Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: PAD883 PROJECT PAPER ON A PROPOSED ADDITIONALCREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 91.3 MILLION (US$ 140MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA FOR A COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (CSDP) MARCH 3, 2014 Social Protection West and Central Africa Country Department AFCW2 Africa Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective January 31, 2014) Currency Unit = Nigerian Naira (NGN) NGN 164.9 = US$1 SDR 0.651805501 = US$1 FISCAL YEAR January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AF Additional Financing IP Implementation Progress CAF Country Assistance Framework IPF Investment Project Financing CBO Community Based Organization ISR Implementation Status Reviews CDD Community Driven Development IT Information Technology CPF Country Partnership Framework LEEMP Local Empowerment and Environmental Management CPRP Community Poverty Reduction Project LGA Local Government Area CSDA Community and Social Development Agency LGA Local Government Authority CSDP Community and Social Development Project LGRC Local Government Review Committees CSO Civil Society Organization MDG Millennium Development Goals DA Disbursement Arrangements M&E Monitoring and Evaluation DFID Department for International Development O&M Operation and Maintenance DO Development Objective ORAF Operational Risk Assessment Framework ESMF Environmental and Social Management PDO Project Development Objective Framework F&A Finance and Administration PFMU Project Financial Management Unit FAM Finance and Administration Manager PIU Project Implementation Unit FM Financial Management RAP Resettlement Action Plan FPFMD Federal Project Financial Management RPF Resettlement Policy Framework Division FPSU Federal Project Support Unit SDR Special Drawing Rights GAAP Governance and Accountability Action Plan SSN Social Safety Net GVG Gender and Vulnerable Groups UNICEF United Nations Children’s Funds IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and USAID United State Agency for International Development Development ICT Information Communication Technology WHO World Health Organization IEC Information Education Communication WHT Withholding Tax IDA International Development Association YESSO Youth Employment and Social Support Operation IFR Interim Financial Reports Vice President: MakhtarDiop Country Director: Marie Francoise Marie-Nelly Sector Manager: Stefano Paternostro Task Team Leader: FolusoOkunmadewa FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT (CSDP) ADDITIONAL FINANCING CONTENTS Project Paper Data Sheet i Project Paper I. Introduction 1 II. Background and Rationale for Additional Financing 2 III. Proposed Changes 6 IV. Appraisal Summary 13 Annexes Revised Results Framework and Monitoring Indicators 18 Operational Risk Assessment Framework 24   ADDITIONAL FINANCING DATA SHEET Nigeria Community and Social Development AF ( P148215 ) AFRICA AFTSW . Basic Information – Parent Parent Project ID: P090644 Original EA Category: B - Partial Assessment Current Closing Date: 31-Dec-2014 Basic Information – Additional Financing (AF) Additional Financing Project ID: P148215 Scale Up Type (from AUS): Regional Vice President: MakhtarDiop Proposed EA Category: B - Partial Assessment Marie Francoise Marie- Expected Effectiveness Country Director: 30-May-2014 Nelly Date: Sector Director: Tawhid Nawaz Expected Closing Date: 31-Dec-2017 Sector Manager: Stefano Paternostro Report No: PAD883 Team Leader: FolusoOkunmadewa Borrower Organization Name Contact Title Telephone Email Mrs. Director, aremuklie99@yahoo. Federal Ministry of Finance AbidemiAremu IERD com Project Financing Data – Parent ( Community and Social Development Project-P090644 ) Key Dates Approval Effectiveness Original Revised Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Signing Date Date Date Closing Date Closing Date Effectiv P090644 IDA-44960 01-Jul-2008 24-Nov-2008 23-Feb-2009 31-Dec-2013 31-Dec-2014 e Disbursements % Cancelle Disburse Undisbur Project Ln/Cr/TF Status Currency Original Revised Disburse d d sed d Effectiv P090644 IDA-44960 XDR 121.50 121.50 0.00 121.47 0.03 99.98 e i Project Financing Data –Additional Financing Community and Social Development AF ( P148215 ) [ ] Loan [ ] Grant [ ] IDA Grant [X] Credit [ ] Guarantee [ ] Other Total Project Cost: 176.00 Total Bank Financing: 140.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source – Additional Financing (AF) Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 36.00 International Development Association (IDA) 140.00 Total 176.00 Policy Waivers Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant No respects? Explanation Does the project require any policy waiver(s)? No Explanation Team Composition Bank Staff Name Title Specialization Unit Antonia T. Koleva Operations Officer Operations AFTSE Luis M. Schwarz Senior Finance Officer Senior Finance Officer CTRLA FolusoOkunmadewa Sector Leader Team Lead AFTHD VaralakshmiVemuru Senior Social Social Safeguards AFTCS Development Specialist OmobowaleAyoola Oni E T Consultant E T Consultant AFTSW Evarist F. Baimu Senior Counsel Senior Counsel LEGAM Joseph EseAkpokodje Senior Environmental Environmental AFTN1 Institutions Specialist Institutions Helen Operations Analyst Operations AFTP3 OgochukwuOkeke SulaimanAdesina Yusuf Consultant Consultant AFTSW Ogo- Senior Monitoring & Monitoring & Evaluation AFTDE OluwaOluwatoyinJagha Evaluation Specialist AkinrinmolaOyenugaAk Sr Financial Financial Management AFTMW ii inyele Management Specialist Adebayo Adeniyi Senior Procurement Procurement AFTPW Specialist Stanley Garuba E T Consultant E T Consultant AFTSW Mariam Denise Brain E T Temporary Administration AFTSE Non Bank Staff Name Title Office Phone City Locations Country First Administrative Location Planned Actual Comments Division Nigeria Federal Republic of Nigeria Nigeria Kwara Kwara State X Nigeria Katsina Katsina State X Nigeria KatsinaAla Nigeria Abuja Federal Federal Capital X Capital Territory Territory Nigeria Abia Abia State X Nigeria Adamawa State Adamawa State X Nigeria Bayelsa Bayelsa State X Nigeria Ebonyi Ebonyi State X Nigeria Ekiti Ekiti State X Nigeria Gombe Gombe State X Nigeria Nassarawa Nassarawa State X Nigeria Zamfara Zamfara State X Nigeria Taraba State Taraba State X Nigeria Abia State Isiala-Ngwa North Nigeria Benue State Logo Nigeria Ekpoma Ethiope West Nigeria Ekpoma Ethiope East Nigeria Ekpoma Ika North East Nigeria Ekpoma Ukwuani iii Nigeria Imo State Aboh-Mbaise Nigeria Imo State Ahiuzu-Mbaise Nigeria Imo State Ehime-Mbano Nigeria Imo State Ihitte/Uboma Nigeria Imo State IsialaMbano Nigeria Imo State Mbaitoli Nigeria Imo State Ngor-Okp Nigeria Imo State Njaba Nigeria Imo State Obowo Nigeria Imo State Ohaji/Egbema Nigeria Imo State Okigwe Nigeria Imo State Oru East Nigeria Imo State Oru West Nigeria Imo State Owerri West Nigeria Abia State Ohafia Nigeria Imo State Unuimo Nigeria Kogi State Adavi Nigeria Adamawa State Fufore Nigeria Kogi State Bassa Nigeria Kogi State Ibaji Nigeria Kogi State Igalamela-Odolu Nigeria Adamawa State Gombi Nigeria Kogi State Ijumu Nigeria Kogi State Kabba/Bunu Nigeria Adamawa State Madagali Nigeria Kogi State Mopa-Muro Nigeria Kogi State Ofu Nigeria Kogi State Okehi Nigeria Kogi State Okene Nigeria Kogi State Olamabor Nigeria Kogi State Omala Nigeria Kogi State Yagba East Nigeria Kogi State Yagba West iv Nigeria Niger State Agaie Nigeria Niger State Agwara Nigeria Niger State Bida Nigeria Niger State Borgu Nigeria Bauchi Bogoro Nigeria