so no attempt is made to separate economic and financial prices (all prices are in 2013 real prices). 25. Other prices, such as milk, manure, hides and skins were collected through the National Project Preparation Teams and/or through the data provided in other projects (e.g. Arid Lands Management Project in Kenya). VIII- Project costs 26. Total project costs are provided by the COSTAB tool on the basis of detailed cost tables prepared for each component in Kenya, Uganda and IGAD. Costs related to IGAD coordination activities (US$5 million) were added in the country-level costs since they are assumed to contribute to the smooth implementation of all regional and national activities. IX- Results (baseline scenario) 27. Incremental increase in output. Using the EcoRum/LSIPT model, and under the herd modeling baseline assumptions, livestock productivity gains were translated into quantitative benefits by placing a price value (in constant US$ currency) on the incremental value of meat, milk and hides/skins. In this case, over a 20-year period, the cumulative incremental benefit (discounted) in output generated by a given household in each of the 2 RPLRP countries with an original herd of 55 animals in Kenya and Uganda (cf. table 1) is about US$1,822 (about US$91 per year) in Kenya and about US$2,144 (about US$107 per year) in Uganda. The slightly higher results in Uganda might be explained by better animal price estimates in the "with project" and "without project" scenarios. Table 4: incremental increase in outputs at the household level Baseline scenario Kenya Uganda Discounted incremental benefit (HH level, 20 years cumulative) (US$) 1,822 2,144 Discounted incremental benefit (HH level/ year) (US$) 91 107 28. Internal Rate of Return and Net Present Value of the project. Incremental benefit streams were calculated in each of the two countries, in constant US$ currency. The total incremental benefit stream was used to calculate the IRRs and NPVs, over a 20-year period. Given the complementarities of activities undertaken under the various components to enhance resilience, a calculation of financial and economic returns (IRRs/NPVs) by component or activity is of limited value in this context, as it does not illustrate the multiple anticipated spillover effects between the project's activities. Rather, the analysis provides IRR and NPV per country. 29. An opportunity cost of capital of 12 percent was used to calculate the IRR (as it is the case in most of the EFAs carried out for World Bank-funded projects in Kenya and Uganda). Results show satisfactory IRRs (table 5), but given the absence of accurate baseline data in the 2 108 countries at the time of pre-appraisal, the ex-ante results should be considered as indicative, rather than final. Table 5: Rate of Return and NPVs of the overall project NPV @12 percent (in '000 US$) Rate of return (20 years) Kenya 14,725 16.6% Uganda 9,652 17.6% X- Sensitivity analysis 30. Variables affecting the project returns. Through a deterministic approach, the analysis tested the robustness of the results against some changes in the main variables of the project (in the "with project" situation, covering both drought and normal years). These key variables include (i) mortality rates, (ii) parturition rates, (iii) off-take rates and, (iv) animal prices. Results of the sensitivity analysis are presented in table 6 below. Table 6: results from sensitivity analysis Sensitivity analysis IRR Scenario Kenya Uganda Baseline scenario 16.6% 17.6% With changes in mortality rates (all other parameters being fixed)* 10 percent increase 11.4% 13.5% 15 percent increase 8.5% 11.4% With changes in parturition rates (all other parameters being fixed)* 2 percent decrease 13.7% 14.9% 5 percent decrease 9.1% 10.7% With changes in off-take rates (all other parameters being fixed)* 10 percent increase 13.3% 15.8% 15 percent increase 11.5% 14.7% With changes in animal prices (only during shocks/ droughts) (all other parameters being fixed) 50 percent decrease 16.3% 17.3% 75 percent decrease 16.2% 17.2% * against the baseline parameter 31. Interpretation of results. The sensitivity analysis shows that the project can be sensitive, in some cases, to changes in the values of some of the project variables. More particularly, the project appears to be more sensitive to changes in animal parturition rates, and in a lower extent mortality rates, rather than changes in off-take rates and animal prices during droughts. These results show that sustainable investments towards animal nutrition and health, both contributing to increased parturition, are key to project success. Increased parturition contributes to maintain households' livestock assets and income sources, and eventually household resilience. 109 32. Limitation of the model. Forecasts of project's benefits (increased parturition rates, decreased mortality rates, increased live weights and prices) in the "with project" scenario (normal years and droughts) are difficult to estimate exactly. This sensitivity analysis did not consider the uncertainties on all these key variables. A more thorough sensitivity analysis (i.e. risk analysis), using a stochastic approach91 (considering probability distributions and performing a Monte Carlo simulation on RPLRP's key variables) would have allowed to better capture uncertainties and strengthen the results of this analysis (i.e. providing a probability for the IRR to be acceptable, i.e. above the opportunity cost of capital). The on- going studies performed by the Technical Consortium (FAO-CGIAR/ILRI) will allow to further improve ex-ante EFAs and develop decision analysis tools to measure the impact of investment on enhanced resilience in the Horn of Africa. 91 Beyond the scope of this analysis 110 XI- Annexes- main herd modeling (baseline) assumptions used in Kenya and Uganda Without project Normal years Drought year Cattle small ruminants Cattle small ruminants Parameters Female male Female male Female male Female male Reproduction Parturition rate 1/ 55% 105% 45% 90% Net prolificacy rate 2/ 100% 120% 100% 105% Mortality rates Juvenile 15% 18% 16% 15% 25% 45% 25% 27% Sub-adult 8% 8% 12% 12% 10% 15% 17% 17% Adult 5% 4% 4% 3% 20% 20% 10% 8% Offtake rates Juvenile 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Sub-adult 2% 15% 5% 20% 0% 20% 15% 25% Adult 5% 25% 10% 15% 2% 40% 15% 25% Live weights (kg) Juvenile 80 120 10 12 50 60 8 9 Sub-adult 160 200 16 20 120 160 12 16 Adult 250 300 27 36 200 250 18 24 With project Normal years Drought year Cattle small ruminants Cattle small ruminants Parameters Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Reproduction Parturition rate 1/ 60% 110% 50% 92% Net prolificacy rate 2/ 100% 120% 100% 110% Mortality rates Juvenile 13% 15% 13% 12% 20% 40% 18% 19% Sub-adult 7% 7% 10% 10% 10% 12% 13% 13% Adult 4% 3% 3% 3% 16% 18% 8% 6% Offtake rates Juvenile 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Sub-adult 3% 23% 8% 30% 0% 40% 17% 28% Adult 8% 30% 15% 23% 2% 50% 17% 28% Live weights (kg) Juvenile 96 144 12 14 65 78 10 12 Sub-adult 192 240 19 24 156 208 16 21 Adult 300 360 33 43 260 325 23 21 1/ Probability for a female to have a parturition; 2/ mean number of offspring per parturition 111 Annex 7: Procurement Arrangements AFRICA: REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT A. Background 1. Procurement Environment: National Procurement Procedures are normally acceptable for National Competitive Bidding (NCB), subject to some exceptions as listed for each country in paragraphs 18, 19 and 20 below. 