REPUBLIC OF YEMEN YEMEN FOOD SECURITY RESPONSE AND RESILIENCE PROJECT (P176129) PRELIMINARY STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN (SEP) FOOD AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION (FAO) AND UNITED NATION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (UNDP) AND WORLD FOOD PROGRAM (WFP) MARCH 25, 2021 0 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Contents I. CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................................... 2 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................................................... 4 III. ENVIRONMENTAL & SOCIAL IMPACTS AND INHERENT RISKS .............................................................. 6 IV. RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN ...................................... 8 V. PRINCIPLES OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ...................................................................................... 9 VI. PROCESS FOR STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................. 10 STEP 1: Stakeholder Identification and Analysis ..................................................................................... 10 STEP 2: Stakeholder engagement during project preparation ............................................................... 13 STEP 3: Stakeholder engagement during project implementation......................................................... 20 VII. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION STRATEGY ....................................................... 23 VIII. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS & BUDGET ........................................................................... 26 Suitability of Implementation Partners:.................................................................................................. 28 IX. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .................................................................................................... 29 X. MONITORING & REPORTING .............................................................................................................. 33 ANNEX 1: Overview Consultations during Project Preparation .................................................................. 36 1 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) I. CONTEXT 1. Yemen has for long been classified as a low-income, food-deficit country which produces merely ten percent of its food needs. The protracted conflict has crippled the economy, created an unprecedented humanitarian crisis, which remains the principal driver of food insecurity in Yemen1. The cumulative contraction in real GDP is estimated to have reached 48.4 percent in 2019, compared to 2014, and the unemployment rate is estimated to have reached 32 percent in 20192. After nearly six years of conflict, Yemen is currently suffering both chronic and acute deprivation and people are exhausting means of livelihood and consumption coping strategies. In 2020, the overall situation has further deteriorated and the brief gains from a relatively more stable setting in 2019 were shortly reversed. Various elements have contributed to the increasing fragility amongst the majority of the population: (i) suspension of basic public services and civil service salary payments; (ii) rapid depreciation of the currency and the consequential increase in food prices; and (iii) shortages of imported goods; and iv) the large depletion in external assistance during 2020 which had financed food imports, other necessities, and helped stabilize the economy in 2019. Some respite was provided by the IMF in late spring and summer of 2020. The deteriorating macroeconomic conditions continue to increase prices of basic necessities and reduce access to income for many Yemenis. 2. The macroeconomic policy environment differs spatially due to the bifurcation of administration between areas of control, and socio-economic conditions have deteriorated throughout 2020, leading to a significant worsening of poverty. Distortions created by the fragmentation of institutional capacity and the divergent policy decisions between the areas of control have compounded the economic and humanitarian crisis. The dramatic deterioration of conditions in Yemen has translated into an estimated 80% of the population (around 24 million) living below the poverty line, even before the crisis brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic (World Bank 2019). In addition to monetary poverty, up to 80% of households experience overlapping monetary and non-monetary deprivations (World Food Programme 2020). The Global Report on Food Crises 2020 concluded that “the combined effects of conflict, macroeconomic crisis, climate-related shocks and crop pests, including fall armyworm and desert locusts, were likely to ensure that Yemen remained the world's worst food crisis� in the immediate future.3 3. Protracted conflict and the destruction of infrastructure and basic public services coupled with economic decline and pre-existing structural issues such as widespread poverty exposed large segments of the Yemeni population to unprecedented levels of food insecurity and malnutrition. An estimated 13.5 million people, 45 per cent of Yemen’s population, are acutely food insecure.[1] That number is projected to increase to 16.2 million, 54 per cent of the population, in the first half of 2021. Of those 16.2 million people, 11 million people will have reached ‘crisis’ levels of food insecurity, classified as Phase 3 in the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC); another 5 million people will have reached ‘emergency’ levels (IPC Phase 4); and 47,000 people will have reached ‘catastrophe’ or famine -like levels (IPC Phase 5). This is the first return of IPC 5 conditions in Yemen in the last two years. Compared to 2018, the number of districts in IPC Phase 4 conditions will have more than tripled, from 49 to 154, out of 333 in Yemen. This analysis assumes the provision of humanitarian assistance at 50 percent, which humanitarian actors have not yet secured the resources for, moving into 2021. 1 IPC ACUTE FOOD INSECURITY ANALYSIS OCTOBER 2020 – JUNE 2021, Issued December 2020. 2 Yemen Socioeconomic Update, Issue 54, November 2020, MOPIC. 3 World Food Programme, 2020. URL: www.fsinplatform.org/sites/default/files/resources/ files/GRFC_2020_ONLINE_200420.pdf. 2 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Figure 1: Projected Acute Food Insecurity in Yemen, 2021 4. Over 2.25 million children under the age of five in Yemen are threatened to suffer from acute malnutrition in 2021. Of those children, 395,000 are expected to suffer from severe acute malnutrition and could die if treatment is not received. The projected figures of the IPC nutrition analysis4 mark a 16 percent increase in acute malnutrition and a 22 percent increase in severe acute malnutrition among children under five compared to last year’s estimate. This is the highest number on record in Yemen. In addition, more than one million cases of pregnant and lactating women are projected to suffer from acute malnutrition during 2021 in Yemen. 5. Yemen’s agriculture meets only an approximate 15-20% of its food needs due to restricted agricultural land and water resources, even though the sector increasingly serves as the main source of income for Yemenis (36.6%) and employment for rural women (87%). Despite its economic importance, agricultural productivity is low and access to markets, transportation, and distribution are severely disrupted by the conflict. 6. Vulnerability to climate change and pest infestations are exacerbating Yemen’s dire food insecurity, creating a crisis within a crisis. Several aggravating factors emerged in mid-2020 and are worsening the food security situation such that Yemen faces a crisis on multiple fronts. Those include: (i) widespread floods; (ii) desert locust invasions; (iii) drastically below-average cereal harvests in 2020; (iv) the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic; and (v) food price increases due to a combination of impacts from COVID- 19 and lower food imports. Over 20 million people (or 68% of the total estimated population) are food insecure5, including a staggering 10 million people at risk of famine. This insecurity is driven by constrained food production, food supply and distribution, and diminishing purchasing power. An estimated 4.3 million people have fled their homes since the start of the conflict, of which 3.3 million remain internally displaced. Hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition are among the most pressing and overwhelming challenges faced by the country at present, at a scale that is not being fully met by national authorities 4 Yemen: High levels of food insecurity persist | IPC Global Platform (ipcinfo.org) 5 IPC Phase 2 and above. 3 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and the international development and humanitarian communities. The high dependence on food imports for most households, combined with high food prices and significantly reduced income earning has resulted in low food access. 7. Already prior to the conflict, women faced structural challenges with inter-generational, systemic poverty. The conflict has aggravated pre-existing gender inequalities in Yemen. Even before the war, literacy and school enrolment rates were lower for women and girls than they were for men and boys. Many girls are subjected to early marriage and pregnancy. Women and girls suffer restrictions on their movement and employment;6 women undertake significantly more unpaid care and domestic work than men and are largely excluded from political life, including peace talks. Certain groups, such as women, young people, minorities and marginalized communities, are disadvantaged in terms of land access and land rights; this is particularly the case for daughters and wives because of discriminatory inheritance practices. 7 The impact of the conflict is coupled with high vulnerability to climate shocks and water scarcity. The increased participation of women in the labour force will be key to revitalizing the economy and lowering poverty rates, and the economic empowerment of women is key to addressing the root causes of inequality that limit women’s potential. 8. Gender inequality in Yemen is staggering. Yemen ranked 162nd of 162 on the Gender Inequality Index and 153rd of 153 countries in the Global Gender Gap Index from 2015 to 2020, although Yemen’s Global Gender Gap Index score improved slightly from 0.484 in 2015 to 0.516 in 2017, it returned to 0.494 in 2020 8 . Likewise, the economic gender gap runs deep. Low female participation and discrimination against women, has dire consequences on economic growth, social cohesion and social mobility. The regional average score on the Economic Participation and Opportunity subindex is 42.5%, In Yemen, the female participation rate of 6.3%, which is the lowest in the world9. These results reveal significant gender gaps – to the detriment of women – in economic participation and opportunity, educational attainment, health and survival, and political empowerment. 9. Stakeholder engagement within this broader country context demands close collaboration with on-ground implementation partners who have proven capability to reach all districts despite conflict and political tensions. Moreover, it will be particularly important to conduct iterative consultations throughout the project’s life cycle with attention to vulnerable populations and groups prone to exclusion, be that for reasons of gender, orientation, age, ability, religious beliefs, and/or ethnicity. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 10. The objective of the Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project is to improve food availability, access and nutritious diets for households in the project area and to strengthen the country- level resilience to food security crises. Progress towards this objective will be measured via the following outcomes: • Outcome 1: Access and availability of food at household level improved. . Measured by the percentage of: (i) households with improved Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES) 6 Brigitte Rohwerder. Institute of Development Studies. 2017. Conflict and Gender Dynamics in Yemen. 7 World Bank. 2013. Land Tenure for Social and Economic Inclusion in Yemen: Issues and Opportunities. 8 Compiled by the World Economic Forum 2015 - 2020. 9 World Economic Forum, Global Gender Gap Report 2020. 4 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) ranks and, of those, female-headed households; and (ii) increase in the volume of food/agricultural products which are commercialized/sold by beneficiaries and, of those, by female beneficiaries. • Outcome 2: Nutrition improved for vulnerable groups of beneficiaries. Measured by the percentage share of: (i) women in beneficiary households with minimum dietary diversity; and (ii) children (6-23 months) consuming minimum acceptable diet. • Outcome 3: Country resilience to food security crises strengthened. Measured by the improvement of food security preparedness through the adoption of the food security preparedness plan and the use of the Earth Observation (EO) monitoring tool 11. The project aims to achieve its objective through five components: (1) Improving household incomes through Cash-for-Work (CFW) for agricultural production infrastructure; (2) Increasing production and sale of nutritious crop, livestock, and fish products; (3) Improving the nutritional status of vulnerable rural households; (4) Capacity building for food security management; and (5) Project management and knowledge management. 12. Most work will occur under the first three components. The first component would alleviate immediate food security needs by providing temporary employment through a Cash-for-Work (CFW) programme. Work to repair and restore productive assets, water infrastructure, and degraded lands would improve household incomes and contribute towards re-establishing agricultural production. Moreover, underlying drivers of food insecurity and malnutrition of women will be addressed through targeted trainings for moderately food-insecure women to develop marketable and sustainable skills and entrepreneurship, geared to the needs of the local community and contemporary demands. The second component will increase production and sale of nutritious agricultural products through two intervention packages: (i) one which promotes agricultural production for smallholder farmers, livestock producers and fishers; and (ii) one which supports enterprising producers, processors, and traders to scale-up, improve product quality & aggregation, consolidate production, and increase access to local and regional markets with their products. 