Niger State Chanchaga Nigeria Niger State Edati Nigeria Bauchi Darazo Nigeria Bauchi Misau Nigeria Benue State Buruku Nigeria Benue State Gboko Nigeria Benue State Kwande Nigeria Enugu State Abi Nigeria Cross River State Boki Nigeria Abia State Afikpo South Nigeria Enugu State Ikwo Nigeria Enugu State Izzi Nigeria Enugu State Enugu East Nigeria Enugu State Igbo Eze North Nigeria Kebbi State Ngaski Nigeria Kebbi State Yauri Nigeria Kebbi State Zuru Nigeria Niger State Gbako Nigeria Niger State Gurara Nigeria Plateau State BarikinLadi Nigeria Niger State Lavun Nigeria Plateau State Pankshin Nigeria Plateau State Shendam Nigeria Niger State Muya Nigeria Niger State Paikoro Nigeria Osun State Atakumosa East Nigeria Osun State Atakumosa West Nigeria Osun State Atakumosa West v Nigeria Yobe State Bursari Nigeria Osun State Boripe Nigeria Yobe State Gujba Nigeria Oyo State Ibarapa East Nigeria Oyo State Ibarapa North Nigeria Yobe State Gulani Nigeria Oyo State Ido Nigeria Oyo State Kajola Nigeria Oyo State Lagelu Nigeria Oyo State Ori Ire Nigeria Oyo State Oyo East Nigeria Oyo State Oyo west Nigeria Oyo State Saki West Nigeria Oyo State Surulere Institutional Data Parent ( Community and Social Development Project-P090644 ) Sector Board Social Protection Sectors / Climate Change Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation Co- Co-benefits % benefits % Health and other social services Other social services 35 Education Primary education 20 Transportation Rural and Inter-Urban 20 Roads and Highways Public Administration, Law, and Public administration- 15 Justice Other social services Water, sanitation and flood protection General water, 10 sanitation and flood protection sector Total 100 Themes vi Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major theme Theme % Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 30 Social protection and risk management Other social protection and risk 30 management Social dev/gender/inclusion Participation and civic engagement 30 Public sector governance Decentralization 10 Total 100 Additional Financing Community and Social Development AF ( P148215 ) Sector Board Social Protection Sectors / Climate Change Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation Co- Co-benefits % benefits % Public Administration, Law, and Public administration- 35 Justice Other social services Education Primary education 20 Health and other social services Other social services 20 Transportation Rural and Inter-Urban 15 Roads and Highways Water, sanitation and flood protection General water, 10 sanitation and flood protection sector Total 100 I certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information applicable to this project. Themes Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100) Major theme Theme % Social protection and risk management Other social protection and risk 50 management Social dev/gender/inclusion Participation and civic engagement 20 Rural development Rural services and infrastructure 20 Public sector governance Decentralization 10 Total 100 vii   I. Introduction 1. This Project Paper seeks the approval of the Executive Directors to provide an additional credit in an amount of SDR 91.3 million (US$140 million equivalent) to the Federal Republic of Nigeria Community and Social Development Project (P148215). The closing date of the Additional Financing would be December 31, 2017. 2. The objective of the proposed additional credit is to increase access by the poor to improved social and natural resource infrastructure services in a sustainable manner throughout Nigeria. In this regard, it aims to enhance impact of the successful community driven interventions under the current project and to provide support to vulnerable and disenfranchised households and individuals.To this end, the Additional Financing would:(i) increase opportunities for social and livelihood activities for poor households; (ii) strengthen the local level mechanism of support for poor and vulnerable households; and (iii) provide information for input into the process of development of a national strategy for a community driven development approach for inclusive growth and development in Nigeria.In general, the main changes introduced through the proposed additional financing are: (i) revision to the Results Framework, (ii) introduction of a new component to ensure vulnerable groups also have increased access to social support services, and (iii) triggering of two new safeguards policies. There is no substantive change to the PDO. However, as there was a discrepancy in the wording, though not the meaning, of the PDO and titles of the three original components in the PAD and Financing Agreement of the original project, the wording in the Additional Financing Project Paper was aligned to coincide with that of the Financing Agreement. 3. The Results Framework has been slightly revised to take into account the new emphasis on social assistance (safety net) for the poor and vulnerable, in addition to increasing the scale of current interventions, this would result in anadditional component (Component 4) which was not part ofthe original design of the Community and Social Development Project. The new component would create a window for social and economic support to the vulnerable1 such as widows, marginalized households, physically challenged and chronically poor individuals and households in the communities. The current component on community investment (Component 3) has been deemed unable to adequately respond to this.Component 1 will involve Federal coordination, including a focus on CDD policy and strategy assessment and formulation, technical support, monitoring and impact evaluation. Components 2 and 3 will remain as in the original project while the new component 4 will usethe same approach and project cycle as component 3but focus on a targeted vulnerable group of households and individuals in the poor communities. 1 The vulnerable are a subset of the households in a poor community that are extremely poor or susceptible to further deteriorating of their welfare situation because of the occurrence of uninsured risks, such as physical deformity, adverse climatic events, conflicts, death of “breadwinner”, fire disasters, etc. Such groups of people include internally displaced poor households due to conflict situations, widows, physically handicapped, culturally marginalized, etc. The conflict and emergency situation in the North East States of Nigeria has increased the number of such groups. While the parent project takes the whole geographical community/ward as a poor enclave consisting of poor households and individuals who are desirous of implementing a program to improve their access to social services and natural resource services, the new component 4 targets the vulnerable within the poor communities. Gender and Vulnerability Studies under the parent project confirm that these groups do not take active part in the community gathering and decision making and therefore their voices and needs are not reflected in the community development plans under the parent project. 