2. The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Secretariat will coordinate the implementation of the cross-boundary interventions, provide a platform for technical assistance and support policy dialogue with countries. The coordination role of IGAD will be funded by an IDA Grant. B. Applicable Procurement Guidelines 3. General: Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement of Goods, Works and Non-Consulting Services under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits & Grant by World Bank Borrowers" dated January 2011; "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits & Grants by World Bank Borrowers" dated January 2011, "Guidelines on Preventing and Combating Fraud and Corruption in Projects Financed by IBRD Loans and IDA Credits and Grants, (the Anti-Corruption Guidelines)" dated October 15, 2006 and revised in January 2011 ,and the provisions stipulated in the Legal Agreement. The various items under different expenditure categories are described below. For each contract to be financed by the Credit, the different procurement methods or consultant selection methods, the need for pre-qualification, estimated costs, prior review requirements, and time frame are agreed between the Borrower and the Bank in the Procurement Plan. The Procurement Plan will be updated at least annually, or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. The borrowers as well as contractors, suppliers, and consultants will observe the highest standards of ethics during procurement and execution of contracts financed under this project. 4. Bidding Documents Applicable under the Project: Bank's Standard Bidding Documents (SBDs) will be used for procurement of works and goods under International Competitive Bidding (ICB); and the Standard Request for Proposals (SRFP) will be used for consultants' contracts. In addition, the implementing agencies will use Standard Bid Evaluation Form for procurement of goods and works for ICB contracts, and Sample Form of Evaluation Report for Selection of Consultants. National Standard Bidding Documents acceptable to the Bank may be used for procurement of goods, works and non-consulting services under National Competitive Bidding (NCB) procedures. subject to the exceptions indicated below under each country. Alternatively, the Bank's SBDs would be used with appropriate modifications. Furthermore, in accordance with para. 1.16 (e) of the Procurement Guidelines each bidding document and contract 112 financed out of the proceeds of the Financing shall provide that: (i) the bidders, suppliers and contractors, and their subcontractors, agents, personnel, consultants, service providers or suppliers shall permit the Bank, at its request, to inspect their accounts, records, and other documents relating to submission of bids and contract performance and to have said accounts and records audited by auditors appointed by the Bank; and (ii) deliberate and material violation by the bidder, supplier, contractor or subcontractor, of such provision may amount to an obstructive practice as defined in paragraphs 1.16(a)(v) of the Procurement Guidelines. C. Applicable Procurement Methods 5. Scope of Procurement: The implementation of the project entails procurement of various types that vary from country to country, but it generally comprise: (a) Works (construction and/or rehabilitation of water resources access facilities such as water pans, earth dams, valley dams, boreholes, shallow wells, forage storage structures, weather stations, quarantine centres, slaughter houses, irrigation and drainage, etc); (b) Goods (vehicles and motor cycles, office furniture and equipment, IT equipment (i.e., computers, computer software, servers, and scanners), veterinary laboratory equipment, veterinary vaccines, commodities (i.e., seeds (assorted) and fertilizers), etc); (c) Consulting Services (technical assistance (TA), research studies, design and supervision firms, M&E, etc.); and (d) Training and Workshops. 6. Procurement of Works and Goods: Contract packages for works estimated to cost US$15 million (for Kenya), US$10 million (for Uganda), and US$ 1 million (for IGAD) equivalent per contract and above; contract packages for goods estimated to cost US$1 million (for Uganda), US$3 million for Kenya, and US$ 150,000 (for IGAD) equivalent per contract will be procured through International Competitive Bidding (ICB) procedures. Works contracts estimated to cost less than US$15 million for Kenya, US$ 10 million for Uganda, and less than US$ 1 million for IGAD equivalent per contract respectively; and goods contracts estimated to cost less than US$1 million equivalent per contract (for Uganda), less than US$3 million equivalent per contract (for Kenya) and less than US$ 150,000 (for IGAD) would be procured through National Competitive Bidding (NCB) procedures. Small works contracts estimated to cost less than US$200,000 equivalent per contract (for Kenya, Uganda, and IGAD); and goods contracts estimated to cost less than US$100,000 equivalent per contract (for Kenya and Uganda) and less than US$ 25,000 (for IGAD) may be procured through Shopping procedures by comparing prices for quotations received from at least three (3) reliable contractors or suppliers. In such cases, request for quotations shall be made in writing and shall indicate the description, scope of the works, the time required for completion of the works and the payment terms. All quotations received shall be opened at the same time. As a general rule, a qualified supplier who offers goods or materials that meet the specifications at the lowest price shall be recommended for award of the contract. Limited International Bidding (LIB) for goods may exceptionally be used when there are only a limited number of known suppliers worldwide. Direct Contracting (DC) for works or goods may exceptionally be an appropriate method in emergency situation, provided the Bank is satisfied in such cases that no advantage could be obtained from 113 competition and that prices are reasonable. In Kenya, procurement of localized serotype vaccines such as FMD, CCPP and CBPP may be procured through Direct Contracting procedures from Kenya Veterinary Vaccines Production Institute (KEVENAPI) classified as a commercial state corporation which generates its own funds through sale of Vaccines and is autonomous. In Uganda, given the need to purchase vaccines which protect the Africa continent against virus strains from other continents, single sourcing of the Botswana Vaccines Institute (BVI) for the procurement of FMD and PPR vaccines may be used. This is justified for PPR by the fact the BVI has been designated by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)92 as an official vaccines Bank for this disease. 7. The procurement of non-consulting services shall follow the existing Bank's SBDs for ICB, or national SBDs for NCB, with appropriate modifications. 8. Use of Framework Agreements (FAs): Common supplies, for example, stationery and consumables will be aggregated and procured through framework contracts to enable implementing agencies place orders for urgently needed supplies at short notice, at a competitive price. FAs shall not restrict foreign competition, and should be limited to a maximum duration of 3 (three) years. The Borrower shall submit to the Bank for its no objection the circumstances and justification for the use of an FA, the particular approach and model adopted, the procedures for selection and award, and the terms and conditions of the contracts. FA procedures applicable to the project are those of the Borrowers that have been deemed acceptable by the Bank, and shall be described in the Loan Agreement. 