13. The third component would improve the nutritional security of vulnerable rural households by providing targeted nutrition-sensitive agriculture activities and facilitating up-take of appropriate diet and nutrition practices. These targeted activities would especially improve the nutrient intakes pregnant mothers and children under two. They will include a blend of promoting kitchen gardens and backyard production for improved diets, promoting women’s rural entrepreneurship for improved nutrition and food security, and providing nutrition assistance to treat and prevent malnutrition for pregnant and lactating women and girls and children under five. Linkages between activities will be established, as well as with safety nets in the area. The fourth component tackles three main areas requiring capacity development and includes: (i) supporting the development of an evidence-based Food Security Preparedness Plan (FSPP) in the context of a larger roadmap for agriculture-sector development and related investment plans; (ii) establishing a satellite-based Earth Observation (EO) crop and pasture monitoring and early warning system; and (iii) strengthening agriculture extension services; and (iv) piloting alternative agricultural production technologies. The fifth component will address basic costs and needs pertaining to project management, including the environmental and social safeguards, monitoring & evaluation requirements, implementation support and financial management/procurement. 5 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 14. The total funding will be USD 127.00 million, of which USD 100 million will come from International Development Assistance (IDA) and 27 million will come from Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP) financing. While this project was originally proposed in 2019 as the “Strengthening Agriculture Productivity and Resilience Project Plus (SAPREP+)�, to be funded by the GAFSP for USD 30 million, it was redesigned as further funds became available to the Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project. III. ENVIRONMENTAL & SOCIAL IMPACTS AND INHERENT RISKS 15. Methodology: Project-related and inherent risks were determined by: (i) screening the project activities against the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Framework; (ii) considering the findings of the desk review on risks conducted during the formation of the SAPREP+ project (which then developed into this project), and (iii) consulting WFP’s internal risk analysis which is based on protecting and responding to risks associated with hunger, taking into account the specific context of Yemen and the commitment to uphold principles of “do no harm�, inclusivity, and equity.10 16. The initial SAPREP+ review identified patterns of systemic issues which could increase risk to the project, its personnel, or beneficiaries. This was then supplemented by the latest security and political risk reviews from recent months. Finally, field staff from the original SAPREP project and other counterparts on the ground conducted site observations and interviews with key informants to better understand the latest conditions which could affect the success of this project. Lists of these consultations are included under Annex 1. As part of the World Bank’s E&S procedures, and given that the implementing agencies have agreed to take a common UN-approach to the project’s safeguards, the precursor risk analysis will be updated after the eligible target areas have been identified, with an initial risk assessment (multi- dimensional) to inform decision making and maximize the probability of success. 17. Project Impacts: This project is expected to have positive impacts in relation to food security, household and agricultural resilience, biological diversity, nutritional wellbeing, economic livelihood with a focus on improving female entrepreneurship, and built capacity of national institutions. Potential negative impacts are limited, expected to be minor-to-moderate in nature, temporary, and largely mitigatable. With the exception of a cross-cutting risk of inequitable engagement/unfair benefits distribution (see details following the component breakdown), which is mitigated in part by this Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and the careful selection of project beneficiaries/participants, potential negative impacts resulting from the project are listed and disaggregated below by component. These impacts may include: • Component 1: environmental and community health and safety risks, and occupational health and safety (OHS) risks related to small rehabilitation works. Environmental risks could include waste (e.g. solid waste) and wastewater generation and accumulation in the environment; dust, noise, and dangers from operating heavy machinery; and impacts from overuse, mismanagement, and deterioation of soils and land resources. Social risks, 10 The WFP protection and accountability policy commits to preventing and responding to protection risks associated with hunger in all contexts. Similar to the World Bank’s ESF, this ensures that WFP takes the necessary measures to mitigate any risks of unintended harm that might arise during any of the organizations/project’s interventions which may otherwise exacerbate vulnerabilities to both physical and psychosocial risks. In addition, WFP maintains a country risk register, to ensure to consistently and continuously horizon-scan for known or new risks, to identify mitigating actions. 6 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) aside from cross-cutting risks listed after the component breakdown (e.g. gender blindness, Gender Based Violence (GBV), sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), discrimination against women/children/elderly/disabled persons during project beneficiary selection), may include impacts related to child labour and lack of child protections prompted by the urgent income needs of poor families. Community health and safety risks from the activites/potential influx of temporary labour include increased risk of disease transmission (e.g. COVID-19, cholera infections, and sexually transmitted diseases) and possible explosions due to remnants of war or the vandalization /destruction of public services infrastructure. If temporary worker camps are established, there may be increased risk of Gender Based Violence (GBV) and sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA) between temporary workers and existing community members. Mitigation of these aforementioned risks will require adequate training on OHS, waste disposal and management, use of personal protective equipment (PPE), safe transportation and use of machinery, and risks of disease transmission. It will also require training of stakeholders and communities on the risks pertaining to child labour, gender discrimination, GBV/SEA and the various referral pathways and GRMs associated with the project to prevent and mitigate such risks. In addition to the project-level GRM, there will be a GRM pertaining to labourers (if needed for a subproject) and a separate GRM to address any instances of GBV/SEA. • Component 2: environmental and community health safety risks relating to pesticide use, storage and disposal; biohazardous waste from livestock; and/or agricultural runoff. The project will be compatible with and complement efforts of the Desert Locust Project and other agriculture-focused projects in the area. To the best extent possible, integrated pest management and biopesticides will be used to reduce ecological impacts. Training will be conducted on pest management, the correct use, storage, and disposal of pesticides and/or biohazardous waste, and use of PPE. As a mitigation measure, a simplified pest management plan will be prepared and, if needed, a waste and wastewater management plan. • Component 3: social risks associated with working with a high number of vulnerable women and children. This include gender risks, exclusion risks, OHS/labor risks within the nutrition clinics, security risks, and GBV/SEA. • Component 4: minor environmental (e.g. noise, generation of dust, solid wastes) and OHS impacts may arise during the construction of hydroponics/aquaponics envisioned under this component. 18. Some components carry a cross-cutting risk of conflict regarding land use/land tenure rights and inequitable engagement/unfair benefits distribution. Negative impacts may be felt if there is mistargeting, lack of transparency, and favoritism in screening of recipients for the CFW program under component one; selection of beneficiaries for the packaged interventions under component two; households to be trained under component three; and/or areas of the government to be engaged under component four. Negative social impacts are a risk if there is discrimination of marginalised groups, particularly during conflict and/or social disputes where adequate consideration is not given to different stakeholders’ needs and interests. Discrimination during beneficiary selection and/or conflict resolution may result from gender blindness and discounting of women/children/elderly/disabled persons. Discrimination may also present as Gender Based Violence (GBV) and sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), an inherent risk in war 7 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and post-war zones. To mitigate these cross-cutting issues, the SEP will be used to ensure transparency of selection criteria and overall process. A GRM will also be available for any project affected persons who feel they have been negatively impacted or excluded. Selection criteria: The primary beneficiaries of the proposed project are poor rural households most affected by food insecurity in the targeted governorates. Within the targeted governorates (the targeting will be done on the basis of the IPC classification), district-level project sites will be selected based on the food insecurity and malnutrition levels. Districts with the highest level of food insecurity and malnutrition will be prioritized. The presence of aggravating factors (floods, impact of COVID19- related restrictions and desert locust) will be one of the selection criteria. The other criteria will include agriculture as a major source of livelihood (proportion of rural population), poverty level of the household, and whether the household has benefitted from other relevant programs in agriculture and livelihood support/food security11. The criteria will be detailed in the Project Operations Manual (POM). 19. Inherent Risks: Due to the existing conflict situation, there are inherent risks pertaining to the safety of those involved with the project and their ability to carry out tasks or receive benefits in areas of immediate conflict. Inherent risks associated with war may also include Gender Based Violence (GBV), sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA); Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and/or landmines and unexploded ordinances (UXOs). The global COVID-19 pandemic also poses a risk, as travel and/or activities requiring close-proximity work may increase transmission rates if those involved do not follow the guidelines on social distancing and personal protective equipment (PPE). IV. RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE OF THE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT PLAN 20. The proposed Project is being prepared under the World Bank’s Environment and Social Framework (ESF). As per the Environmental and Social Standard 10 (ESS10): Stakeholders Engagement and Information Disclosure, implementing agencies should provide stakeholders with timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information, and consult with them in a culturally appropriate manner which is free of manipulation, interference, coercion, discrimination and intimidation. 21. This SEP recognizes the importance of open and transparent engagement between the Recipient and project stakeholders as an essential element of good international practice. Effective stakeholder engagement can improve the environmental and social sustainability of projects, enhance project acceptance, and significantly contribute to successful project design and implementation. Stakeholder engagement is an inclusive process conducted throughout the project life cycle. When properly designed and implemented, it supports the development of strong, constructive, and responsive relationships that are important for successful management of a project’s environmental and social risks. 22. The overall objective of this SEP is to define a technically and culturally appropriate plan of action for stakeholder engagement for public consultation, equal participation, and information disclosure throughout the project cycle. The SEP outlines the ways in which the project team will communicate with stakeholders and includes a Grievance Mechanism (GM) through which people can raise concerns, provide feedback, or make complaints about project activities. 11 The project will leverage SFD’s knowledge of the various programs and their beneficiaries. 8 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 23. The main goals of the SEP are to ensure the project’s potential stakeholders: (i) have timely access to key project information such as project’s goal, activities, potential project impact, potential stakeholders, including key consultation milestones; (ii) know when and where consultation opportunities are available for them to participate; and (iii) participate in consultation and provide meaningful feedback to further inform the project design and implementation process. The SEP also provides a brief description of the projects grievance redress mechanisms to be applied for any grievances relating to project investments. 24. The involvement of diverse stakeholder groups is essential to the success of the project and ensuring smooth collaboration between project staff and local communities, including the most vulnerable groups. As such, the SEP aims to: • Establish a systematic approach to stakeholder engagement that helps the Recipient and implementation partners to identify stakeholders and build and maintain a constructive relationship with those stakeholders (particularly for the project-affected peoples) throughout the project cycle; • Assess the level of stakeholder interest and support for the project during preparation and implementation to ensure their views inform project design and assessment of environmental and social safeguards performance; • Promote and provide means for effective and inclusive engagement with project-affected parties throughout the project life cycle on issues that could potentially affect them; • Ensure that project information on environmental and social risks and impacts is disclosed to stakeholders in a timely, understandable, accessible, and appropriate manner and format; and • Provide project-affected parties with accessible and inclusive means to raise issues and grievances, opt-out, and allow Recipients to respond to and manage such grievances and requests. 