1 4. The AF would use the current structure and institutional arrangementsof the original CSDP project at the State level, while the FPSU will be restructured, reconstituted and strengthened. Likewise, financial management and procurement arrangements will remain as they are under the parent CSDP and disbursement estimates would be revised to account for the additional funding. Furthermore, there will be no changes in the environmental category of the credit, although two additional safeguards policies would be triggered, namely OP 4.36 – Forests and OP 4.04 – Natural Habitat. II.Background and Rationale for Additional Financing in the amount of US$140 million Background 5. The original credit for CSDP was approved by the Board of Executive Directors on July 1, 2008 for an amount of SDR121.50 (US$200 millionequivalent), with the related Financing Agreement being signed on November 24, 2008, and becomingeffective on February 23, 2009. The original closing date of the original credit for CSDP was December 31, 2013. However, as of October 2013, 98 percent of the IDA resources had been disbursed and, to allow for full disbursement, at the request ofGovernment, the closing date of the original credit was extended to December 31, 2014. The original credit is expected to be fully disbursed by the revised closing date. 6. The CSDP is a community-driven development (CDD) project and its project development objective (PDO) is “to increase access by thepoor to improved social and natural resource infrastructure servicesin a sustainable manner throughout Nigeria.” Therefore the CSDP supports: (i) the empowerment of communities to develop, implement and monitor micro social infrastructure projects (public and common pool goods) including natural resource management interventions; and (ii) strengthening the skills and capacity of Local Government Authorities (LGAs) and sectoral public agencies to support communities and build a partnership between them. The original Project has three components as per the Financing Agreement of the parent project: Component 1: Overall Project Support and Coordination; Component 2: Capacity Building and Partnerships Development in State Ministries and LGAs; and Component 3: Community-Driven Investments Facility. 7. The first component is managed by a Federal Project Support Unit (FPSU), supervised by the Federal Ministry of Finance, while the latter two are currently managed at the State level by 26 (twenty six) State Agencies established by law plus FCT Specialized Unit. Performance Status 8. Over the life of the project, 11 Implementation Status Reviews (ISR) over 5 years were conducted, and ratings for implementation progress (IP) and progress towards achievement of the development objective (DO) have consistently been rated “satisfactory” and CSDP is on course to fully meet the project development objective. There is actually a high probability of the project exceeding the target number of poor communities and households with increased access to social and natural resource management services. As of November 2013, more than 2 2500 new communities were already covered by the completed micro-projects, compared to a total target of 3,000. Micro-projects in an additional 800 communities are at final stages of completion. A total of 5,596 micro-projects across the States have been completed in all the benefiting communities with close to 800 under implementation and about 1,200, yet to be commenced. The distribution of the micro-projects cuts across eight sectors, including: education, environment, health, rural electrification, rural markets infrastructures, skill acquisition centers and equipment, transport, and water infrastructure. Water supply infrastructure tops the list of the micro-projects with a total of over 1,600 water-related micro- projects already completed. Also, the number of direct project beneficiaries is now over 2 million, higher than the target of 1.5 million. 9. The national impact assessment (recently conducted by independent firms across all participating states and summarized by a National Consultant) shows that CSDP has directly benefitted about two million people across all the 26 participating States. The summarized report shows that the project has contributed to significant outcomes in all the sectors of interventions. There has been increase in primary and secondary school enrolments in the project communities. Compared with non-CSDP communities there is a higher increase in number of additional children that are registered in schools and those in science classes in CSDP communities. In the water sector, average distance to water source reduced and the number of people with access to potablewater increased more in CSDP communities. Average distance reduced to 2.3Km in CSDP communities compared with 6.2Km in non-CSDP communities. There is an increased number of children immunized per cycle in CSDP communities beyond what is recorded in non-CSDP communities. More households are now connected to electricity with more businesses springing up as a result in CSDP communities relative to non-CSDP communities. The CSDP also intervened in the areas of channelization, land reclamation and erosion control. As a result of these interventions, many communities have been protected from natural disasters. The colossal loss of lives and properties to these natural disasters is averted in the participating communities as seen in the Osun state channelization project by Osun CSDP. Also the impact evaluation shows that a national average of 151.42 m2 of land has been reclaimed or protected in the participating communities while about 1691.25m2 of land is under threat in the non-participating communities. The report also shows that CSDP is more cost effective ranging from a comparative cost ratio of 1:1.97 for lock-up stalls to 1:4.58 for open stalls. A unit classroom and health center in CSDP is on the average 1:2.25 and 1:2.72 times respectively lower than the cost of putting the same structures together by other agencies. 10. Implementation is also progressing smoothly with the State level agencies and the local government institutional partnership with community level groups. The structure for the successful institutionalization of the community driven development approach is also improving. The State Agencies are receiving government contributions to complement the IDA resources. More than 15 State governments, out of the 26 States participating, are contributing an average of 100 million Naira (about US$700,000) annually to the resources of their Agencies. In two States (Edo and Bayelsa) the State Agencies are also being used to execute the CDD interventions of another World Bank assisted project. A total of 439 Local Government Review Committees (about 80 percent of participating LGAs) are fully functioning across the participating States and more than 2,600 Community Development Plans have been approved by the State Community and Social Development Agencies. More than 65 percent of the total resources provided by IDA have been utilized and managed at the community level by the 3 community groups. Communities are also contributing (in cash and kind), more than the stipulated 10% of total cost of operation. 