9. Advance Contracting and Retroactive Financing shall apply for this project which allows the Borrowers to proceed with the initial steps of procurement before signing the related Bank loan. In such cases, the procurement procedures, including advertising, shall be in accordance with the Guidelines in order for the eventual contracts to be eligible for Bank financing, and the Bank shall review the process used by the Borrower. A Borrower undertakes such advance contracting at its own risk, and any concurrence by the Bank with the procedures, documentation, or proposal for award does not commit the Bank to make a loan for the project in question. 10. It has been agreed with the Borrower, that bidding documents under NCB procedures include a clause rendering ineligible for Bank financing a firm, or an individual, of the Borrower country that is under a sanction of debarment from being awarded a contract by the appropriate judicial authority of the Borrower country and pursuant to its relevant laws, provided that the Bank has determined that the firm, or the individual, has engaged in fraud or corruption and the judicial proceeding afforded the firm or the individual adequate due process. 92 The OIE is the standards setting organization specialized in animal health, recognized by the World Trade Organization for international trade of livestock and products. The OIE has developed The Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals (Terrestrial Manual - http://www.oie.int/international-standard-setting/terrestrial-manual/ ) adopted by its 178 Member States who described internationally agreed requirements for the production and control of vaccines 114 11. Selection of Consultants: Contracts with firms estimated to cost US$300,000 (for Kenya), US$200,000 (for Uganda) and US$ 50,000 (for IGAD) equivalent and above per contract will be selected using Quality and Cost Based Selection (QCBS) Method. Quality Based Selection (QBS) and/or Fixed Budget Selection (FBS) may be used for assignments which meet the requirements of paragraph 3.2 and 3.5 of the Consultants Guidelines respectively. However, consultants used for assignments of a standard and routine nature such as audits and other repetitive services would be selected through Least-Cost Selection (LCS) method in accordance with paragraph 3.6 of the Consultants Guidelines. Contracts for consulting services, using firms, estimated to cost less than US$300,000 (for Kenya, Uganda and IGAD) equivalent per contract and for which the cost of a full-fledged selection process would not be justified may be selected on the basis of Consultant Qualifications (CQS) in accordance with paragraphs 3.7 of the Consultants Guidelines. Short List of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$300,000 (for Kenya), US$200,000 (for Uganda) and US 50,000 (for IGAD) equivalent per contract may be comprised entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. For consulting assignments of engineering and contract supervision, short list of consultants for services estimated to cost less than US$300,000 (for Kenya Uganda, and IGAD) equivalent per contract may be comprised entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. 12. Single-Source Selection (SSS) of consulting firms or individuals would be applied only in exceptional cases if it presents a clear advantage over competition when selection through a competitive process is not practicable or appropriate and would be made on the basis of strong justifications and upon Bank's concurrence to the grounds supporting such justification. 13. Individual Consultants (IC) will be selected on the basis of their qualifications by comparison of CVs of at least three candidates from those expressing interest in the assignment or those approached directly by the Implementing Agency in accordance with the provision of Section V of the Consultants Guidelines. 14. Training and Workshops: The project will fund training activities including capacity building of (i) communities and water user associations in water management; (ii) local government and security officials to enforce agreements signed on resource sharing; (iii) market staff and officials on market management models; etc. Training plans of each country will be approved by the Bank. The training plans would include details on: (i) type of training to be provided; (ii) number of beneficiaries to be trained, duration of training, and estimated cost; (iii) institutions selected based on their expertise; and (iv) expected learning outcomes. Workshops shall be prior reviewed as a part of the annual work-plans of the participating countries. 15. Operating Costs: Incremental operating costs contributing to project implementation for maintaining equipment and vehicles; fuel; office supplies; utilities; consumables; workshop venues and materials; financial audit fees and per diems, travel costs, and accommodation for staff when travelling on duty during implementation of this project, 115 but excluding salaries of civil/public servants. In Uganda they also include inputs for agricultural technologies demonstration. These will be procured using the Borrower's administrative procedures, acceptable to the Bank. Operating expenditures are neither subject to the Procurement and Consultant Guidelines nor prior or post reviews. Salary top-ups, meeting allowances, sitting allowances and honoraria to civil/public servants and contracted consultants are not eligible for funding by the project. 16. Bank's Review Thresholds: The Borrower shall seek World Bank prior review in accordance with Appendix 1 of both Procurement and Consultant Guidelines for contracts above the thresholds as agreed in the Procurement Plan. For purposes of the initial Procurement Plan, the Borrower shall seek Bank prior review for: (i) works contracts estimated to cost US$5 million (for Uganda) and US$10 million (for Kenya) and US$ 0.1 million (for IGAD) equivalent per contract and above; (ii) goods contracts estimated to cost US$500,000 (for Uganda), US$1 million (for Kenya) and US$ 0.05 million (for IGAD) equivalent per contract and above; (iii) all consultancy contracts for services to be provided by consulting firms of US$200,000 (for Uganda), US$500,000 (for Kenya), and 0.05 million (for IGAD), equivalent per contract and above; (iv) for individual consultants contracts estimated to cost US$100,000 (for Uganda), US$200,000 (for Kenya) and US$ 0.025 million (for IGAD) equivalent per contract and above; (iv) all direct contracting and single source selection contracts regardless of their value; and (v) annual training plan. In addition, a specified number of contracts to be identified in the procurement plan for the procurement of goods and works below the ICB threshold will also be subject to prior review. These prior review thresholds may be re-visited annually and any revisions based on the assessment of the implementing agencies capacity will be agreed with the Borrower and included in an updated Procurement Plan. 17. Record Keeping: Each implementing agency in a respective country will be responsible for record keeping and filing of procurement records for ease retrieval of procurement information. In this respect, each contract shall have its own file and should contain all documents on the procurement process in accordance with the requirements and as described in the national procurement Law. 18. Monitoring: M&E of procurement performance will be carried out through Bank supervision and post procurement review missions. D. Use of National Procurement Procedures for Goods and Works 19. National Procurement Procedures are normally acceptable for NCB, subject to some exceptions as listed below for each country: 20. Uganda: Procurement in Uganda is governed by the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act of 2003. The procedures in the PPDA act have been reviewed by the Bank and found to be acceptable subject to the following exceptions which will not be applicable under this project: 116 * Negotiations with the best evaluated bidder: Shall not apply for goods/non-consulting services and works procured using competitive methods; However for civil works, technical discussions to agree on work programs, method statement and other technical matters related to contract implementation with an awarded bidder are permissible. * The merit point evaluation for goods and works for bid evaluation: This shall not be applied for goods and works contracts. * Application of Domestic Preference: Domestic Preference under NCB shall not apply. * Micro-procurement: Micro-procurement as defined in the PPDA Act will only apply for contracts estimated to cost the equivalent of US$200 or less in case of unforeseen circumstances only. * Charging of fees for dealing with bidder complaints at procuring entity level: The procuring entities shall not be allowed to charge fees for dealing with complaints. * Selection of Consultants: The procedures for Selection of Consultants under the PPDA Act shall not apply. Only the Bank's guidelines shall apply for selection of all Consultants under the project. * Evaluation of Goods and Works: The following documentation or their equivalent shall not be treated as eligibility requirements: (i) Tax clearance certificates; (ii) Tax registration certificates; (iii) trading licenses, and (iv)the PPDA Certificate of Registration. Documents (i) - (iii) may however be included as post qualification requirements, which the Borrower can request the Bidder to avail during the evaluation. * Disqualification of Bidders for not purchasing the bidding documents from the Borrower shall not apply. * Ineligibility shall in addition to firms suspended by PPDA extend to firms debarred or suspended by IDA. * Registration in the PPDAs: Register of Providers shall neither be an eligibility nor qualification requirement. 21. Kenya: All contracts other than those to be procured on the basis of International Competitive Bidding (ICB) and consulting services shall follow the procedures set out in the Public Procurement and Disposal Act of 2005. The Act has been reviewed by the Bank and found to be acceptable except for the following provisions that would not be applied under this project: * Bidding period shall not be less than 30 days as opposed to 21/14 days provided in the law. * Government-owned enterprises shall be allowed to participate in procurement only if they are legally and financially autonomous, operate under commercial law, and are independent from the borrower and its purchasing/contracting authority. * Extension of tender validity shall be allowed only once, and for not more than thirty (30) days, unless otherwise previously agreed in writing by the Association. * Evaluation of tenders shall be based on quantifiable criteria expressed in monetary terms as defined in the tender documents. It should not be based on a merit points system. * The evaluation of tenders shall be in compliance with applicable WB guidelines. * Notification of contract award shall constitute formation of the contract. No negotiations for procurement of works and goods shall be done prior to contract award. 117 * Shopping procedures shall be used instead of direct procurement for low value contracts in lieu of Direct Procurement, except as otherwise previously agreed in writing by the Association. * The "two envelope" bid opening procedure for procurement of goods shall not be permitted. * The Bank's SCBs for goods and works with appropriate modifications shall be used. E. Implementation Arrangements and Risk Assessment 22. The overall responsibility for procurement of works and goods and selection of consultants will be carried out at national level, regional and districts in each country. The description of implementation arrangements and assessments of the agencies/entities' capacity to handle and manage procurement in each country is provided below. 23. Uganda: The project will be mainstreamed into the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries (MAAIF). MAAIF will collaborate with the Ministry of Water and Environment and Office of the Prime Minister to get technical support. The procurement function under the project will be executed by the PDU. 24. The key issues and risks to procurement include: (i) staff capacity gaps in the PDU, particularly inadequate experience in IDA procurement procedures; (ii) lack of Civil Engineer to oversee and approve payment certificates for civil works; (iii) inadequate record keeping; (iv) inadequate number of staff in technical departments; (v) delayed payments up to one year; (vi) poor coordination between user department and PDU; (vii) inadequate access to information on reporting fraud and corruption; and (viii) inadequate procurement staff at District level. 25. The overall project risk for procurement is "High."The proposed actions to mitigate the risk are summarized in the following table: Risk Action Completion Date Responsible Entity PDU staff have Recruit 1 Procurement Specialist proficient By 1 month after MAAIF Inadequate proficiency in in IDA financed procurement management effectiveness IDA financed to (i) handle procurement processing for procurement procedures RPLRP; (ii) provide hands-on coaching and mentoring of PDU staff PDU staff to attend training at a MAAIF Inadequate filing of procurement training institute, e.g. procurement records ESAMI, in selection of consultants A Training workshop facilitated by IDA MAAIF Procurement Team for staff involved in By six months after project implementation to provide basic Effectiveness knowledge of World Bank procedures. Hands on training on acceptable procurement records filing facilitated by 118 Risk Action Completion Date Responsible Entity IDA Procurement Team Lack of Civil Engineer to MAAIF hires a Civil Engineer with ToR By six months after MAAIF oversee and approve payment acceptable to MOWT and IDA to verify Effectiveness certificates for Civil works the contractors' payments during contract execution Inadequate record keeping Establish an acceptable record keeping Within twelve MAAIF system; months of Effectiveness Enhanced record keeping by safes opened At Project by 2 people - the Procurement Officer and Implementation the Accounting Officer Poor coordination between Include Procurement section in Project By project MAAIF user departments and PDU Implementation Manual to enforce effectiveness adherence to roles and responsibilities of staff Inadequate procurement staff Procurements at district level shall be During MAAIF at District level aggregated and packaged into big contracts implementation to be procured at national level by MAAIF. Inadequate information on MAAIF reporting of fraud and Procurement Notice Board to include corruption Poster or Banner indicating telephone Nos of the implementing agency to which fraud and corruption issues should be reported as At Project well as IDA 's Integrity Department Implementation contacts and that of the IGG 26. Kenya: The Ministry has established a Project Implementation Unit (PIU) headed by a Project Coordinator who reports to the Principal Secretary of Livestock from the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries. The PIU comprises of (i) Accounts; (ii) Monitoring and evaluation; (iii) Procurement; and (iv) safeguards as core components of the Project. The procurement function of the Project will be centralized at the PIU. The component heads will provide technical support to the procurement management. Currently, the PIU is being served by one procurement specialist who is a civil servant seconded to this particular project. The procurement specialist has 8 years of project experience under the African Development Bank supported project. However, he has limited knowledge of the