25. As such, the stakeholder engagement process provides a continuous feedback loop informing the project and adapting it to stakeholder needs as required. It is based on an understanding of the channels of communication that are most used and trusted by the affected populations, including in the current context of active conflict and displacement, and provides recommendations for a more informed approach to community engagement. V. PRINCIPLES OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 26. Stakeholder engagement under the project will abide by the following principles: • Inclusivity and sensitivity: the approach used to engage stakeholders and method(s) of communication will be adapted to each group in a manner respectful of and sensitive to their unique needs. Engagement will be tailored based on information from the stakeholder identification and analysis to ensure inclusivity. The goal is to support better communication and effective relationship building. Access to information will not just be equal; it will be equitable, with particular attention given to vulnerable groups including women, elderly, youth, ethnic/religious minorities, and disabled individuals. 9 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) • Openness and life-cycle approach: public consultations for the project will be iterative in nature and continue for the entirety of the project lifecycle, from preparation through implementation. Stakeholder engagement will be meaningful and free from manipulation, coercion, and intimidation. • Meaningful, informed participation and feedback: information will be provided and widely distributed among all stakeholders an appropriate and understandable format (e.g. local language, in-person, telecommunications, etc.). Information must be shared in a timely, relevant, understandable, and accessible way, with opportunities for stakeholders to raise concerns and offering enough time to ensure that feedback is taken into consideration during decision making. • Gender sensitivity and social inclusion: Consultations will be organized during the project cycle, to ensure that both women, men, people with disability have equal access and active participation to the project activities. The project partners will hold separate meetings and focus group discussions for women and men with facilitators from the same gender as the participants to guarantee their active engagement and provide special support to facilitate access of caregivers. • Sustainability and resilience: The project partners will assess with affected and interested parties concerns on sustainability of project’s activities and outcomes beyond the project period. The project’s outputs will strengthen the stakeholder’s resilience and adaptation in addressing the social, environmental, and economic vulnerabilities and hazards. VI. PROCESS FOR STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT 27. The process for stakeholder engagement involves the following steps: • STEP 1: Stakeholder identification and analysis; • STEP 2: Engagement during project preparation (this will contribute to a stakeholder needs assessment, selection of preferred methods of communication, further project refinement, and development of a project-level GRM); • STEP 3: Engagement during project implementation (this includes ongoing monitoring and reporting and the establishment of a feedback-loop whereby the project is continually adapted based on evolving community needs). 28. An overview of the Grievance Redress Mechanism, monitoring & reporting, and Information disclosure and consultation plans are detailed later in this SEP. STEP 1: Stakeholder Identification and Analysis 29. Identifying stakeholders who will be involved in project planning and implementation is an important step. By engaging the right stakeholders at the right time, the project can ensure that timely feedback from appropriate project stakeholders can be obtained. When combined with appropriate methods of consultation, this ensures that consultations facilitate meaningful feedback. In this step, 10 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) potential key stakeholders are identified. More stakeholders will be added as the project develops throughout preparation and implementation. 30. To ensure important key stakeholders are identified for a meaningful consultation process, identification of potential stakeholders is based on the types of project investments to be carried out. For example, rehabilitation and construction works under the cash-for-work component; value chain development with small producers; development of policies to address nutrition and food insecurity; training on good agricultural practices and dietary diversity; etc. The types of project activities under a given investment (re: Component/sub-component) will determine the nature of relationship with stakeholders involved in a particular investment. Identification and analysis based on project investment type helps to determine the level of relationship stakeholders have to the project’s objectives and expected outcomes. Stakeholders may be directly or indirectly affected by a project. Moreover, they may have interests in a project and/or the ability to influence its outcome, either positively or negatively. Conducting a thorough stakeholder identification and analysis is a useful tool for managing communication between the project team and stakeholders throughout the project cycle. Project stakeholders are defined as individuals, groups, or other entities who: (i) Are impacted or likely to be impacted directly or indirectly, positively or adversely, by the Project (also known as ‘affected parties’); and, (ii) May have an interest in the Project (‘interested parties’). These include individuals or groups whose interests may be affected by the Project and who have the potential to influence the Project outcomes in any way. 31. Cooperation and negotiation with stakeholders is required throughout the project cycle. To facilitate this, persons within stakeholder groups who act as legitimate representatives of their respective group and are entrusted by their fellow group members will be identified during the process of engagement. These “gatekeepers� or community representatives may provide helpful insight into the local settings and act both as a (i) means for dissemination of the Project information, and (ii) primary communication/liaison link between the Project, targeted communities, and their established networks. Legitimacy of the community representatives/gatekeepers can be verified by talking informally to a random sample of community members and heeding their views on who can be representing their interests in the most effective way. 32. Stakeholders of this project may include affected parties, interested parties, and vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, as discussed below. 33. Affected parties: Affected parties are those who are directly influenced (actually or potentially) by the project and/or have been identified as most susceptible to potential risks and impacts associated with the project, thus necessitating close engagement. These may include local community members and other parties who are subject to direct impacts from the Project. Specifically, the following individuals and groups fall within this category: • Farmers, pastoralist and agro-pastoralists communities; • Smallholder farmers, livestock producers, and fishers; • Rural populations at large who have lost crops, livestock, and livelihoods; • Community workers; • Enterprising producers, processors, and traders; 11 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) • IDPs (Internally displaced people); • Households experiencing extreme malnutrition and/or food insecurity, particularly children and women/elderly-led households; • Field officers involved with agricultural extension; • Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs); • Water Users Associations (WUA); • Contracted workers, consultants, scouts, vehicle and/or aircraft operators; • Cooperating local NGOs. 34. Other interested parties: These are considered to have either high interest but low mandate or high mandate but low interest. Other interested parties of the projects’ stakeholders include: • Politicians (leadership in both north and south Yemen); • National institutions which overlap with the work of, or contribute towards the efforts of, the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MAI); • Tribal authorities; • Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE); • Ministry of Public Health and Population (MoPHP); • Ministry of Education for numeracy and literacy curriculum; • Ministry of Technical Education and Vocational Training. • Agriculture Research Institutions; • International Labor Organization; • Social Fund for Development (SFD) (and SMEP) as an implementation partner; • Public Works Project (PWP) as an implementation partner; • FAO, UNDP, and WFP as main implementing agencies; • UN sister-agencies for Nutrition: WHO and UNICEF; • IFPRI and ICARDA as collaborators; • Cooperating international NGOs; • Other local NGOs (not directly cooperating); • The public at large. 35. Disadvantaged/vulnerable individuals or groups: Disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals or groups are those peoples or groups highly vulnerable to potential project impacts and often do not have a voice to express their concerns or understand the impact and risk of the project. They may be disproportionately be impacted or further disadvantaged by the project as compared with any other groups due to their vulnerable status, and usually require special arrangements to ensure their equal (and equitable) representation in the consultation and decision-making process associated with the project. Their vulnerability may stem from their origin, gender, age, health condition, disability, economic deficiency and financial insecurity, disadvantaged status in the community (e.g. minority groups), dependence on other individuals or natural resources, etc. WFP’s hotline provides equal and meaningful access to all, including the elderly and persons living with disabilities. 36. Awareness raising and stakeholder engagement with disadvantaged or vulnerable individuals or groups on the project must consider such group’s or individuals’ sensitivities, concerns, and cultural differences to ensure a full understanding of project activities and benefits. Engagement with these vulnerable groups and individuals often requires the application of specific measures and assistance 12 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) aimed at the facilitation of their participation in the project related decision making so that their awareness of and input to the overall process are commensurate to those of the other stakeholders. 37. Within the proposed Project, the vulnerable or disadvantaged groups may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Historically underserved and disadvantaged communities in coastal plains along the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, western interior parts of the country, and central and eastern parts of the country; • Households reliant on agricultural production activities who are already facing food insecurity; • Elderly people in hard-hit areas and facing food shortages; • Female-headed and elderly-headed households; • Divorced, abandoned, and widowed women; • Children and youth-headed households; • Internally displaced persons (IDPs); • People with disabilities; • Poor people, including ex-pastoralists; • Illiterate persons; • Low-income families/extreme poor • Women, particularly women-headed households or single mothers with underage children • The unemployed persons 38. Vulnerable groups within the communities affected by the project will be further confirmed and consulted during Environmental and Social Assessment preparation through dedicated means, as appropriate. STEP 2: Stakeholder engagement during project preparation 39. Given that this project has been designed in the context of a food security emergency and global COVID-19 pandemic (complete with government restrictions on gatherings of people), this preliminary SEP was developed to provide the initial foundations for a more complete SEP to be submitted following project approval by the World Bank. This preliminary SEP was developed and disclosed prior to project appraisal, as the starting point of an iterative process to develop a more comprehensive stakeholder engagement strategy and plan. Thus far, the extent of the stakeholder engagement has amounted to consultations between the FAO, UNDP, SFD, PWP, and the MAI, and their respective findings on stakeholder needs, preferred methods of communication, and key obstacles based on their ongoing works within the potential project areas (a summary of these early-stage engagement activities can be found in Annex 1). This preliminary SEP draws from lessons-learned from FAO and UNDP during the earlier SAPREP and YECRP projects and from design-stage insights for projects like the Desert Locust Project, as well as recommendations from the SFD and PWP’s extensive on-ground network, discussed below. This SEP will be updated within two months of project effectiveness and anytime thereafter if/when the project design is amended. The main update within two months of project effectiveness will clearly lay out: • Type of Stakeholder to be consulted • Anticipated Issues and Interests • Stages of Involvement • Methods of Involvement • Proposed Communications Methods 13 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) • Information Disclosure • Responsible authority/institution 40. UNDP’s and its partners have generated great experience and best practices in engaging with the stakeholders effectively during implementation of YECRP and SEP’s development for SPECRP. This adds great benefits and experience in well-preparation a joint SEP with UNDP partners (SFD, PWP, and SMEPS) during project appraisal. UNDP has a solid and rich experience in provision of the CfW and CfS for constructing and rehabilitating various agricultural and water facilities depended on the outcomes of stakeholder’s needs and consultations. UNDP gives high dedication and accountability to no one leaving behind, by including the most vulnerable groups, considering human- rights approached, empowering women and gender responsiveness. 41. WFP is the most recent agency to join this Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience project, thus their stakeholder engagement has not been articulated during the accelerated preparation phase. Despite this, WFP has nation-wide operational presence at the field level which includes deep engagement with the local communities through its community-based approach to management of acute malnutrition. As such, they are consistently receiving on-ground information which would support their efforts under Component 3. Prior to implementing livelihood projects, WFP and its partners conduct in-depth community consultations, including Integrated Context Analysis (ICA) and Community-Based Participatory Planning (CBPP) at the local level. These are conducted with wide representation from women, men, and persons living with disabilities, all of which feed into the programme design and identification of suitable trainings, skills development, and vocational training courses of high demand in the local market. WFP works closely with the Ministry of Public Health and Population (MoPHP), the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the Ministry of Technical Education and Vocational Training (MTEVT). 