11. At the Federal level, the performance of the coordinating unit is weak and based on a comprehensive review, a proposal to strengthen the Federal Project Support Unit (FPSU) to make it more effective is in place and its implementation is underway. A restructured FPSU will be responsible for implementing the additional financing. The FPSU currently manages a robust ICT based Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system for the project and also houses the financial management system for the entire operation. The FPSU recently produced a draft CDD policy strategy note for integration of the CDD approach into the development agenda of the Federal and State Governments in Nigeria. The strategy note will be revised and disseminated during the additional financing. Procurement, Financial Management and Safeguards issues 12. The World Bank records indicate that there are no major outstanding financial and procurement management issues. The Financial Management review carried out in early 2013 recommended a number of minor management practices, such as monitoring of Withdrawal Applications on a monthly basis, the need to accurately apply Withholding Tax (WHT) rate on payments to Consultants at the various State Agencies, using the 5 percent prescribed under the relevant Tax, and for all State Agencies to make the appropriate tax deductions to protect the project against a potential tax liability. The review also recommended that internal control systems of the State Agencies be improved with adequate retirement of advances, documentation and classification of expenditures. The comprehensive report of the FM review was circulated to FPSU and all State Agencies so the implementation of recommendations could be supervised. On safeguards, the project has been implementing environmental and social measures for the micro-projects, based on guidance from the ESMF. An Environmental Safeguards Audit of the project in all the participating Stateshas been prepared and publicly disclosed. The Audit includes recommendations for strengthening capacity on implementation of environmental and social measures. An Environmental and Social Impact Assessment of the Bemi Bridge in Cross River Statehas been finalized, following stakeholder consultations and has been publicly disclosed in-country and in the World Bank’s Infoshop. Rationale for Additional Financing 13. In a letter to the World Bank dated September 20, 2013 the Coordinating Minister of the Economy and Minister for Finance requested a year’s extension of the closing date for the original Project, which has already been processed, as well as additional financing of US$150 million for the Project. 14. In line with the request of the government, the Bank team is in support of a US$140 million proposed additional financing to the Project with a closing date of December 31, 2017.The closing date of the original credit for CSDP has already been extended to December 31, 2014. As the signing of the additional credit is expected to take place before December 31, 2014 and considering that the original credit is almost fully disbursed, no further extension of the current closing date of the original credit is necessary at this point. 4 15. The Bank team considers that there is a strong justification for further support to CSDP with an additional financing as proposed. Further to the impressive performance of the CSDP to date and the need to ensure appreciation of the CDD approach in thegovernment’s strategy for inclusive growth and shared prosperity, the rationale for additional financing includes: (i) the need to respond to the emerging individual and household challenges as well as needs of the chronically poor and vulnerable, especially with the Boko Haram conflict situation in the North East of Nigeria; (ii) the need to further strengthen the institutional mechanism for community driven development partnership especially at the local government level; and (iii) the need to expand the coverage of the project to more communities and local governments, particularly to increase the number of poor households and individuals with access to basic social services. The new component would create a window for investment in vulnerable groups for increased access to social support services by responding to the demands and specificitiesof the groups. Such vulnerable groups include internally displaced poor people, widows, marginalized households, physically challenged and chronically poor households in the communities. Lessons of experience and documentation in CSDP show that the current community investment component in CSDP is unable to adequately respond to these groups. There is, for instance,a limited number of education micro-projects with provision for physically challenged and or health centers and services with provision for those who cannot even pay for health cards. There is no opportunity for internally displaced poor households to integrate into their host communities especially in terms of housing and other social and economic facilities and services. The major reason is that the “voices” and needs of these sets of people are not considered as priority in the community gatherings and decision making which is a key stage in the CDD cycle of the CSDP. The number of these vulnerable and chronic poor is also on the increase especially as a result of current uninsured risks and uncertainties. This is evidenced by the increasing inequality statistics in the current poverty assessment in the country. This is also arising from climatic, policy changes, and conflict (Boko Haram) situations in the country. 16. In recognition of the growing and large inequality, the Country Partnership Strategy under preparation is making provisions for a broadened Social Safety Net operation in the next fiscal year (FY 15/16) and the seamless linkage with the CSDP (a CDD type intervention) in each of the participating States will need to be ensured. In the future it is envisaged that the Social Safety Net (SSN) platform, which is currentlyunder development under the World Bank assisted Youth Employment and Social Support Operation will be expanded, especially to more States,and the CSDP will be one of the interventions to use the platform’s targeting and coordinating systems. Component 4, in particular, would be the connecting point of CSDP to the SSN platform. So the preparation of the additional financing and the addition of the new component will ensure linkage of CSDP to the Social Safety Net platform in each of the States. 17. Government has shown increasing commitment to address the challenge of low human capital development in the country, especially with the increasing provision of additional resources to the CSDP for increasing access of poor households to basic social and livelihood support services. It is possible to leverage more government resources and commitment into this approach by strengthening the mechanism at the local government level for partnership with the communities, a mechanism that has proven successful so far. Institutionalization of the CDD approach, especially at the local government level that started in the parent project, will be reinforced in the additional financing. This will continue to serve as a major platform for strong 5 partnership between community groups and the lowest tier of government. The participatory planning process and the partnership continue to ensure effectiveness and sustainability. III. Proposed Changes Summary of Proposed Changes The main change from the parent project is to increase emphasis on support to vulnerable groups, expand scope of assistance to such households beyond public goods (schools, health center, water, etc.), to also include demand side support for safety nets. This new emphasis on safety nets results in an additional component for grants to vulnerable groups. In general, the main changes introduced through the proposed additional financing are: (i) revision to the Results Framework, (ii) Introduction of a new component to ensure vulnerable groups also have increased access to social support services, and (iii) triggering of two new safeguards policies. There is no substantive change to the PDO. However, as there was a discrepancy in the wording, though not the meaning, of the PDO and titles of the three original