Bank Procurement Guidelines. His experience is mainly the use of Kenya Public Procurement Law and procedures. The Ministry has a Tender Committee established based on the Public Procurement Law. Equally, the CEO normally appoints an ad hoc tender opening committee and technical evaluation committee in pursuant to the Public Procurement Law. Bidding documents are prepared jointly by the technical departments supported by the procurement staff and are issued to public by the procurement unit. 119 27. An assessment of the capacity of the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries (MALF) to carry out procurement of the Project activities was carried out by the World Bank on August 23, 2013. The assessment was based on discussion with the project's senior staff comprising of the Project Coordinator, the procurement officer and one from Compliance Studies on overall procurement processes, internal controls, organizational setup and staff exposure to international procurement, number of qualified staff, etc. The Ministry oversees the operations of the Nairobi Metropolitan Services Improvement Project (NaMSIP) another project financed by the Bank, but it is relatively new. 28. The key issues and risks concerning procurement of Ministry have been identified and mitigation measures proposed. It was observed that the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock & Fisheries has the following weaknesses: (i) Inadequate procurement capacity of the PMU; (ii) Inadequate practical experience in the application of Bank Procurement Guidelines; and (iii) risk of fraud and corruption. 29. The overall project risk for procurement is "Substantial." The proposed risk mitigation measures are summarized below: Risk Action Timeframe Responsibility Inadequate procurement Recruit at least one qualified Procurement MALF capacity of the PMU Specialist knowledgeable of Bank Before Effectiveness (Ministry) Procurement Guidelines to fill capacity gaps. The current seconded Procurement Specialist will support the new recruit. Inadequate practical a) Conduct induction procurement Induction training by MALF experience in the application training for the PMU procurement staff Effectiveness; and of Bank Procurement on Bank procurement procedures; formal training by Guidelines. b) Develop and implement formal training regional training program on Bank procurement procedures institutes by taking the to procurement staff. earliest available slot. Procurement fraud is a risk. Recruit an independent consultant to carry Within the first 12 MALF out annual procurement audits. months of project Incorporate procurement audit as an implementation, and integral part of the annual financial audits. during the life of RPLRP. Inadequate Procurement Conduct training in procurement of During MALF Capacity. goods, works, and selection of consultants implementation of the for the MALF procurement staff. project. Sustainability of Existing MoF to ensure that procurement officers During MoF / MALF Capacity. seconded to the ministry are retained for implementation of the the duration of the project. project. SBD for NCB Contracts. Bank's SBD to be used for NCB During MALF contracts. implementation of the project. RFP documents for selection Bank's RFP documents to be used. During MALF of consultants. implementation of the project. Sporadic and inadequate MALF to ensure consistent and timely During MALF budgetary support. budgetary support to allow PIU tocarry implementation of the out its activities under the project. project. 120 30. IGAD: This is an intergovernmental organization and serves as the secretariat for the coordination of the intergovernmental development activities of member countries. Because of this unique nature of the secretariat there is no a clear legal framework which guides procurement activities under the secretariat. Moreover, being an intergovernmental organization the authority receives grants from various Development Partners to carry out specific studies and coordination of developmental activities in member countries. Consequently, the procurement unit of the authority has to follow procurement procedures of the various Development Partners, which provide support to the Authority. 31. The procurement unit of the Authority is organized under the Directorate for Finance and Administration. Currently, the procurement unit is under formulation. The unit is run by one procurement specialist who is employed to carry out the procurement activities of an EU supported project. However, the Director of Finance and Administration informed the Mission that he is also in-charge of the procurement unit of IGAD. 32. The Executive Secretary of IGAD appoints the procurement committee, which is in- charge of reviewing procurement recommendations made by the evaluation committee. The evaluation committee is composed of user departments and it usually has observers from donor partners and from internal audit. Final procurement approvals are, however, made by the Executive Secretary of the Authority. 33. IGAD does not have its own procurement manual, which provides directives as to how procurement should be carried out. However, recently the Authority has realized the importance of such manual and a committee headed by the Director of Finance and Administration is working on the development of the manual. The draft manual has been shared with the Mission. However, currently a manual, which provides comprehensive and clear instructions for all steps of the procurement process (planning, evaluation, award, methods, review thresholds, record keeping etc.) is not available for use by the procurement unit of the Authority. It is hoped that the committee entrusted with the responsibility of developing the manual shall fill this gap at the earliest. 34. Procurement filing and records keeping. In IGAD procurement documents are normally kept in the finance unit. Otherwise complete procurement documents starting from planning up to contract signing and receipt of goods and services are not kept in the procurement unit. The staff in-charge of the procurement unit, based on his experience elsewhere, keeps copies of some of the procurement documents of the project for which he is responsible in the procurement unit. The mission has reviewed the documentation and appreciates the effort made by the procurement officer. However, it was noted that the procurement documents are not complete and need improvement by documenting all aspects of the procurement process and should apply to all projects carried out under the Authority. 35. IGAD does not have its own SBDS and SRFPs for use in bids and selection of consultants. The procurement of goods and equipment as well as selection of consultants is carried out using bidding documents and RFPs of donor agencies. The procurement of 121 goods which the mission has reviewed is by and large limited to the procurement of venues and hotel accommodation for workshops which are carried out through shopping procedures. The procurement of some IT equipment is also carried out. The evaluation involves by and large comparison of quotations. The selection and employment of consultants is also by and large limited to the selection of individual consultants. 36. Generally, there are no complex procurement activities observed during the review of procurement documents at the procurement unit. Experience in handling complex procurement of goods and services and selection of consultants appears to be limited. 