42. Considerations & Lessons Learned from Similar Projects/Engagement Efforts: Stakeholder engagement activities must accommodate contextual factors of conflict, violence and fragility, and additional threats posed by COVID-19 and cholera outbreak risks. Social cohesion and trust which have eroded due to years of war, destruction, and inter-communal fighting must be rebuilt through consistent engagement, positive project-related impacts, and swift addressal of grievances. These considerations and lessons-learned are drawn from a blend of the: (i) Desert Locust and SAPREP Project findings/supporting documents; (ii) Evaluation report by the Yemen Community Engagement Working Group (August 2016)12; (iii) UNICEF/Humanitarian Policy Group Commissioned Report on “Accountability dilemmas and collective approaches to communication and community engagement in Yemen� (July 2020)13 ; and (iv) experiences from relevant World Bank, UNDP, WFP, SFD, and PWP projects (including the Yemen Emergency Crisis Response Project (YECRP)). Methods for incorporating these lessons-learned into this project’s SEP are indicated at the end of each bulleted lesson. • Addressing grievances: The 2016 evaluation conducted by the Yemen Community Engagement Working Group highlighted the difficulties of stakeholder engagement in conflict-affected areas of Yemen. Focus groups discussions showed that, although most community members felt involved with the humanitarian response, only 15% knew how to provide feedback or lodge a complaint to humanitarian agencies. Amid the small 12 Yemen Community Engagement Working Group, 2016. URL: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/enhancing_informed_engament_with_conflict_affected_c ommunities_in_yemen.pdf 13 UNICEF, 2020b. URL: unicef_cce_yemen_web.pdf (odi.org) 14 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) percentage of people who did provide feedback or complaints, only 40% felt their opinion or concern had been considered. Amongst internally displaced persons (IDPs), while their familiarity with lodging complaints was about the same as community members, the percentage who felt their opinion or concern had been considered dropped to 29% (71% of IDPs felt their feedback was not accounted for). These low numbers highlight a risk of under-reporting issues pertaining to harassment, abuse, or general project-related concerns. As such, this SEP must ensure that its GRM process is transparent and that responses to grievances are provided (i) promptly and (ii) in a manner comprehendible to the complainant, so as to avoid misunderstanding and distrust. • Preferred method and timing of communications: Trusted, preferred, and most-used communication channels amongst the target beneficiaries include cell phone calling (59%) and word of mouth (56%). The top preference changes, however, depending on whether those involved are IDPs or host communities: IDPs prefer cell phone calling, whilst host communities prefer work of mouth. Focus group discussions showed that trusted word-of-mouth information comes from friends, relatives, community leaders or knowledgeable community members (e.g. religious leaders). Community volunteers are considered the third most trustworthy source of information (36%), and radio the fourth (23%). Televisions are used but are not as widely trusted. The use of a given communication channel relates to the level of trust people bestow upon that channel. Both television and radio are perceived to be less trustworthy than other methods due to the perceived politicized nature of the information. Noticeboards are the least used mode of communication. Given this, stakeholder engagement for this project will utilize the most trusted and preferred methods of communication. Preferred timing of communication will need to be determined once the project areas have been finalized, based on the preferences of the local communities. • Sustained information flows with opportunity to shape assistance: The 2020 UNICEF/HPG commissioned report, Accountability dilemmas and collective approaches to communication and community engagement (CCE) in Yemen, highlights there are three main approaches to CCE in Yemen: (i) face-to-face engagement (driven by social capital); (ii) technological engagement (driven by social media); and (iii) humanitarian leadership (management-driven). When these various approaches and their communications activities are impeded, be that due to conflict or other obstacles, it results in a temporary suspension of information flows from the affected population to international actors (and vice-versa). This suspension increases overall response times, erodes trust, and reduces opportunity to adaptively manage project interventions. The report suggests that the “most striking evidence that the collective approach to CCE has not had an impact in Yemen is the limited engagement of communities and local organizations in shaping the assistance they receive.� Part of this is because affected persons do not always know how to prioritize their needs – the report indicates that, despite receiving trainings from organizations on needs identification and prioritization, they often live with the feeling that “when assistance arrives, they … should take everything that they can get even if they do not have a critical need for it.� This feeling stems from insecurity about reliability and arrival time of assistance. With this in mind, this SEP will focus on (i) ensuring use of multiple engagement channels in order to avoid potential disruptions to information flow; (ii) providing frequent updates on timing and planning of assistance, in order to assuage fears which fuel the “take anything you can get right now� mentality; and 15 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) (iii) incorporating, to the best extent possible, community recommendations within the project interventions. Four key considerations are offered from the report, to be included within this SEP’s approach to engagement: ➢ Approaches to CCE, both collective and individual, should invest further in ensuring that they are driven by local realities and priorities and take existing power dynamics into account; ➢ Collective approaches to CCE need to be more inclusive of marginalized groups; ➢ A collective approach to CCE should be supported by an honest conversation about the capacity to adhere to the humanitarian principles in practice; and ➢ Local organizations should be empowered to play a bigger role in decision making, structuring and implementing the response by being brought into the collective approach to CCE. • Disease transmission: Consultations will include necessary precautions to prevent spread of COVID-19. The following are some considerations for selecting channels of communication, given the current COVID-19 situation and threat of cholera outbreaks: ➢ Avoid public gatherings (taking into account national restrictions or advisories), including public hearings, workshops and community meetings; ➢ If smaller meetings are permitted/advised, conduct consultations in small-group sessions, such as focus group meetings and deploy good hygiene practices. If not permitted or advised, make all reasonable efforts to conduct meetings through online channels; ➢ Diversify means of communication and rely more on social media and online channels. Where possible and appropriate, create dedicated online platforms and chatgroups appropriate for the purpose, based on the type and category of stakeholders involved; ➢ Employ traditional channels of communications (dedicated phone-lines, radio, television, newspaper, and mail) when stakeholders to do not have access to online channels or do not use them frequently. Traditional channels can also be highly effective in conveying relevant information to stakeholders, allowing them to also provide feedback and suggestions; ➢ Where direct engagement with project affected people or beneficiaries is necessary, identify channels for direct communication with each affected household via a context-specific combination of email messages, mail, online platforms, dedicated phone lines with knowledgeable operators, etc.; ➢ Each of the proposed channels of engagement should clearly specify how feedback and suggestions can be provided by stakeholders. • Maximizing benefits from YECRP Systems for Stakeholder Engagement: the YECRP offers a well-established stakeholder engagement system that will continue to be implemented in this proposed project. The existing YECRP system will be utilized and further improved for stakeholder engagement based on the following: ➢ Communities are involved from the outset in the selection and design phases, through to project closure, as specified by the principles for sub-project cycle identification, development, and management. 16 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) ➢ During the project appraisal, the implementing partners nominate a community committee to sustain community participation and engagement, providing training activities to enhance community capacity to sustain activities after project closure. ➢ Community committees are set up at the onset of project at the identification and design phase and play a key role in supporting field teams, facilitating implementation and in the sustainability of community assets that are built through subprojects, after project closure. ➢ Communities are engaged early and, to reduce the potential risks of conflict between stakeholders over project implementation, a careful selection criterion is developed by the implementing partners. While determining an objective set of criteria, and using a national data-based distress index, communities are also called upon to participate at the municipal level to engage in prioritization of community projects and identification of beneficiaries. ➢ Subprojects must meet the basic needs according to poverty and service needs provided in national indicators. Priority is given to poorer communities. Data provided through national indicators, community groups are consulted to identify who will benefit from sub-projects, in this way stakeholders themselves are involved in the selection and decision of who benefits from sub-projects. ➢ All implementing institutions will include gender mainstreaming, GBV and SEA/SH provisions as a means to ensure equal participation of all stakeholders in subprojects and provide opportunities to improve women’s participation in decision-making as indicated in the above section on project impacts and risk, gender section. In addition to developing an action plan to build the capacity on the social safeguard requirements on gender, GBV and SEA; ➢ Use a Third Party Mechanism (TPM) to (i) help ensure stakeholders have been duly consulted; and (ii) monitor their level of satisfaction with the project, including with the sub-project selection criteria. TPM surveys have verified implementation of planned interventions, adherence to agreed implementation procedures, quality of implemented interventions, beneficiaries and community satisfaction on various aspects of project interventions and its effects/impacts on targeted beneficiaries and communities. Women and men, youth are interviewed separately to enable meaningful participation by marginalized groups; and ➢ Strengthened and ongoing stakeholder engagement, bringing together the various stakeholders more regularly as true partners to help identify solutions to the challenges faced by the project (this was identified as a lesson learned based on the ESMF stakeholder consultations for the YECRP). Stakeholder engagement will continue to be a priority of the project and project partners will continue to explore new and effective means to deliver on this commitment. Each sub-project should include a budget line for stakeholder engagement and capacity building/training. UNDP and its partners’ prolonged experience, knowledge and capacity will ensure achieving the purpose and ensure timely implementation of the SEP. • Maximizing lessons-learned from WFP’s projects and country operations: 17 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) ➢ Strengthening community capacity and civic engagement drives commitment and autonomy: WFP’s 2020 Review of Food Assistance for Assets found that Food for asset and livelihood activities strengthen community capacity by involving communities, including women and youth, in the implementation of activities throughout the project, starting from the selection of assets to asset delivery. Participating communities feel empowered to decide what assets are important to them and receive training to run and maintain the assets autonomously after the project ends. The civic engagement experiences through which participants and community members report learning the importance of commitment and organization, feedback mechanisms and voluntary contributions for the common good. These experiences often resulted in follow-up self-help processes that were undertaken autonomously by the community. In the current context of Yemen, some communities found it challenging to meet their commitments for maintenance after the completion of the project due to the absence of public funds. Further investment in the training of local partners, civic society and communities is required to ensure sustainability of results. This includes more systematic knowledge sharing and evidence building and increased focus on the creation of functional community asset management committees. ➢ Reduced hardships, empowerment and benefits for women and vulnerable groups. Assets decrease day-to-day hardship, especially for women, children and persons with disabilities, as confirmed by 90% of surveyed community members in WFP’s 2020 Review of Food Assistance for Assets (FFA). Released time was used for productive tasks, personal and family care and rest. Improvements were commonly felt through: ▪ Safer and faster water collection by women, girls and boys: Women, girls and boys are tasked with water collection for drinking and domestic use in most rural areas in Yemen. They often travel long distances by foot to collect water and carry it manually back to their residences. Where a footpath or road is available, the community also relies on donkeys or motorcycles for transport, making water collection easier. FFA activities focused on increasing the volume of rainwater harvested as close as possible to houses within the community by renovating and constructing water harvesting schemes; building safe and accessible water tanks for drinking water from natural springs; and improving road access to water collection points so that women, girls and boys do not have to carry water manually. It was found that these activities not only reduced hardships but also improved access to education, as many girls and boys reportedly miss or arrive late to classes due to their engagement in water collection tasks; ▪ Easier road access for people requiring medical attention and persons living with a disability: the rehabilitation of rural roads has led to significant improvements in the physical access of community residents to medical services. The cost and duration of transport to medical facilities prior to