components in the PAD and Financing Agreement of the original project, the wording in the Additional Financing Project Paper was aligned to coincide with that of the Financing Agreement. Change in Implementing Agency Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Project's Development Objectives Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change in Results Framework Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change of EA category Yes [ ] No [ X ] Other Changes to Safeguards Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Legal Covenants Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Yes [ ] No [ X ] Cancellations Proposed Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Disbursement Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ] Reallocation between Disbursement Categories Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Disbursement Estimates Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change to Components and Cost Yes [ X ] No [ ] Change in Institutional Arrangements Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Financial Management Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Procurement Yes [ ] No [ X ] Change in Implementation Schedule Yes [ ] No [ X ] Other Change(s) Yes [ ] No [ X ] 6 Development Objective/Results PHHHDO Project’s Development Objectives Original PDO Development objectives. The project development objective is to sustainably increase access of poor people to social and natural resource infrastructure services. The key performance indicators are: - Increased number of poor people (of which 70% are women) with access to social services. - Increased number of poor people with access to natural resources infrastructure services. - Increased percentage of participating Local Governments that are incorporating Community development plans in their budget. Change in Project's Development Objectives PHHCPDO Explanation: There is no substantive change to the PDO. There was a discrepancy in wording, though not in meaning, between the PAD and Financing Agreement of the parent project. The wording in the Additional Financing project paper was revised to be the same as that of the Financing Agreement. Proposed New PDO - Additional Financing (AF) The project development objective is to increase access by the poor to improved social and natural resource infrastructure services in a sustainable manner throughout Nigeria. Change in Results Framework PHHCRF Explanation: The changes in the Results Framework include revision of some indicators wording, targets and additional new intermediate indicators. Target values of PDO indicators were increased because of the additional component 4. New targets were set for women, vulnerable group and the people reached with the project, as a result of the new emphasis on safety nets. Two new intermediate indicators were added to track the progress of the intervention with component 4. The intermediate indicator 6 was revised to align with description of what is tracked. Targets for current intermediate indicators were increased because of the extension of the project closing date as well as the additional financing available. Compliance PHHHCompl Change in Safeguard Policies Triggered PHHCSPT Explanation: The ESIA audit recommended that two additional safeguard policies namely, OP 4.36 – Forests and OP 4.04 – Natural Habitat should be included to the already triggered safeguard instruments - OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment and OP 4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement. Current and Proposed Safeguard Policies Current(from Current Proposed (from Triggered: Parent ISDS) Additional Financing ISDS) Environmental Assessment (OP) (BP 4.01) Yes Yes Natural Habitats (OP) (BP 4.04) No Yes Forests (OP) (BP 4.36) No Yes Pest Management (OP 4.09) No No Physical Cultural Resources (OP) (BP 4.11) No No Indigenous Peoples (OP) (BP 4.10) No No 7 Involuntary Resettlement (OP) (BP 4.12) Yes Yes Safety of Dams (OP) (BP 4.37) No No Projects on International Waterways (OP) (BP No No 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas (OP) (BP 7.60) No No Covenants - Additional Financing ( Community and Social Development AF - P148215 ) Source of Finance Description of Funds Agreement Date Due Recurrent Frequency Action Covenants Reference The recipient shall cause each participating State to require its respective Article III. 31-Oct- IDA CSDA to deposit New 3.03 (a) 2014 into its CSDA Project Account an initial amount of at least N150 million The recipient shall cause each participating State to require its respective CSDA to Article III. replenish its 31-Oct- IDA New 3.03 (b) CSDA Project 2014 Account by the first day of each calendar semester with an amount of at least N25 million At least one Subsidiary Agreement has Article IV. been executed on CONTINU IDA New 4.01. (a) behalf of the OUS Recipient and one Participating State, in form 8 and substance satisfactory to the Association (Effectiveness Condition) The Recipient, through the Federal Ministry of Finance, has restructured the Federal Project Article IV. CONTINU IDA Support Unit, in New 4.01. (b) OUS form and substance satisfactory to the Association (Effectiveness Condition) The Recipient shall, no later than 9 months after Effectiveness Date, prepare and furnish to the Association for Section I. F. 1 its review and CONTINU IDA New (a) approval, an OUS operations manual which shall set forth detailed implementation arrangements for Part D of the project. Notwithstanding the provisions of Part A of this Section, no Section IV. B. CONTINU IDA withdrawal shall New 1. (b) OUS be made for payments under any Category to be made with 9 respect to any Participating State until the Recipient has furnished to the Association evidence satisfactory to the Association that eligibility criteria have been fulfilled. (Disbursement Condition) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part A of this Section, no withdrawal shall be made for payments under Category (4) Section IV. B. unless and until CONTINU IDA New 1. (c) the Recipient has OUS adopted the VG Manual in the form, substance and manner satisfactory to the Association. (Disbursement Condition) Notwithstanding the provisions of Part A of this Section, no withdrawal shall be made for Section IV. B. CONTINU IDA payments under New 1. (d) OUS Category (1) until the Recipient has furnished to the Association evidence 10 satisfactory to the Association that it has deposited in the FPSU Project Account an initial deposit in the amount of at least fifty million Naira (N50,000,000). (Disbursement Condition) Finance PHHHFin Loan Closing Date - Additional Financing ( Community and Social Development AF - P148215 ) Source of Funds Proposed Additional Financing Loan Closing Date International Development Association (IDA) 31-Dec-2017 Change in Disbursement Estimates (including all sources of Financing)PHHCDE Explanation: The Additional Financing has added US$140 million equivalent as a scale-up and the revised disbursement estimates reflect the additional amount spread over the 3 year life of the project. Expected Disbursements (in USD Million) (including all Sources of Financing) Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Annual 25.00 50.00 40.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cumulative 25.00 75.00 115.00 140.