37. The procurement unit at IGAD appears to have a guide regarding advertisements for procurement of goods and services. Advertisements for procurement of goods and selection of consultants are advertised in IGAD's website. Moreover, the invitation for bids for selection and employment of consultants are also advertised in the national presses of member countries. Requests for quotations are solicited from service providers in member countries through e-mails. These are the most common practices for the procurement of goods and non-consulting services. The floating time of the invitation for bids, particularly for the selection of consultants, do not conform to the requirements of the Bank in most cases. 38. As the procurement carried out by the procurement unit is by and large limited to shopping and selection of individual consultants the evaluation and award of contract does not appear to be a challenge. These are carried out in accordance with the requirements of donor organizations, particularly the EU. The evaluation is carried out by a procurement committee which is appointed by the executive secretary of the organization. This committee includes members from user departments and also observers from donor organizations. 39. The overall project risk for procurement is "High." The proposed risk mitigation measures are summarized below. Action Plan to Mitigate Procurement Risks 40. A summary of actions to mitigate the above risks is presented in the table below. Summary of Findings and Actions (Risk Mitigation Matrix) No. Major findings/issues Actions proposed Responsibility Targeted date Inadequate capacity at IGAD 1. Employment of qualified and IGAD Respectively within to handle procurement procurement proficient consultant two and three months activities of RPRLP acceptable to the Association after the date of 2. The procurement committee of project effectiveness 1. IGAD shall be provided with procurement clinic to provide them orientation on Bank's procurement procedures 122 No. Major findings/issues Actions proposed Responsibility Targeted date Inadequate procurement 1. Make procurement planning a IGAD Within a month after planning requirement as part of annual work the date of project 2. plans and budget. effectiveness 2. Train procurement staff in procurement planning Lack of written procedural Prepare procurement manual as part of IGAD Before project 3 manual/systems on the PIM which shall guide the effectiveness procurement implementation of IGAD's component of RPLRP Lack of capacity for 1. Training on procurement records IGAD During project launch satisfactory data management keeping to be provided to procurement and maintenance of staff of IGAD procurement audit trail 2. Establish satisfactory procurement data management system; Weaknesses in internal Conduct post procurement review of WB During project 5 control and weak capacity of procurement activities at IGAD implementation procurement oversight F. Frequency of Procurement Supervision 41. In addition to the prior review supervision to be carried out from Bank offices, the capacity assessments of the Implementing Agencies has recommended semi-annual supervision missions to conduct field visits, of which at least one mission will involve post review of procurement actions. 42. Prior Review Threshold: I. Procurement of Goods and Works Expenditure Contract Value (Threshold) Procurement Contracts Subject to Category US$ Method Prior Review 1. Works >=15,000,000 (for Kenya) >=10,000,000 (for Uganda) ICB All Contracts >=1,000,000 (for IGAD) < 10,000,000 (for Kenya) < 1,000,000 (for IGAD) NCB Selected Contracts as indicated on Procurement Plan < 200,000 (for all countries) Shopping None 123 2. Goods >=1,000,000 (for Uganda) ICB All Contracts >=3,000,000 (for Kenya) > 150,000 (for IGAD) < 500,000 (for Uganda) NCB Selected Contracts as indicated on < 1,000,000 (for Kenya) Procurement Plan < 150,000 (for IGAD) <100,000 (for Uganda, and Kenya) Shopping None < 25,000 (for IGAD) 43. Contracts below the threshold but falling within an exception as defined in clause 5.4 of the Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants are also subject to prior review or require the Bank's prior no objection. Special cases beyond the defined thresholds are allowed based on applicable market conditions. II. Selection of Consultants Expenditure Contract Value (Threshold) Selection Method Contracts Subject to Category US$ Prior Review (a) Firms >=300,000 QCBS, QBS, LCS, FBS All contracts <300,000 CQS All contracts equal or above US$200,000 All values SSS All contracts (b) Individual >=100,000 IC All contracts All values SSS All contracts Note: (i) Irrespective of the thresholds and category of risk, the selection of all consultants (firms or individuals) hired for legal work or for procurement activities are respectively cleared by the LEG VPU unit with the relevant expertise and the designated PS/PAS or RPM as required, (ii) Thresholds for which a shortlist may comprise only national consultants and the Borrower does not publish in UNDB online. G. Readiness for Implementation and Procurement Plan 44. Procurement Plans were prepared and discussed during project appraisal in each country. The Plans were prepared in a format acceptable to IDA. The plans have been agreed between the Borrower and the Project Teams of Uganda, Kenya and IGAD on February 03, 2014 for Kenya and Uganda and February 6, 2014 for IGAD. They will be available in each ministry. They will also be available in the project databases and on the Bank's external website. The Procurement Plans will be updated in agreement with the Project Teams annually or as required to reflect the actual project implementation needs and improvements in institutional capacity. Details of the Procurement Arrangements are provided below for each country. 45. Goods, Works, and Non Consulting Services (a) List of contract packages to be procured following ICB and direct contracting: 124 Goods, Works, and Non Consulting Services A. Uganda List of contract packages, which will be procured following ICB and Direct Contracting procedures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref. Contract ( Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments No Cost ($) Method qualification preference bank Bid (Yes/No) (Prior/Post) Opening Date (a) Goods 1 Procurement of; 1,484,000.00 ICB Post No Prior 09.09.2014 Lot 1: 2 Station Wagons @ 90,000 Lot2: 16 Double Cabin Pickups @ 60,000 Lot3: 60 Motor cycles @ 6,000 Lot4: 360 Bicycles @ 150 2 Procurement of Weather station equipment 19.08.2014 Lot 1: 1 set GIS Equipment, Lot 2: 20 Units of Ordinary hand held GPS, Lot 3: 2 Pieces 630,000.00 NCB Post of Large format plotter Scanner. Lot 4: 1 Post No Piece of Laptop computer with docking capability, Lot 5: Supply and Installation of 240 Rain gauges, Lot 6: Supply and installation of 240 Stephenson screens, Lot 7: Supply and Installation of 560 Thermometers 4 Procurement of livestock 865,384.00 Shopping Post No Prior 19.08.2014 Lotl:382 Genetic Improved Cattle and Lot2: 2400 Cross Boer Goats 5 Procurement of Animal Vaccine 848,081.00 NCB Post No Prior 09.09.2014 Lotl: Contagious Bovine Pleura Pneumonia Lot 2: Brucellosis Lot 3 New castle disease 6 Procurement of Animal Vaccine 300,000 Direct Post No Prior 08.12.14 Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR) Contracting 125 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref. Contract ( Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments No Cost ($) Method qualification preference bank Bid (Yes/No) (Prior/Post) Opening Date 7 Procurement of Laboratory Equipment and 620,000.00 NCB 19.08.2014 Consumables Lotl: Procurement of 960 No of Tsetse traps, Yes No Post Lot2: 12 sets Laboratory Equipment, Lot3:12 sets Laboratory Reagents and Consumables B) Works 1 Construction and rehabilitation of Water 3,615,400.00 NCB Yes No Prior 28. 