the FFA interventions prevented residents from seeking and receiving medical attention on time or carrying routine medical checks, especially for pregnant and lactating women 18 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and persons with disabilities. This has frequently led people to succumb to disease before urgent medical attention could be provided. Expanded, renovated and weather-proof roads facilitated the affordable and reliable access of residents to health services; and ▪ Strengthened women’s participation in decision-making: Ensuring the participation of women in FFA activities is a challenge in Yemen. The programme took specific measures to raise awareness among partners and the community to ensure that the voice of women is heard during community consultations and that specific, culturally acceptable tasks could be designed and implemented by women. In some locations, asset creation activities were replaced with training activities or health and hygiene awareness tasks led by women within their communities. ➢ Transfer of skills and complementary activities foster diversified livelihoods: WFP’s prior experience shows that semi-skilled and skilled workers from the community worked jointly and benefitted from the supervision of engineers and technical staff, which expanded their expertise and experience. Furthermore, all workers received basic training to deliver the outputs that were assigned to them during the implementation of activities. Many participants reported that the skills gained during the project increased their employability and their chances of finding higher-paid jobs. In order to more systematically reap and maximize these benefits, livelihood activities could be accompanied by targeted trainings on sustainable agricultural practices as well as capital-intensive input such as machinery for irrigation and cultivation. The impact on diversified and strengthened livelihoods are further strengthened through complementary activities. This include agricultural and non-agricultural trainings, livelihoods grants to support access to input and equipment for on-farm and off-farm activities, and capital-intensive projects such as the installation of solar-powered water pumps. • Maximizing lessons-learned from the Smallholder Agricultural Production Restoration and Enhancement Project (SAPREP): ➢ SAPREP activities have strengthened social relations in communities and helped beneficiaries reinstate and improve their sources of income. Beneficiaries perceived SAPREP interventions as relevant to their most important needs and accessible by all different groups in targeted communities, and reported sizeable increase in yields, area planted and farm profits. The project surveys of beneficiaries reported high satisfaction with the project support and quality of services received. 93% of surveyed beneficiaries perceive SAPREP activities as relevant to their most important needs. They also report about equal access to the services by all different groups in targeted communities and that SAPREP activities strengthened social relations in communities. Beneficiaries reported that inputs provided by the project helped beneficiaries to reinstate and improve their source of income. In particular, poultry distribution and livestock restocking activities resulted in 40% and 27% increases in incomes respectively. Beneficiaries of 19 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) the seed distribution program reported 53% and 61% increases in income for forage and cereal seeds respectively. ➢ Empowering women by increasing knowledge and employment opportunities brings immediate rewards as it improves farming business . Participation in the SAPREP’s Farmer Field Schools (FFS) allowed women to improve farming practices and to gain knowledge on good agricultural practices, leading to increases in yields, healthier food for their families and more significant income opportunities. Women that were selected and trained as Community Animal Health Workers (CAHWs) under SAPREP were officially recognized as Animal Health Workers which led them to both gain respect and to deal with the broader set of challenges found within their communities. Women’s empowerment under the project yielded benefits beyond ensuring employment and income generation for the women. The local community became more accepting of reducing gender-related barriers that usually prevent women from working, promoted women's work, and allowed for mobility (women provided advice in their villages and neighboring villages). The project will explore options to collaborate with the local research centers, for instance the Gender and Development Research Center of Sana’a University. ➢ Successful project implementation in challenging operational environments hinges on carefully considered partnerships and implementation support arrangements, but local capacity building should be built into the project. Where the client lacks the capacity to implement and coordinate a crisis response, the key is to work effectively with partners whose presence on the ground can mobilize a response. Success factors in these cases include: a mutual understanding of respective roles and responsibilities; accepting the need to navigate organizational differences; open lines of communication throughout implementation; and adopting best practices in terms of Third- Party Monitoring (TPM). Yet it is also important to build lasting skills on the ground through capacity building, as the experience of the South Sudan Emergency Food and Nutrition Security Project shows. Any outside technical assistance should be balanced by a strong program of capacity building (technical and managerial) for the client. Close supervision is also needed to more effectively track progress, communicate and establish teamwork. STEP 3: Stakeholder engagement during project implementation 43. A stakeholder communication strategy will be prepared and put in place to address the following: • Location of project interventions; general information on project and project-associated risks and impacts; precautionary mitigation measures; grievance redress processes; etc.; • Appropriate and effective types of communication methods to reach the target groups, including differentiated needs of vulnerable groups and preferred timing of communications and interventions; • Emergency-communications procedures to inform the public in the instance of a project- related emergency; • Project and emergency contact information; 20 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 44. The strategy will draw upon lessons learned from implementation partners, previous/concurrent projects, and related community engagement efforts (as detailed in the previous section of this chapter). During the COVID 19 the prevention measures of social distance will be applied apply to more telecommunication using technological methods will be used as well as limiting the number of people during face-to-face meeting and introduce door to door discussion during the stakeholder consultations. The guiding principles for effective communications and outreach include: • Clarity: the objective of communication and the audience must be clear. • Accessibility: communication must be accessible with effective channels identified to make information available to all, particularly historically underserved and vulnerable groups. • Actionability: communication must indicate how audiences can move toward action or incite action directly; this may include designing a behavior change campaign and/or encouraging action during a health emergency. • Credibility: communications must come from trustworthy sources, following the local standards for trusted forms of communication, establishing technical accuracy, transparency, coordination with partners, and communicating as one consistent message from an agreed-upon entity. • Relevance: communications should be tailored to include only the most relevant content, specific to the audience. This requires knowing the audience, listening to the audience, tailoring the message to the audience, and then motivating the audience to take part in and provide feedback. • Timeliness: communications must be timely, which means communicating what is known at the right time (rather than leaving stakeholders to speculate) and keeping a continuum of conversation. • Comprehensibility: wherever possible, simple language is preferred, relating the message to the stakeholder’s context using visual and local/familiar language. • Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning: communications must be iterative in nature and develop through a feedback loop provided by regular monitoring, evaluation, and incorporation of lessons-learned into future iterations. • Compatibility of Partner Communications: ensure adequate exploration of the various communication functions and units of the implementing partners, including changes and how such functions would be relevant to the proposed project. 45. With these considerations in mind, the following engagement methods are tentatively proposed, as they draw upon and utilize the methods already employed by the UN implementation agencies (FAO, UNDP, WFP) and their projects (e.g. the Desert Locust Project). Table 1: Engagement approach and examples of appropriate application Engagement Appropriate Application (Examples) Approach Technological • Establish hotline for project grievances, concerns, and information, OR utilize an existing This includes hotline (ensuring that all project-specific grievances are captured in the project’s correspondence via grievance log); phone and/or email; • Distribute information to Government officials, NGOs, Local Government, and a project website; organisations/agencies; social media sites; • Invite stakeholders to meetings and follow-up; printed information • Present project information and progress updates; 21 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) on project leaflets or • Disclose the ESMF, ESMP, and other relevant project documentation; signage • Share information door-to-door on project activities; project investment locations; project disclosure; educational materials on E&S risks/impacts; • Highlight site-specific project information • Infographics on nutritional and dietary requirements Face-to-Face • Share information on the timing of interventions; This includes direct • Reach consensus on cash-for-work interventions; communication with • Present project information to a group of stakeholders and record feedback; affected populations, • Hear stakeholders’ views on targeted baseline information; focus group meetings • Build relationships with the communities. Grievance Redness • Establish site specific box for project grievances, concerns. Mechanism (GRM) • Receive written complaints, suggestions, or feedback into GRM boxes. Box • Involve community committee into opening and solving complains • List and document the types of GRM and complaints 46. The strategy will include a timeline concerning the implementation of communications activities as well as the expected turn-around time for responses to requests for information, among others. The transparency of this timeline will be important for project accountability and the management of expectations. Delays should be reflected in an updated timeline that is easily available for all. 47. With specific regard to COVID-19, and in order to address project stakeholder needs within the context of the global pandemic, a precautionary approach will be taken to the consultation process to prevent infection and/or contagion. Given the highly infectious nature of COVID-19. the following are some considerations for selecting channels of communication: • Avoid public gatherings, including public hearings, workshops and community meetings; • If smaller meetings are permitted/advised, conduct consultations in small-group sessions, such as focus group meetings. • Diversify means of communication and rely more on social media and online channels. Where possible and appropriate, create dedicated online platforms and chatgroups appropriate for the purpose, based on the type and category of stakeholders; • Employ traditional channels of communications (TV, newspaper, radio, dedicated phone- lines, and mail) when stakeholders to do not have access to online channels or do not use them frequently. Traditional channels can also be highly effective in conveying relevant information to stakeholders, and allow them to provide their feedback and suggestions; • Where direct engagement with project affected people or beneficiaries is necessary, identify channels for direct communication with each affected household via a context specific combination of email messages, mail, online platforms, dedicated phone lines with knowledgeable operators; • Each of the proposed channels of engagement should clearly specify how feedback and suggestions can be provided by stakeholders. 48. In addition to consultations already held during project preparation (see Annex 1 for a full list), a tentative list of forthcoming engagement activities is indicated in Table 2, with the understanding that these will be further refined and updated as the project design is finalized. Emphasis is given to consultations to support the selection and prioritization of districts, communities, and beneficiaries. Several iterative discussions will be held with government officials; local leaders at the Governorate, District, and Community levels; private sector entities and Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). 22 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Table 2: Tentative List of Forthcoming Stakeholder Engagement Activities Project stage Targeted Topics of Methods Location and Responsible stakeholders engagement frequency unit Appraisal Government Selection of Focus groups Virtual or in- FAO, UNDP, CSOs project areas and key person, WFP, and Local leaders and informant depending on implementing Communities beneficiaries interviews COVID-19 partners situation; at least two consultations per group Implementation Local leaders Sub-project Focus groups Focus groups FAO, UNDP, Communities activities for and key and interviews WFP, and CSOs communities informant to be held implementing Private sector interviews; virtually or in- partners Information person, dissemination depending on via phone, COVID-19 online, radio, situation; at flyers least two consultations per group; Additional outreach via web/phone/ etc. Implementation Local leaders; GRM and E&S Sensitization In person FAO, UNDP, Communities; considerations trainings and/or online; and WFP. Implementation Mobile, web, partners; and paper- Government based posting of information Implementation Local leaders; Ongoing Focus groups & In person, FAO, UNDP, communities; reporting for key informant depending on WFP, and project progress interviews; COVID-19 implementing and community Online and/or situation, with partners satisfaction paper-based additional surveys outreach online/paper- based; Every six months. VII. INFORMATION DISCLOSURE AND CONSULTATION STRATEGY 49. The strategy for information disclosure and consultation will depend on the local context (including the changing situation of COVID-19). Regardless, all activities will be inclusive and culturally 23 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) sensitive so that vulnerable groups can meaningfully participate in and avail of project benefits while avoiding unnecessary risks. Likewise, stakeholder engagements will be culturally sensitive in nature, ensuring that both men and women are enabled to share their views in a safe environment. Information will be delivered in a meaningful, timely, and accessible way for all affected stakeholders (e.g. use of local language or images in the instance of high illiteracy). Information disclosure and consultation may include a blend of household outreach activities, focus group discussions, telecommunications (e.g. radios, phones), and/or the use of verbal communication and pictures. Country-wide awareness campaigns for some of the project activities (e.g. nutritional information) may be established, but area-specific communications and awareness-raising consultations will still be the gold standard for effective outreach. 