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Allocations - Additional Financing ( Community and Social Development AF - P148215 ) Disbursement %(Type Source of Category of Allocation Currency Total) Fund Expenditure Proposed Proposed GOODS/CS/TRN/OP IDA XDR 3,800,000.00 100.00 COSTS PT A GOODS/WKS/CS/TRN/ 18,000,000.00 100.00 OP COSTS PT B&C&D GRANTS PT C 43,500,000.00 100.00 IDA XDR VG EXPENDITUREs - 26,000,000.00 100.00 PT D Total: 91,300,000.00 11 Current Proposed Current Proposed IDA-44960 XDR GOODS PT A 528,000.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 4,866,000.0 GOODS PT B & C 0.00 0.00 100.00 0 CS/AUD/TRN/WKSP - 1,811,000.0 0.00 0.00 100.00 PT A 0 CS/AUD/TRN/WKSP - 30,825,000. 0.00 0.00 100.00 PT B & C 00 OPERATING COSTS - 1,250,000.0 0.00 0.00 100.00 PT A 0 IDA-44960 OPERATING COSTS - 15,720,000. 0.00 0.00 100.00 PT B & C 00 66,500,000. GRANTS 0.00 0.00 100.00 00 UNALLOCATED 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Designated Account 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Designated Account 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 121,500,00 Total: 0.00 0.00 Components PHHHCompo Change to Components and Cost PHHCCC Explanation: Components 1, 2, and 3 do not change. However, as there was a discrepancy between the wording of the titles of the components between the PAD and the Financing Agreement of the parent project, the wording has been revised to coincide with that of the Financing Agreement. The new emphasis on safety nets has resulted in an additional component for vulnerable groups investment grants (component 4). This component would create the enabling system and investment that would allow the vulnerable groups to access public social and natural resource services. In the parent project, component 3 supports only public goods and services, such as education, health and water infrastructures facilities and services, that have no exclusion practices, that is, all members of the community (public) have user rights. The proposed new component 4 is more targeted and would apply to specific vulnerable groups (including widows, deprived, internally displaced, physically challenged). The goods and services may not always be purely social but could also be socio-economic. A detailed list of eligible micro-projects would be included in the project implementation manual. Such micro-projects would include: specialized skills centers, classrooms, and health centers; specialized tools and equipment; community housing; one time start-up grants into revolving funds, scholarship funds or other welfare funds for vulnerable groups. As in the parent project, the use of a community managed approach and emphasis on local government active partnership with community groups will be retained and strengthened to deliver the micro-projects. In CDD practice, emphasis is given to providing a separate window with more specific rules to target the vulnerable groups. 12 The parent CSDP attempts to respond to this type of demand but there are challenges in targeting and counterpart contribution rules. Therefore, targeting rules, group counterpart contribution, procedures and guidelines for the micro-project cycle in the new component 4 will be clearly defined in the manual prior to the start of implementation. However, the new component will follow the same project development and implementation cycle as component 3 from the parent CSDP. The proposed costing has been revised to include the parent project cost and Additional Financing. Current Component Proposed Component Current Cost Proposed Action Name Name (US$M) Cost (US$M) Federal Level Overall Project Support Coordination and and Coordination 10.00 15.75 Revised Monitoring Capacity Building and LGA Partnership and Partnerships 20.00 47.50 Revised Capacity Building Development in State Ministries and LGAs Community-driven Community-Driven 170.00 236.75 Revised Investments Investments Facility Vulnerable Groups 0.00 40.00 New Investments Facility Total: 200.00 340.00 Appraisal Summary PHHHAppS Economic and Financial Analysis PHHASEFA Explanation: Economic Analysis: The analysis of costs and financial flows in CSDP contained in the recent impact evaluation study (2013) clearly justifies the CSDP in terms of the economics and justifies the proposed additional financing. The CSDP uses detailed technical criteria, standard designs and simple economic criteria to determine micro-project economic viability before financing. This includes application of a comprehensive list of unit costs by type of micro project. The impact evaluation study established the fact the CSDP, relative to other interventions, is more cost effective ranging from a comparative cost ratio of 1:1.97 for lock-up stalls to 1:4.58 for open stalls. A unit classroom and health center in CSDP is on the average 1:2.25 and 1:2.72 times respectively lower than the cost of building the same structures by other agencies. Also in comparison to other agencies, CSDP have a more positive impact on the private and public sector by setting points of reference such as prices and procedures, for the social and natural resource infrastructure industry. This explains the justification for increased budgetary provisions to the State Agency for CSDP by some State Governments. The CSDP approach fosters greater allocative efficiency in public expenditure in relation to the needs of the poor. Through the promotion of participatory decision-making at the local level (the participatory community planning process), the CSDP empower communities to allocate scarce resources across sectors, thereby ensuring that such resources are applied most efficiently in response to local priorities. Broad- based participation creates local ownership, which combined with other complementary activities that CSDP provides (such as capacity building, etc.), makes the sub-projects sustainable and extends the life of 13 the investment’s benefits. This same approach is envisaged for the additional financing. Financial Analysis: In line with the Country Financing Parameters, IDA will finance 100 percent of most project investment costs, including incremental operational costs. However, in view of the significant impact and results of the parent project (CSDP), State governments did provide budgetary contributions, in an incremental fashion, to the investment as well as operational costs, of the CSDP. The last implementation support mission report provided evidence that more that 60% of the participating States are providing regular budget allocations to the State Agencies, while the others are making firm commitment to provide allocations. Upon completion of social and natural resource micro-projects contained in the CDPs, additional overhead and maintenance costs associated with these infrastructures are financed by the communities, LGAs and State governments as appropriate. It was estimated that the total contribution by State and Local Government represents less than a 5% increase in State and Local government expenditure and therefore does not constitute any fiscal instability for the governments. Technical Analysis PHHASTA Explanation: The proposed additional financing of CSDP has been designed based on the lessons learnt from the parent CSDP which merged the approaches of both CPRP and LEEMP. This includes the satisfactory performance of the project, significant benefits to people across all participating states, and establishment of the structure for institutionalizing and integrating a CDD approach into the government development agenda. The following key design elements of the additional financing have been guided by the following lessons learnt from the parent CSDP: • Implement the additional financing for CSDP only