12.15 Facilities Lotl: Construction of 13 No of Valley Tanks Lot2: Construction of 21 and rehabilitation of 30 No Boreholes Lot3: Construction of 72 and rehabilitation of 52 No of Shallow Wells 2 Construction/Rehabilitation/ of Livestock 6,481,493.00 NCB Yes No Prior 28. 12.15 Market Infrastructure and disease control infrastructures Lotl: 12 No of Slaughter Prior Sheds, Lot 2: 4No of Holding/Auction Prior Grounds, Lot3: 12 No of Livestock Markets Lot 4:: 3No of Border Check Points and 2 Post regional laboratories Lot 5: 6 Quarantine centers and 36 communal crushes B. Kenya List of contract packages to be procured following ICB and Direct Contracting procedures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref No. Contract (Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments Cost US$ Method qualification Preference the Bank Bid- (Yes/No) (Prior / Post) Opening Date 126 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref No. Contract (Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments Cost US$ Method qualification Preference the Bank Bid- (Yes/No) (Prior / Post) Opening Date (a) Goods 1 Cameras 14,000.00 Shopping Post 28-Apr-14 To be procured centrally and distributed in each of 14 the project counties 2 Fodder tree seedlings and seeds 14,000.00 Shopping Post 28-Apr-14 3 Animal Feeds and other farm equipment 42,000.00 Shopping Post 29-Apr-14 4 Drought tolerant Grass Seeds For 37,000.00 Shopping Post 6-May-14 Multiplication 5 Fertilizers 7,000.00 Shopping Post 8-May-14 6 Computer hardware including Computer 906,000.00 NCB Post 28-July 14 To be procured Servers, Printers/scanner/photocopier for centrally and office use; Assorted computer software distributed in including for GIS, Accounting digital pen, each of 14 the Networking and ICT equipment etc. project counties 7 Farm tools & equipment for use in holding 142,000.00 NCB Post 30-May-14 grounds 8 Reagents for laboratory use 80,000.00 Shopping Post 29-May-14 Olololua, Lorgum, Lokichogio, Todenyang, Ileret, Moyale, Forole, Mandera,Malkam ari labs and regional labs:Embakasi, Karatina, Eldoret, Garissa, Nakuru, Mariakani, Witu VILs & Kabete Central Veterinary investigation 127 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref No. Contract (Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments Cost US$ Method qualification Preference the Bank Bid- (Yes/No) (Prior / Post) Opening Date laboratory. 9 4WD passenger cars, Mini bus,Van and 2,053,000.00 ICB Post 16-Jun-14 other types, Purchase of Motor cycles 10 Hay harvesting equipment (including balers, 1,412,000.00 ICB Post 18-Jun-14 briquetting machines, etc.) 11 Breeding (pure bred) animals for 248,000.00 NCB Post 9-Jul-14 multiplication centers 12 Printers/scanner/photocopier for office use 46,000.00 Shopping Post 15-Jul-14 To be procured centrally and distributed in each of 14 the project counties 13 Vector and pest control Chemicals and drugs 14,000.00 Shopping Post 17-Jul-14 To be procured centrally and distributed in each of 14 the project counties 14 Early warning tools (including GIS and GPS 40,000.00 Shopping Post 17-Jul-14 handsets) 15 Assorted Stationery (printing papers, writing 24,000.00 Shopping Post 15-Aug-14 pens, writing pads, printing tonners and Cartridges) 16 Laboratory equipment 310,000.00 NCB Post 24th July 2014 17 Vaccine (CBPP, CCPP, PPR & FMD) 2,888,000.00 ICB Prior 27-Aug-14 18 Assorted office equipment &furniture ( including office chairs, tables, cupboards, cabinets) 118,000.00 NCB Prior 21-Oct-14 19 Purchase of emergency manuals ( including 124,000.00 NCB Prior 23-Oct-14 To be procured LEGS manuals) centrally and distributed in each of 14 the I project counties 128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref No. Contract (Description) Estimated Procurement Pre- Domestic Review by Expected Comments Cost US$ Method qualification Preference the Bank Bid- (Yes/No) (Prior / Post) Opening Date (b) Works 1. Renovation And Refurbishment Of Project 59,000.00 Shopping Post 18-6-2014 All the 14 Offices Counties 2. 117000IBPost 29-11- Mandera, Development and rehabilitation of Holding 1,107,000.0 JCB 2014 M and Grounds And Auction Yard 0 Wai Wajir 3. 94,000.00 NCB Post 30-6-2014 West pokot, Renovation of institution livestock sheds Baringo, ("Bomas") Samburu and Marsabit 4. 141,000.00 NCB Post 18-8-2014 Mandera, Rehabilitation of Water Pans and Earth 14,0.0 NBMrai'n dams Marsabit and Wajir 5. 24,000.00 Shopping Post 12-8-2014 Mandera, Rehabilitation of Bore Holes Marsabit and Wajir 6. 9,000.00 Shopping Post 30-8-2014 Mandera, Rehabilitation of Shallow wells Marsabit and Wajir 129 C. IGAD List of contract packages, which will be procured following ICB and Direct contracting procedures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ref. Contract Estimated Procurem Prequalifi Domestic Review Expected Comments No. (Description) Cost (US$) ent cation Preference by Bank Bid-Opening Method (yes/no) (yes/no) (Prior/P Date ost) (a) Goods 1 Procurement of IT Equipment 50,000 Shopping No No Prior June 9, 2014 2 Communication Equipment 12,000 Shopping No No Post June 9, 2014 3 Stationery 25,000 Shopping No No Post May 5, 2014 4 Office Furniture 5,000 Shopping No No Post May 5, 2014 5 Vehicle (one 4WD) 50,000 Shopping NO No Prior May 5, 2014 130 CONSULTING SERVICES LIST OF CONSULTING ASSIGNMENTS WITH SHORT-LIST OF INTERNATIONAL FIRMS A. Uganda 1. Short list comprising entirely of national consultants: Short list of consultants for services, estimated to cost less than $300,000 equivalent per contract, may comprise entirely of national consultants in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 2.7 of the Consultant Guidelines. 2. Consultancy Assignments with Selection Methods and Time Schedule 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Description of Assignment Estimated Selection Review by Bank Expected Comments No. Cost (US$) Method (Prior / Post) Proposals Annual Submission Date 2a Design and Supervision Services for Water Facilities: 13 No 395,538 QCBS Prior July, 2014 of Valley Tanks, 21 No of new boreholes, 27 No of new shallow wells, Rehabilitation of 30 No of Boreholes, Rehabilitation of 52 shallow wells 2b Design and Supervision Services for Construction and 393,281 QCBS Prior July, 2014 rehabilitation of Livestock Infrastructure 12 No Slaughter Sheds, 4 No Holding/Auction Grounds, 12 No Livestock Markets, 2 No Regional Laboratory , 3 no. border check points, 36 no. communal crushes, 6 number quarantine stations B. Kenya List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Description of Assignment Estimated Selection Review by Expected Comments No. Cost (US$) Method Bank Proposals (Prior / Post) Submission Date 1. Study on available range resources 7,000.00 ICS post 17-7-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Garissa, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, 131 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Description of Assignment Estimated Selection Review by Expected Comments No. Cost (US$) Method Bank Proposals (Prior / Post) Submission Date Mandera and Isiolo 2. Consultancy for Training on use of GIS software 6,000.00 ICS post 30-7-2014 3. Study on pastoral movements 59,000.00 ICS prior 30-9-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Garissa, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera and Isiolo 4. Feasibility studies on water resource facilities 38,000.00 ICS post 30-6-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Garissa, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera and Isiolo 5. Development of MIS software including for knowledge 247,000.00 QCBS Prior 9-7-2014 PCU and CPCU management 6. Design of storage facilities including hay sheds 9,000.00 ICS post 2-8-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Garissa, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, Laikipia, Samburu, Narok, Kajiado, Mandera and