50. Table 3 illustrates the proposed common UN Strategy for Information Disclosure and Consultation. Table 3: Proposed Common UN Strategy for Information Disclosure and Consultation14 Sub-Project phase List of information Methods Target group(s) Responsibility to be disclosed Project Identification, Project concept, E&S Participatory Affected groups and WFP through Screening and principles and methods, door to interested groups: men, Cooperating Assessment obligations, door/social distance women, youth, elderly, Partners (CPs), documents, meetings, public people with disability, FAO and UNDP Consultation process. consultations, disadvantage groups, through documentation migrant and IDP people Implementing ESMP document Partners (IPs) includes area, target group, estimated Awareness sessions/ Affected people, WFP through CPs, cost, GRM, ES & OHS training for Gender/ marginalized and women FAO and UNDP risks management GBV and SH, GRM and groups, and community with IPs and and mitigation plans. complaint’ channels/ committee Safeguard and confidentiality and Gender specialists GBV/ SEA/ gender anonymity complaints mitigation/ prevention plan. Information leaflets and brochures; and meetings, including with vulnerable groups while making appropriate adjustments to formats in order to take into account the need for social distancing. Implementation and Updated on Field visits/ FGD public Affected/ disadvantaged FAO, WFP, CP Monitoring implementation of and Community target groups, monitors and subproject, SEA and Consultations community committee Third Party GBV preventions, Monitors, UNDP GRM types and closure, accidents and Consultations/ FGD, Affected and groups and FAO, WFP daily meeting/ field community committee, through CPs, 14 The UN agencies and local implementation partners will employ all COVID19 prevention measures in all their activities. 24 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Sub-Project phase List of information Methods Target group(s) Responsibility to be disclosed LMP, environmental visits, GRM cases and injured and complained UNDP with IPs and mitigations, accidents’ reports and people and Safeguard qualitative impact updates specialists indicators GRM/ incidents, GBV Community committees, FAO, WFP CPs, The social distancing and SH prevention/ and GBV and SH UNDP, IPs, gender and communication referral pathways and survivors and safeguards strategy. daily monthly/ specialist biweekly reports Dissemination of hard copies at designated public locations; Information leaflets and brochures; separate focus group meetings with vulnerable groups, while making appropriate adjustments to consultation formats to take into account the need for social distancing. Evaluation and close M&E Spot-Checks Focus group Affected, interested and FAO, WFP, CPs where accessible; discussions with disadvantaged persons, and TPM, UNDP Third Party beneficiaries and non- non-beneficiaries, and with IPs and hired Monitoring Report, beneficiaries local government TPM. documentations 51. As stakeholder engagement is an ongoing process, information disclosure must also be an ongoing process. FAO, UNDP, WFP, and their local implementing partners will conduct consultations with the community members and other concerned stakeholders before and during project implementation; likewise, information must be disclosed on a rolling basis, as changes are made throughout the project’s lifetime. In addition, preliminary consultations will be conducted during the preparation of the ESMF, subsequent ESMPs, and safeguards documents like the LMP and RPF. The draft and final versions of the ESMF/ESMPs, SEP, LMP, and RPF must be disclosed in both English and local language prior to any formal consultations on the document under discussion. Furthermore, for nutrition activities, community health workers will be involved in the dissemination of nutrition education for all community members and will remain involved throughout the programme. For entrepreneurial interventions, WFP and its cooperating partners will continue to conduct community consultations to identify vocational training courses of high demand in the local market. 52. Reporting back to stakeholders: Stakeholders will be kept informed as the project develops, especially regarding activities which require specific health and safety procedures and taking COVID-19 into consideration. Reports back to stakeholders must cover summaries of the project’s safeguards 25 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) performance and overall implementation of the stakeholder engagement plan and project-level grievance redress mechanism. 53. Finalizing the strategy: Once project preparation is complete, the final SEP can be prepared to include details on which methods of communication and engagement technologies will be used for the project. Studies conducted in support of the project design (e.g. background reports, annexes, safeguards documents, etc.) will inform the final engagement strategy, whether that be the production of communication materials, including local radio content, and/or traditional information sharing channels for effective information sharing with communities pre, during and post spraying and documentation. VIII. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS & BUDGET 54. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) will be the implementing entities responsible for the project activities. FAO will work closely with the Social Fund for Development (SFD), Public Works Project (PWP), and the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MAI) to ensure smooth implementation and widespread, on-ground coverage. The project will have a Project Coordination Unit (PCU) based in Sana’a with staff and resources, including one Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialist, to support the management of the project’s environmental and social risks. Technical staff will be deployed in the Aden sub-office and other decentralized hubs to ensure day-to-day management of the project, including all fiduciary, environmental, and social aspects, as well as monitoring and reporting. The lead safeguards specialist in the PCU will coordinate closely with the Regional Project Coordination Units (RPCU’s) to provide support throughout project implementation, particularly for reporting requirements. The structure builds on the experience gained with previous grants implemented by FAO in the country. FAO’s team in Sana’a will also be backstopped by a dedicated team of technical experts at Regional (Cairo) and Headquarters (Rome) level, in line with the Level 3 fast-track procedures established due to the emergency situation in Yemen. 55. WFP has been present in Yemen since 1967. The country office is based in Sana’a, with area offices in Aden, Hodeidah, Ibb, Sana’a and Sa’ada. Sub-offices are established in Mukalla, Turbah, Mareb, Mokha and Hajjah. WFP Yemen currently employs 888 staff, out of which over 850 in country. WFP will work closely with the Ministry of Public Health and Population (MoPHP), the Ministry of Education (MoE) and the Ministry of Technical Education and Vocational Training (MTEVT). Moreover, for the purposes of safeguards staffing, WFP will hire a project-level safeguards specialist and supporting staff (e.g. OHS specialist), as detailed in the ESCP, to ensure (i) screening of subprojects; and (ii) regular monitoring and reporting. 56. WFP will support nutrition-related activities under component 3 of this project, as it is currently implementing its nutrition programme in line with national protocols and in close collaboration with the Ministry of Public Health and Population (MOPHP) and nutrition cluster partners concerned with severe acute malnutrition, including UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO). Implementation will be supported by Ministry of Health and local and international NGOs, including Abs Development Organization for Women and Child (ADO), Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA), Building Foundation for Development (BFD), Field Medical Foundation (FMF), Humanitarian Aid and Development (HAD), Islamic Relief Yemen (IRY), Medical Mercy Foundation (MMF), Save the Children International (SCI), Society for Humanitarian Solidarity (SHS), SOUL for Development, Vision Hope International (VHI), 26 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and Yemen Family Care Association (YFCA). The preventative nutrition programme is implemented solely by national and international NGOs, while around 40% of the curative programme is implemented by I/NGOs and the MOPHP implements the remainder. Nutrition activities are implemented nation-wide across all governorates, provided there is access. For activities pertaining to women’s entrepreneurship, WFP will work with national NGO partners and provide Food for Training to food-insecure women, targeting in particular those who are heading their households in rural communities. The specific NGOs will be identified at a later stage, during the community consultations after the project areas have been finalized. Governorates tentatively flagged for implementation include Lahj, Hadamaut, Hajjah Amran, Sana’a and Ibb, however these will be confirmed after further consultation. 57. UNDP will be responsible of the implementation of Component 1 and part of the community capacity building efforts (targeting women & youth), in collaboration with SFD, PWP and SMEP. UNDP will have a dedicated and experienced project team based in Sana’a, including three national safeguard officers (Social/ environmental/OHS) and one international safeguard specialist, and also supported by international specialists in M&E, and Adaptive Management. Also 1-2 safeguard staff will be recruited in Aden and other sub-regional offices to support the safeguard team in Sana’a. The project will have support from the regional hub and from experts in New York. Additional Procurement support is provided from Malaysia. The structure builds on the experience with previous WB grants implemented by UNDP in the country. 58. Stakeholder engagement under Component 1 will be conducted by a blend of UNDP, WFP SFD, PWP and SMEPs (implementing partners), based on the specific intervention – be that initial targeting and site selection, or rollout of the cash-for-work activities, or safeguards sensitization training. The stakeholder engagement activities will be documented through quarterly progress reports, to be shared with the World Bank. It is important to mention that the UNDP have the qualified safeguard experts who would be directly responsible for the updating/implementation of the SEP. For Component 2, FAO will take the lead in stakeholder engagement, with support from the Small and Micro-Enterprises Promotion Services Agency (SMEPS, an SFD subsidiary) for the second intervention package. Component 3 will be technically led by FAO and WFP, and Component 4 will be led by FAO with collaboration from other UN Agencies as well as with IFPRI and ICARDA. 59. The project will be implemented in areas which are accessible and where the project recovery and development interventions can be implemented, building upon the project areas selected for the original SAPREP project (Figure 2 shows the tentative project areas). The approach is to keep the project design flexible allowing for adjustments as needed. This may include changes in the project’s targeted districts if original districts become inaccessible and adjustments to the implementation schedule due to access and security constraints and other reasons. As indicated above, participation of local communities in the identification and selection of subprojects and investments would ensure inclusiveness and transparency. A third-party monitoring mechanism (TPM) would also be used to monitor the status of implementation on the ground and reflect the beneficiaries’ perceptions regarding the project interventions. It should be noted that, whilst the Project Appraisal Document (PAD) includes implementation arrangements (listed, also, in this chapter of the SEP), further delegation of project activities across implementation partners is still under discussion. As such, this SEP will be updated upon project finalization, by which point it will be possible to develop a budget and timeline for the SEP, including the quarterly and annual progress reports made and shared with the World Bank. Figure 2: Tentative project areas for activities implemented by FAO (indicated as “SAPREP+� in the image) 27 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Suitability of Implementation Partners: 60. Successful outreach and stakeholder engagement for this project will depend upon close coordination of FAO, WFP, and UNDP with on-ground implementation partners. Some of the known implementation partners include: the Social Fund for Development (SFD) and the Public Works Project (PWP), and Small Micro Enterprise Promotion Service (SMEPS). The SFD and PWP are the key local partners in implementing the ongoing Yemen Emergency Crisis Response Project (YECRP) and would support implementation of Component 1. Meanwhile, the SFD subsidiary, SMEP, would contribute to the value chain development of Component 2. The selection of national institutions for these roles will contribute to building national capacity for community-based interventions. Nutrition activities will be implemented in collaboration with the Ministry of Primary Health and Population (MoPHP) at national level, governorate health offices and district health offices for implementation, coordination and monitoring of nutrition activities. Frontline heath staffs and community health workers will engage with local and international INGOs for the implementation of the treatment and prevention services. Women entrepreneur training activities will be implemented in collaboration with the Ministry of Education (MoE) for numerary and literacy curriculum and the Ministry of Technical Education and Vocational Training (MTEVT) for alternative vocational trainings, implemented through WFP’s cooperating partners. 