in States that have demonstrated interest, ownership and funding of the State agency which has been set up to facilitate the adoption of a CDD approach in formulating development strategies. This way, funding, ownership and sustainability can be best assured. • Implement the additional financing for CSDP through the autonomous State agency which has been set up to prevent substantial government interference in the project implementation. In new participating States such as Borno State in North East, a specialized unit of an existing MDA with delegated authority and acceptable to IDA, would be eligible to implement the CSDP. • Provide input into the development of the CDD approach into government strategy for inclusive growth and shared prosperity. • Maintain institutionalization of the CDD approach at the local level, set out by a bye-law, which delineates specific roles and responsibilities between the LGA and its communities, and by adopting and funding of CDPs. • Strengthen the LGAs through capacity building and skills training to enhance their active engagement with communities and improving local governance. • Expand the coverage of CSDP to more communities and local government, particularly to increase the number of poor households and individuals with access to basic social services. • Create a window for social and empowerment support to the individuals and households as well as the needs of the chronically poor and vulnerable. Social Analysis PHHASSA Explanation: The project will build on the success and lessons emerging from the CSDP to further expand the access for poor populations to both social and natural resource infrastructure services; but also put in place basic service delivery opportunity for the more vulnerable households. The groups currently affected by the 14 conflict in the North East of the Country and the emergency rule will find support from the additional financing and particularly from the new component. These groups include the internally displaced poor households, the widows and the physically challenged. The new component will provide opportunity for access to basic social services for such groups. The identification of micro-projects will be based on participatory and inclusive approaches that have proved effective under CSDP where in micro-projects implemented have been cost-effective, functional and providing services to communities. Community contribution of a minimum of 10% of micro-project costs, either in cash or kind, will guide community grants allocation. Community contribution under the vulnerable grant facility will be reduced to less than 10%. The planning and implementation process will reflect primacy to people’s service priorities; close partnership between communities, LGAs and civil society in finalizing and implementation of micro- projects; and coordination with sector agencies for implementation and meeting recurrent costs and O&M expenses. Under the new vulnerable group facility component, the identification of beneficiaries for social and livelihoods support will be based on community identification, profiling and the willingness of the group of beneficiaries to work together. In the future the identification methodology will adopt mechanisms that have been designed under the Youth Employment and Social Support Operation (YESSO) so as to maintain consistency and coherence in approaches under Bank funded projects. CSDP has been successful in establishing essential elements of social accountability to enable a greater interaction and collaboration between the participating entities including communities, LGAs, CBOs, sector agencies and the project implementation entities. Dissemination of essential project information related to investments, processes, roles and responsibilities of different entities (as detailed in the Project Implementation Manual) is an important starting point. The establishment of Local Government Review Committees (LGRC) at the LG level will continue to serve as an institutional mechanism to establish and nurture a partnership relationship between the LGA and the communities. All communities in LGAs with a functional LGRC will be able to submit Community Development Plans and expect funding for community prioritized social and natural resources infrastructure. OP 4.12 on Involuntary Resettlement is triggered. To date, no RAPs have been prepared. Most micro- projects have not involved land take; in some cases, communities have voluntarily donated community land for the micro-projects. Since the range, scale, locations and number of micro-projects will emerge from a participatory process, the social impacts of the micro projects, as well as possible negative impacts in terms of land acquisition, loss of economic activities and/or possible displacement are not known. Therefore, the Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF), updated by the borrower in line with national and World Bank policies, and disclosed in-country on February 19, 2014 and at the Bank’s Infoshop on February 20, 2014; will guide implementation under the project. RAPs will be prepared, consulted upon and disclosed as and when necessary. The environmental safeguards audit of CSDP implementation confirms the adequacy of the instruments and approach. However, the audit has noted the need for the safeguards implementation capacity for the project states and LGAs to be reinforced and strengthened. Environmental Analysis PHHASEnvA Explanation: As in the parent project, the additional financing is a Category B project, resulting from the site specific environmental and social impacts associated with small infrastructure projects associated with the CDD micro-projects. The micro-projects have been implementing environmental and social measures, based on the ESMF. For the AF, the environmental and social impacts of micro-projects are expected to be minimal, site specific and manageable to an accepted level. However, in those cases where environmental impacts are more substantial, ESIAs and/or ESMPs will be prepared, consulted upon and disclosed. 15 An environmental safeguards audit was prepared for the parent project to ascertain how well the ESMF and RPF instruments have been complied with and to identify recent challenges in safeguards implementation with the aim of proffering solutions to such challenges and providing guidance for improvement where necessary. This audit carried out in the 26 CSDP states rated the project’s performance with respect to environmental safeguards compliance as credible and satisfactory. In the audit, reference was made to the use of a limited safeguard instrument used to assess the development of a CDD project (Bemi Bridge) in Cross River State that attracted criticism of some stakeholders in the area, in particular, with regard to the construction of the bridge, which could potentially cause induced impacts (including illegal logging and poaching) in two parks. An ESIA has been prepared for the CDD project, and the ESMP, drawing on consultations with local communities, includes mitigation measures to address these risks (e.g. monitoring and enforcing forest management rules, constructing additional ranger posts, involving the community in the management of the parks, and an outreach/communication strategy to sensitize local communities about the parks). The ESIA/ESMP has been consulted upon and disclosed in- country on February 19, 2014 and at the InfoShop on February 20, 2014. The environmental audit has also been publicly disclosed in-country on February 25, 2014 and at the