Isiolo 7. Establishment of tree nurseries for seedling production 38,000.00 ICS post 2-8-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera and Isiolo 8. Mapping and gap analysis of major cross border Livestock and 59,000.00 ICS Post 10-9-2014 W/Pokot, Turkana, livestock products Marsabit. Wajir. and Mandera 9. Survey and registration of holding ground 59,000.00 ICS Post 10-9-2014 Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera 10. Design of holding ground and auction yard 59,000.00 ICS Post 30-7-2014 Marsabit, Wajir, Mandera 11. Market structure analysis for major trade routes 59,000.00 ICS Post 8-10-2014 W/Pokot, Turkana, Marsabit. Wajir. and Mandera 12. Study on existing financial schemes and products 59,000.00 ICS Post 10-10-2014 All the 14 counties 13. Study on credit demand by pastoralist 59,000.00 ICS Post 30-10-2014 All the 14 counties 14. Development of field school curriculum 8,000.00 ICS Post 2-7-2014 132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Description of Assignment Estimated Selection Review by Expected Comments No. Cost (US$) Method Bank Proposals (Prior / Post) Submission Date 15. Construction of storage facilities for conserved hay and fodder 42,000.00 ICS Post 9-7-2014 W/pokot, Turkana, Garissa, Baringo, Marsabit, Wajir, Laikipia, Samburu, Narok, Kajiado, Mandera and Isiolo 16. Design of irrigation schemes 24,000.00 ICS Post 11-8-2014 Isiolo, Wpokot, Garissa, Turkana, Tana River, 17. Study on early traditional warning system 49,000.00 ICS Post 25-8-2014 18. Hiring of Trainee Consultants 67,000.00 ICS Post 30-8-2014 19. Development of M&E system 176,000.00 CQS Post 30-10-2014 20. Design and Development of project website 2,000.00 ICS Post 6-8-2014 21. Design and operationalize knowledge management system 47,000.00 ICS Post 28-8-2014 22. Recruitment of Project M&E Specialist Consultant 49,000.00 ICS Post 16-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 23. Recruitment of Cluster M&E Consultant 6 No. 203,000.00 ICS Prior 16-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 24. Recruitment of Project Procurement Specialist Consultant 38,000.00 ICS Prior 17-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 25. Recruitment of Project Financial Accountant Consultant 38,000.00 ICS Post 17-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 26. Recruitment of Project Financial Accountant Assistants 68,000.00 ICS Post 18-06-2014 Contract period is 2 Consultant 2 No. years renewable 133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ref. Description of Assignment Estimated Selection Review by Expected Comments No. Cost (US$) Method Bank Proposals (Prior / Post) Submission Date subject to acceptable performance 27. Recruitment of Information & Knowledge Management 38,000.00 ICS Post 18-06-2014 Contract period is 2 Specialist Consultant years renewable subject to acceptable performance 28. Recruitment of Communication Specialist Consultant 38,000.00 ICS Post 20-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 29. Recruitment of Human Resource Consultant 38,000.00 ICS Post 20-06-2014 Contract period is 2 years renewable subject to acceptable performance 30. Procurement of Recruitment Consultancy firm 500,000.00 CQS Post 17-05-2014 Contract period is for an initial 3 months to conduct recruitment of consultants required for project implementation and thereafter as and when need arises. 134 C. IGAD List of consulting assignments with short-list of international firms: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 SN Description of Assignments Estimated Costs Selection Review by Expected Comments (USD) Method Bank (Prior/ Proposals Submission Post) Date 1 Study to collect, review and harmonize policies and 60,000 CQS Prior Jan. 12,2015 identify gaps and develop relevant land use policies on rangeland management 2 Study to collect, review and harmonize policies and 60,000 CQS Prior Feb. 9, 2015 identify gaps and develop relevant land use policies for secured access to natural resources 3. Design and develop regional livestock marketing 70,000 CQS Prior Feb. 9, 2015 system & information platform (IGAD-LMIS and national LMIS) 4 Stock-taking study for gap-analysis of financial 40,000 CQS Post Jan. 12, 2015 products for pastoral areas and link pastoralists to financial providers 5 Stock-taking study to review, harmonize and 50,000 CQS Post Feb. 9, 2015 implement regional trade and mobility policies in IGAD/EAC/COMESA/SADC areas 6 Market survey for identification of international 30,000 IC Prior Jan. 12, 2015 markets and development of value chains for alternative products to livestock (3 identified NWFPs, Artisan minerals, beekeeping and fisheries) 7 Consultancy service for stocktaking on DRM and 100,000 QCBS Prior Feb. 9, 2015 formulation of regional DRM contingency plan 8 Regional Coordinator 150,000 IC Prior Apr. 8, 2015 9. Operations Officer 60,000 IC Post May 12, 2014 10. Procurement Officer 60,000 IC Prior May 12, 2014 11. Asst. Accountant 36,000 IC Post May 12,2014 135 IBRD 40710 EAST AFRICA 32°E 34°E 36 38°1 40°E4 REGIONAL PASTORAL LIVELIHOODS RESILIENCE PROJECT 0 U T H S U D A N a"EnguT KENYA AND UGANDA 0 Lokichokio PROJECT DISTRKTS Ramnu Mandera CITIES AND TOWNS Kakuma 9 DISTRKT CAPITALS* Yumbe ®Lamwo Yurnbe Kaabong Lake North Horr Sololo o Mandera @ NATIONAL CAPITAL •Koboko Ad nKitgumrkana 0uanale DISTRCT BOUNDARIES Maracha Lodwar INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARIES @Arua Kotido@ Pader DAgago Buna El Wak o *UGANDA - district names are identical to district capitals, ®yGulu @Abim and are,therefore,not named on the map,except in six Zombo Nwoya ® Moroto exceptions,e.g." Kabarolel ® Otukee Lokichar KENYA - not all district capitals are shown. NOyar Kole (Alebtong 0 o South Horr Marsabit Tarbaj _ _ _yam Lira 9Alebtong Napak Mrbta0 hulisaArui 2°N Kiryandongo ®Apac DAmuna Katakwi Amudat Kangatet 2°N- 0 Dokolo 0 Nakapinipurrt® Lae/ Kaberamaido Alet Soroti® WestPokot Wajir Masmdi Amolatar® Ngora Kumi en Holmna, Seäre Ng a ® Bulambuli Kween Nakasongola e ® bnyiny Samburu Buyende Bukedeaå@ KapehörWa k/ Sab5uIio10 UPallisa »Sironko BuwS OAA Kyankwnz'UGANDA KPsBudaka Sh nk ransNzoia Elgeyo/ ®Maralal Ks 0 NtrloKaniuli Kiuk® gh .Bouda Kitale& ÄPd E Y J B Ndbu ry KKibba Kam Kaliro Butalja Marakwet o Kaedo Mando e Foluwero aBusiki ra , a r oafwa Archers Gadi ~ ort Portal Nakasge yu L k oro Bungoma - Uasin Post Garba G Kabarole ® 0Mubende Gishua Kyenjojo Mta ak Jinja Bugiri Busia ®E e GMarigat - Kygewat~ Mukono 0 Eldoret0 Kyegegwa e Mayuge Kakatnega 15 - Iioloå Mbalamnbala Buikwe Namayingo Kakamega Laikipia 0 Kasese, Kaawenge OMpigi Kaamn .l Butere0 Nandi Nyahururu Nanyuki Meru -0° Sembabule Siaya banda 0b Kalungu as DEM . R E P. Rubm,z ( b i" Bukomansimi Buvuma Kisumu ®Kisumu @ Nyanarua Tharaka-Nithi buhoi Lyntsd Kericho Nydau St wengo Masaka 91Kalangala K Nakuru Nyeri Garinya Bushenyi Homa Bay Kericho Nakuru o Nye smsKirsa Garissa OF CONGbSheea Nyatnira Nei0EmbuGasa Gria iF CsN G 0 ji,ukugi Sheema @u®Rakaiar Embu Nguni Kangu Thika o Narok Kiambu 0 Bura Kabalrie Kolbio Kisoro - Lake Victoria 0lolgonen Narok Nairobi * NAIROBI itui Machakos ® Machakos 0 Kitui Tana River _ R Makueni kodhei RIÄl Akutha 0 02'S Kajiado GarsåLamu Kib~eoi Garsen o ®~am Kibrei Lam Kiifi INDIAN OMalindi l~ B U R-I UNfi T A N Z A N l A 0v0i 0''" OcE N Taita/Taveta SOMackinnon Park 4- 4 30 60Miles Mombasa AJ_Kwale ®Mombasa This map was produced by the Map Design Unit of The World Bonk. Kwale®lm Theo°ondaries, colors, denominoti°" ndony°oherinf°rmatio 0 30 60 Kilometers shon on this map do not imply, 0n the port of The World Book GSDPM Groop, oyjudgment on the lecal status of any territory,or an0 M D -t endorsement or acceptance ofsuchoondaries. 28°E 30 32°E 34°E 36°E 38°E Shimoni 40E 42°E FEBRUJARY 2014