61. Social Fund for Development: The SFD is a non-profit organization established in 1997 to contribute to achieve and align its programs with the goals of the national social and economic Development Plans for Poverty Reduction (DPPRs). It is currently in Phase IV of its operations. The SFD supports development opportunities by: (i) improving access to basic services; (ii) enhancing economic opportunities and reducing the vulnerability of the poor; and (iii) building national capacity, including local 28 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) authorities and community structures. The SFD is committed to applying the best international and local practices, policies, and piloted approaches and sharing lessons-learned with other development players. SFD has extensive experience with cash-for-work programming and a longstanding relationship with FAO UNDP and WB. The organization has reach within all districts and has served as an implementation partner for past and present FAO/ UNDP/World Bank projects (e.g. SAPREP, Desert Locust Project and YECRP). It’s monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system, developed in 2002, facilitates accountability and transparency of all projects for which the SFD is involved. The system relies on a blend of the Management Information System (MIS), field visit project surveys, evaluation surveys, and external databases (e.g. census data, national surveys). This project marks an opportunity for SFD, UNDP and FAO to continue their collaboration, particularly under components one and two. 62. Public Works Project: The PWP was established in 1996 to deliver basic infrastructure services with well-defined, transparent procedures. Its main objectives are to: (i) create job opportunities for skilled and unskilled labourers; (ii) provide infrastructure service projects for poor and deprived communities; (iii) improve economic and environmental conditions of the poor; (iv) develop the local contracting and consulting industry; and (v) enhance community participation in the development process. Work is done through regular contracting, community contracting, and cash-for-work programming. Like the SFD, the PWP has nation-wide reach, with operations in every district. Its staff include specialists in M&E/quality control, engineering, environmental and social safeguards, procurement, and finance (to name just a few). The PWP prioritizes engagement with the most deprived areas, where illiteracy rates are high and opportunity for education is low (particularly for women). It coordinates closely with line ministries and offices across the country. The management is committed to transparency and equitability and has an MIS which covers all projects in which the PWP is involved. The PWP has worked on projects with other United Nations entities (e.g. UNOPs, UNESCO) and have supported World Bank projects. The UNDP will collaborate with PWP on activities under Component 1. 63. Small Micro Enterprise Promotion Service: SMEPS has experience and knowledge in private sector and technical assistance to the value chain development activities. The management unit in SMEPS central office in Sana’a will provide overall management and support to the project, while the branch offices will implement the field activities, provide support and coordination for the project activities. Each branch is consist of branch manager, programs & projects unit which includes Communications & Advocacy, Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) and Procurement Unit, Finance Unit and Administrative Services which includes (IT and Human Resources & Administrative Affaires) which are responsible for the implementation and monitoring of all activities in the field. SMEPS is well known for its skilled and well-experienced staff and work closely with UNDP in component 1. IX. GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM 64. The main objective of a Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) is to assist to resolve complaints and grievances in a timely, effective and efficient manner that satisfies all parties involved. Specifically, it provides a transparent and credible process for fair, effective and lasting outcomes. It also builds trust and cooperation as an integral component of broader community consultation that facilitates corrective actions. Overall, the GRM: • Provides affected people with avenues for making a complaint or resolving any dispute that may arise during the course of the implementation of project activities; 29 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) • Ensures that appropriate and mutually acceptable redress actions are identified and implemented to the satisfaction of complainants; and • Avoids the need to resort to judicial proceedings. 65. GM Types: Three Grievance Mechanisms (GMs) will be prepared so that project affected persons and other interested persons, local communities, and the public are able to raise issues concerning the project activities. The main GRM will address the overall project and will be included in the ESMF. The other two GRMs include: (i) a GRM specific to labour management; and (ii) a GRM for issues pertaining gender-based violence, to sexual exploitation and abuse/sexual harassment. All GRMs will guarantee: (i) privacy and confidentiality on the part of the aggrieved party; and (ii) a timely and respectful response from project implementers. Awareness: As the main purpose of a GRM is to identify and resolve complaints in a timely, effective, and efficient manner, project-level GRMs are an effective way for people to raise their issues and concerns regarding project activities which affect them either directly or indirectly. The project-level GRM will be culturally appropriate, effective, accessible and should be understood and familiar for the affected populations. The FAO, WFP, UNDP and implementing partners (SFD, PWP) will develop the project-level GRM based on (i) inputs and recommendations obtained during project design consultations; and (ii) building on the existing systems already in place (e.g. hotlines, risk management systems). Moreover, prior to and throughout project implementation, they will conduct awareness raising for the affected communities about the presence of the respective GRMs and inform them of their rights to file any concerns, complaints and/or issues they may have related to the project. In addition to providing a transparent and credible process for fair, effective, and lasting outcomes/conflict resolution, the GRM also builds trust and cooperation as an integral component of broader community consultations which facilitate corrective actions. 66. Management of the GM: A grievance redress committee will be established at the district level and governorate level to ensure accessibility and transparency of the project’s GM. If an effective and functional grievance redress committee already exists at the district or governorate level, then the existing GRM will serve as a location point for addressing grievances related to this project; however, this must be accompanied by the provision of appropriate training for the committee members on the project’s unique requirements. For reporting purposes, FAO will lead to ensure that complaints received in other governorates/districts (e.g. those under the support of other UN partners or local implementing agencies) are aggregated at the central level, depending upon close collaboration of all implementing partners. 67. FAO, WFP, UNDP and its implementing partners will develop and implement a GM guideline which details the procedure, timing, and indicative grievance redress committee members, etc. Resources will be allocated for the GM. Complaints will be recorded and either resolved or referred to the next level up. Quarterly and annual reporting on the GM will occur via the environmental and social implementation performance reports. 68. Existing Systems the project builds upon: • WFP actively seeks feedback from beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries throughout its programming cycle. A toll-free hotline number (08002020) accessible from telecommunication networks across the country is staffed by both male and female operators that speak the local language. The hotline is operational from Sunday to Thursday between 8 a.m. until 4 p.m. Calls are logged directly into a database and each case is given an automated unique reference code 30 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) that conceals the caller's personal information. There is daily escalation of calls to the responsible units. Cooperating partners inform the community about the toll-free line and posters advertising the toll-free lines are displayed within communities with information written in Arabic. • The call centre is physically based in the Country Office and reports to the internal Compliance Unit. The call centre/hotline number has been extensively publicized and hence, as per monitoring data, 79% of beneficiaries have knowledge of one or more of WFP's feedback mechanisms. Calls are being followed up systematically by the Area Offices and by the technical team in the Country Office. Outreach is ensured through the distribution of hotline posters and inclusion of the awareness on hotline during training sessions of cooperating partners and counterpart authorities. The follow up mechanism is established and in place in WFP to follow up any reported cases through the hotline immediately. Standard Operating Procedures define the coordinated actions and communication and referrals on reported cases with regards to any WFP programmes, contributing to improved quality and efficiency of WFP's programmes in Yemen. • UNDP is planning to apply the existing system which was established under the Emergency Crisis Response Project (ECRP) and develop a Third-Party Monitoring (TPM) call centre facility. First, UNDP and its implementation partners will utilize the integrated GRM system, building on the experience and systems developed under the previous project. The SFD, PWP and SMEPS have utilized a wide variety of communication methods for soliciting grievances, including complaint boxes, toll-free phone calls, SMS, WhatsApp, Telegram, Fax, Online Forms, emails, letters, in- person visits to head offices or branch offices or through face-to-face interactions with project staff. Second, the UNDP will develop a parallel GRM system by operating a TPM call centre facility for both inbound and outbound calls from- and to- project beneficiaries and targeted communities via a dedicated hotline toll-free number, and SMS/WhatsApp messages. The system will facilitate answering toll-free calls for all three mobile operators and from fixed/land phone lines. An overview is given in Table 4. Table 4: Summary of tentative GRM contacts for UNDP and its implementing partners UNDP and Telephone or Email Mailbox Contact Person partners WhatsApp number 15485 Mr. Mohammed SFD 8009800/772045256 chm_hq@sfd-yemen.org Sana’a Al-Antari Mr. Abdulrahman PWP 8002626/77526262 a.sharhan@pwpyemen.org Sarhan feedback@smeps.org.ye Ms. Wafa SMED 8005550/774002215 wmothana@smeps.org.ye Muthana TPM Not finalized yet UNDP HQ SECU/SRM, Stakeholder OAI, UNDP; +1-844-595-5206 project.concerns@undp.org N/A – UNDP HQ Response & 1 U.N. Plaza, GRM 4th Floor; 31 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) UNDP and Telephone or Email Mailbox Contact Person partners WhatsApp number New York, NY USA 10017 69. FAO has established Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) for all projects to enable beneficiaries to communicate their concerns regarding the project activities. FAO provides multiple access points to the FAO GRM for beneficiaries to voice and raise their concerns. These access points include the GRM contact information, which includes a hotline & landline toll-free, mobile SMS, WhatsApp, website, email and offline form, as per Table 5. Table 5: FAO GRM contact details Toll-free telephone number 800 19 19 SMS 2222 Messengers WhatsApp: 776 01 30 30 Website www.fao.org Email Yemen-Feedback@fao.org Interviews During field visits, FAO Field Monitors and Technical Specialists, in case of a complaint, will fill in a report and share with the Toll-Free Phone Operator at the FAO Representation level for actions. Similar template and mechanism will be applied if a person approaches any offices of FAO to file a complaint. 70. Accordingly, FAO has established grievance access database to register, follow-up and take action on the complaints. An offline form was also designed to record the field complaints or offline grievances. FAO has a person in charge of the call centre. Grievances can be raised by affected people in case of concerns regarding: (i) beneficiary and community selection; (ii) assistance quantity and quality; (iii) corruption or theft; (iv) staff abuse, etc. 71. Also referred to as the “Beneficiary Feedback Mechanism (BFM)�, the GRM/BFM details the procedures which communities and/or individuals, who believe they are adversely affected by the project or a specific sub-project, can use to submit their complaints, as well as the procedures used by FAO to systematically register, track, investigate and promptly resolve complaints. The timeframe for managing feedback including giving appropriate response to the complaints raised by beneficiaries will vary based on the nature and magnitude of the reported problem. Feedback will always be reviewed and continuous efforts to improve program will be undertaken, including reduction or prevention of similar occurrences of negative events. The overall procedure for FAO handling of feedback and complaints is as follows: • Receipt of a feedback/complaint and its registry in the system, capturing details of the caller and the nature of the feedback; • Sharing complaint in a generated report template to the respective staff members for addressing, based on the classification of the complaint (please see the Table 6); • Resolution – within five working days. In case, the issue cannot be solved by the closest appropriate level, the complaint will be sent further, as described in the “Resolution� section below; • Inform the complainant not later than seven working days after receiving the case; and 32 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) • Closure of the complaint. Table 6: Staff Members to Make Decisions Categories Type Decision-Maker Timeframe Category A. − Inquiries; − Phone Operator Immediately Low − Request for assistance; − False calls. Category B. − Operational (late delivery of inputs and − Assistant to FAOR/ Review on bi- services, cash transfer payments, etc.); Programme; weekly basis Moderate − Out of beneficiaries list; − Assistant to FAOR/ Operations; − Out of target area (not included in the project); − Concerned project CTA or staff in − Distribution of less amount than envisaged; charge; − Criteria for selection is unclear or not − M&E Focal Point. applied; − Quality of items and services provided; − Overlapping activities in the given area; − Dissatisfaction with FAO activities. Category C. − FAO or its IPs staff misconduct; − FAOR or Deputy Immediately FAOR; communicated Critical − Corruption; to the FAOR/ − Assistant to FAOR/ − Tax imposition on inputs and beneficiary Deputy FAOR Programme; payments by local authorities; for decision- − Assistant to FAOR/ making − Sexual Exploitation and Abuse; Operations; − Abuse of authority. − Others assigned by the FAOR based on the case- sensitivity. 72. As FAO will lead the consolidated reporting for grievance management, partnering UN agencies (UNDP, WFP) and other implementing partners are required to maintain records of grievances and complaints, including any minutes of discussions, recommendations, and/or resolutions made. These summaries of recorded complaints must be submitted with their progress reports. X. MONITORING & REPORTING 73. Monitoring and reporting of safeguards and stakeholder engagement will be conducted periodically throughout the project. As the SEP is a living document, it will be updated within two months of project effectiveness and (should there be further changes to the project’s design) during 33 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) implementation as necessary, remaining consistent with the requirements of ESS10 and in a manner acceptable to the World Bank. Any major changes to the project-related activities and to implementation schedule will be duly reflected in the SEP. Implementation partners, the UNDP, FAO and WFP will prepare and submit quarterly reports to the World Bank, as well as annual SEP implementation reports which include information on ESHS performance and other environment and social instruments of the Project, including the grievance redress mechanism. The quarterly summaries will provide a mechanism for assessing both the number and the nature of complaints and requests for information, along with the Project’s ability to address those issues in a timely and effective manner. 74. A record of public engagement activities undertaken by the project during a given year will be conveyed to the stakeholders as follows: (i) publication of a stand-alone annual report on the project’s stakeholder engagement; and (ii) reporting against Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) based on the principles for effective communication and outreach (see Chapter VI, Step 3). 75. Further details on monitoring and reporting will be outlined within an updated version of this SEP, to be prepared within two months of project’s effectiveness date, including the establishment of a detailed stakeholders’ communication guideline. 76. All project partners including FAO, WFP, UNDP, SFD, PWP and SMEPS will work to provide unified, joint safeguards requirements, be those documents (ESMPs, SEP, LMP), grievance redress, and/or monitoring and reporting efforts. 77. UNDP plans to involve all stakeholders in monitoring and reporting as part of the SEP and participatory impact monitoring (PIM) to ensure the full participation of stakeholders in the project preparation and implementation phases, and to enhance community’s ownership, participation, resilience and sustainable development. This would involve regular meetings (biweekly, monthly, and/or quarterly) with implementing partners with community committees to collect, register and address the GRM received at each site. When needed, an urgent meeting could be called to address any immediate responses and actions. UNDP and the implementing partners will monitor involvement of stakeholders as agreed within the SEP, and they will provide capacity building activities to enhance community capacity in community participation and development, women and youth’s empowerment and resilience. UNDP and the respective TPMs will formally monitor the project and associated impacts on a quarterly basis, and provide ongoing monitoring of the GRM hotline. Throughout implementation, UNDP, it’s implementing partners, and the TPM will collect and consolidate best practices and lesson learned from field visits. 78. WFP closely monitors the implementation of activities by partners through its own field monitors and contracted third parties, including: • WFP Field Staff Monitoring • Third Party Monitoring: WFP has three dedicated TPM companies that conduct onsite monitoring as well as Post-distribution monitoring. • Three WFP call centres, two in Sana’a and one in Amman, as part of the process and outcome monitoring: (i) Dispatch and Distribution follow-up to track deliveries, distribution status and identify gaps; (ii) Beneficiary Verification Mechanism to follow up and verify third party monitoring findings in high priority locations; (iii) Post distribution monitoring and outcome monitoring call centre in Amman. • A WFP toll-free hotline number (08002020), (as described in the GRM) where beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries can ask questions and raise concerns. 34 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) 79. WFP established several control mechanisms to further augment its monitoring functions, transparency and effectiveness, including a Monitoring and Evaluation Findings (MEF) management database to track and follow up on monitoring findings. WFP undertakes monitoring activities either directly or through one of its TPMs who adhere to the prescribed monitoring process. The process includes engaging with the stakeholders at the clinic level which include community health workers/volunteers, local community leaders, and male and female beneficiaries. 35 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) ANNEX 1: Overview Consultations during Project Preparation Consultation with local stakeholders and development partners: Development of the project proposal was done through intensive a consultation process led by the MAI and MoPIC in collaboration with FAO. Different methods of quantitative and qualitative data collection were used to inform the process, including desk research, interviews with key informants, site observations by staff in the field, focus groups with potential beneficiary groups, and extensive dialogue with stakeholders at different levels. Initial coordination and planning/meetings were held between top officials and experts from MAI, MoPIC in Cairo to make kick-off the process. FAO was delegated to assist in the preparation of the GAFSP proposal. Further discussions took place with the World Bank as the selected supervising entity. A GoY taskforce was established to carry out the design and writing of the GAFSP project proposal, after which a series of consultations with various stakeholders across the following categories (see list at the end of this annex: key officials (Ministers, Vice Ministers, and Deputy Ministers) from MoPIC, MAI, MWE, MFW; agriculture extension agents and representatives of rural women departments; researchers; veterinarians and animal husbandry specialists; crop production and seed specialists; crop protection specialists; representatives of cooperatives union and farmer associations; and fisheries specialists. MoPIC facilitated discussions on updating GoY’s relevant and interrelated strategies on the following: Food Security, Agriculture Sector, Water Sector, and Investment Plan (represented by reconstruction and economic recovery plan). During proposal development, FAO also consulted key informants such as farmers, farmer groups’ members, local NGOs and different private sector actors to collect their invaluable perspectives and feedback, which have notably enriched the proposal. Involvement of traditionally marginalized groups during consultations: As part of ongoing implementation of different projects, the project teams and public sector counterparts have gained deeper understanding of the needs of local government officials, private sector business people, farmer groups, including marginalized groups such as women, youth, landless farmers and farm workers, the elderly and infirm, and other excluded groups. These insights have been invaluable in designing an inclusive and effective response to sustainably address agriculture issues in those districts. Interviews and focus groups held by female staff with and youth groups disaggregated by gender helped participants feel at ease to discuss challenges and potential solutions to be addressed under this new project. Feedback from beneficiaries among these target groups who have been participating under the predecessor project SAPREP were reviewed and results achieved among these groups were analyzed for ways to make improvements. Ways in which the consultations have added value or enhanced the project design: The joint consultation process during preparation of this proposal has reflected ownership and buy-in among government counterparts at different levels and across various ministries, especially MAI, and successful working relationships with FAO staff. The design process reiterated the continued relevance of the National Agricultural Sector Strategy (NASS) and its specific objectives, and delivery mechanisms. Moreover, government experts who helped brainstorm and refine strategies for this project (see table at the end of this annex) provided their deep knowledge and understanding of the challenges they faced and appropriate, feasible solutions for them and smallholder farming communities. This feedback included, but was not limited to, implementation arrangements and approaches to monitoring and reporting. This consultation and coordination served to validate the overall project approach and design and generated thoughtful solutions on how to ensure inclusive approaches and encourage participation of women, youth and other marginalized and excluded groups. 36 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Full list of stakeholders engaged in consultation process during proposal preparation: Name Title Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation (MAI) Abdulmalik Qassim Al-Thawr H.E. Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation Ali Gunaid Abdullah Deputy Minister Majid Hashim Al-Mutawkil Deputy Minister Izzadeen Al-Gunaid Deputy Minister Irrigation sector Ahmed Mohamed Nasser Deputy Minister Irrigation Sector Ali Abdulkareem AL-Fadhil Deputy Minister Agricultural Production Development Abdulmalik Najji Obaid Deputy Minister Plant Production Sector Dhaifallah Shamalan Deputy Minister Agriculture Services Ahmed Saeed Abdah Al-Wahish Coordinator of Food Security Programme Wasil Ali Al-Dhabiani Consultant of the Minister Wadei Abdul Habib Advisor - Seed Production Ayman Ismail Al-Houthi Consultant Hilal Ahmed Al-Maghrabi Minister Secretary Abdulraqeeb Mahdi Hadi Ministry Secretariat Mukhtar Abod Hamam Director General of Agriculture Extension Department Khalid Ali Saeed Director General of Agriculture Information Director General of General Seed Multiplication Ahmed Awadh Obaid Corporation Shukri Fadhil Saleh Khamis Director General of Irrigation Facilities Omar Saeed Mohamed Director General of Livestock Development Department Mohamed Moogam Director General of Planning and Monitoring Abdul AlElah Ahmed AbdulQawi Director General of Planning Department ABdulHafiz Garahash Director General of Plant Production Rushdi Mahmod Shaboti Director General of Plant Production Department Ahmed Yahia Saber Director General of Programmes Abdah Hamid Ali Al- Sorori Director General of Relations 37 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Fadhil Mothana Razih Director General of Relations Director General of Rural Women Development Nadia Hamid Sultan department Kamal Ali Hassan Shamsan Director General of the Deputy office Salim Nasser General Director Yahia Mohamed AL-Makhadhi General Director Ali Saif Al-Shaiabani General Director Plant Protection Department General Director of General Directorate of Animal Health Abdulrahman Al-Khatib and Veterinary Quarantine Farooq Taleb Ali General Director of Forestry and Desertification MAI Coordinator at National Authority for Management Mutaher Zaid and Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Taha Ali Gunaid Support Staff Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation (MoPIC) H.E. Vice Minister Ministry of Planning and International Nizar BaSuhaib Cooperation Omar ABdulaziz Abdulghani Deputy Minister International Cooperation Hassan Ali Jaadal Deputy office Director Nizar Ahmed AL-Ahdal Director General of Energy and Industry Director General of NGOs at the Ministry of Planning & Zohair Hamid Jaafar International Cooperation Salah Ahmed Saif Ahmed Director General of the Directorate of UN Organizations Arwaa Haidarah Hassan Director of the Fisheries Directorate Hussein Ahmed Mohamed Al-Taib Director of the Monitoring Directorate Sawsan Saeed Mohamed Ahmed Food Security Information System Khidhar Ali Itroosh Food Security Technical Secretariat Head - Aden Abdulwahid Mukred Food Security Technical Secretariat Head - Sanaa Khalid Mohamed Saeed General Director Nazih Qais AbdulKhaliq General Director Obaid Khalid Ahmed Awn General Director 38 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) Mohamed Al-Kibsi General Director - Agriculture and Fisheries Wafaa Nasser Salim Head of Food Security Technical Secretariat Office Ali Salim Askar Head of Water and Sanitation Mansour Zaid Haidrah Assistant Deputy Ahmed Saeed Abdulwaahid Coordinator Robaa Abdullah Abdorabah Minister Office Assistant Ministry of Fish Wealth Anwar Saleh AS Sadi Chairman of the Technical Committee and Consultant Adel Ibrahim Al-Ghawri Consultant Mohamed Awadh Ghalan Deputy Minister Ahmed Yahia Al-Babli Deputy Minister Projects Programming Sector Bashir Mohamed Al-Khiwani Deputy Minister Traditional Fishing Sector Rihab Rafiq Mohamed Ahmed Director General of Information Center Maryam Mohamed Ahmed Tahir Director General of Planning Mohamed Abass Husein Al- Faqeeh General Director Abdulrahman Ahmed As Saidi General Director of International Cooperation Agricultural Cooperative Union Mohamed Mothana Mohamed Chief of the Agricultural Cooperative Union AbdulAziz Saleh Al-Ashwal Head of Agricultural Affairs Department Ahmed Abdulmalik Head of Cooperative Coordination Unit Mohamed Abdullah Programmes Engineers Association & Potato Seed Company Obad Mohamed Al-Ansi Director General of Potato Seed Company Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Hussein Gadain FAO Representative in Yemen Mohamed Sallam Assistant FAO Representative (Programme) Hanan Saif Al-Sabai Programme Unit Kodan Research Center Dr. Mohamed Salem Al- Khashia’a Senior research Specialist 39 Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project (P176129) Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) National Water Resources Authority Khalid Mohssen BelEidi Head of National Water Resources Authority Abdulaziz Mahiub Mohamed Deputy of National Water Resources Authority Research Authority - Post Harvest Technology Director General of Food and Post-Harvest Research Abdullah Omar BaKhiwar Center Tihama Development Authority Mohamed Daws Hassan Zabidi Agricultural Resources Specialist Note: a variety of other individuals (farmers, women, farmers organization leaders, experts, private sector actors, etc.) not detailed here were also consulted in topics related to this proposal. These consultations took place in the course of SAPREP activities and also the interaction of proposal team members with these individuals. 40