Bank’s Infoshop on February 26, 2014. The audit also recommended the following. (i) Two additional safeguard policies namely, OP 4.36 – Forests and OP 4.04 – Natural Habitat should be included to the already triggered safeguard instruments - OP 4.01 – Environmental Assessment and OP 4.12 – Involuntary Resettlement; (ii) Adequate provision should be made for the implementation of safeguards instruments in the various states through such capacity building measures as training; and (iii) Adequate site visits to administer the adequate safeguards instrument for each CDD project. All recommendations have been dully taken into account and will be followed. Risk PHHASRisk Explanation: The overall risk is substantial, mainly as the 2014 and 2015 general election approaches and political leadership transition is eminent in the participating States. A considerable amount of sensitization and awareness building for the incoming political leaders will be necessary to sustain commitment. There are increasing security challenges and conflict situations in the North Eastern part of the country. There are also religious and tribal conflicts and kidnapping of people for monetary gain in other areas. This poses implementation risk and especially for supervision by the World Bank team. In terms of mitigation, use of third party monitors, local NGOs and other civil society groups for supervision, monitoring and evaluation will be explored and if the situation escalates the World Bank and the Borrower will reassess the operation. In addition, the weakness of the Federal Project Support Unit (FPSU), which provides Coordination Monitoring and Funds management functions for the CSDP, may constitute a major challenge. The FPSU is currently being restructured and strengthened by the Federal Government, with a reformed FPSU included as a condition for effectiveness of the Additional Financing. 16 ANNEX 1: RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING NIGERIA: Community and Social DevelopmentProject (Additional Financing) Revisions to the Results Framework PDO Parent Project Proposed Comments/Rationale for Change To increase access by No change to Project Development There is no substantive change to thepoor to improved social Objective the PDO. However, as there was a and natural resource discrepancy in wording, though not infrastructure services in a in meaning, between the PAD and sustainable manner Financing Agreement of the parent throughout Nigeria. project, the wording in the Additional Financing project paper was aligned to be the same as that of the Financing Agreement. PDO indicators Parent Project Proposed change Comments/Rationale for Change No. of poor communities Poor communities with access to social Targets removed from the wording with access to social services of the indicator. Also, new targets services increases by 20% were defined for women, per year for 50% of the vulnerable group and at the benefiting Communities individuals/people level. between 2009- 2013 No. of poor communities Poor communities with access to Targets removed from the wording with access to natural natural resource management services of the indicator. Also, new targets resource management were defined for women, services increased by 10% vulnerable group and at the per year for 20% of the individuals/people level. benefiting communities between 2009 -2013 Annual Local Government Annual Local Government budget in Targets removed from the wording budget in participating participating States incorporating of the indicator. States incorporating Community development plans Community development increases yearly plans increases yearly between 2009-2013 Direct project Beneficiaries: Direct project beneficiaries, of which Wording aligned with core No. of poor people with female: (measured by the number of indicator. access to improved services poor people with access to improved increases by 20% and 50% social services) per year respectively for half of the benefiting poor communities, and 70% of them are women 17 Intermediate Results indicators Parent Project Proposed change Comments/Rationale for Change Completed No change microprojectsthat are operational and maintained one year after completion. Health Centers built or No change rehabilitated Classrooms built and/or No change rehabilitated Students enrolled in No change primary education schools supported by project LGAs that received training No change have integrated CDD approach in the formation of their Local development plans Percentage of project fund Project funds that are channeled to Wording changed to reconcile with that are managed and community-driven investments description of what is tracked controlled by community development groups Community Development No change Plans that are approved and funded NA Gender and Vulnerable Groups (GVG) New indicator will track the (women/gender and other vulnerable intermediate results of the groups) register available in increased investments in the communities implementing CSDP. female gender and vulnerable people. NA GVG beneficiaries (women/gender and New indicator will track the other vulnerable groups) enrolled in intermediate results of the schools, vocational centers and increased investments in the apprenticeship schemes. female gender and vulnerable people. 18 Project Project Community and Social Development AF (P148215) Additional Financing Status: DRAFT Name: Stage: Team Requesting FolusoOkunmadewa AFCW2 Created by: Antonia T. Koleva on 25-Nov-2013 Leader: Unit: Product Responsible IBRD/IDA AFTSW Modified by: Antonia T. Koleva on 25-Feb-2014 Line: Unit: Country: Nigeria Approval FY: 2014 Lending Region: AFRICA Investment Project Financing Instrument: Parent Project Parent Project P090644 Community and Social Development Project (P090644) ID: Name: . Project Development Objectives Original Project Development Objective - Parent: Development objectives. The project development objective is to sustainably increase access of poor people to social and natural resource infrastructure services. The key performance indicators are: - Increased number of poor people (of which 70% are women) with access to social services. - Increased number of poor people with access to natural resources infrastructure services. - Increased percentage of participating Local Governments that are incorporating Community development plans in their budget. Proposed Project Development Objective - Additional Financing (AF): The project development objective is to increase access by the poor to improved social and natural resource infrastructure services in a sustainable manner throughout Nigeria. Results Core sector indicators are considered: Yes Results reporting level: Project Level . Project Development Objective Indicators Status Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline Actual(Current) End Target Revised Poor communities with access Text Value 1000 2,433 new 3750 to social services Communities communities Communities (about 500,000 (about 1,200,000 (about households) households) 1,500,000 19 households of which 40% are women, 10% of whom are other vulnerable groups) Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 Comment based on project M&E records Revised Poor communities with access Text Value 50 650 new 800 to natural resource Communities communities ( communities management services (about 25,000 about 325,000 (about 400,000 households) households) households of which 30% are women, 10% of whom are other vulnerable groups) Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 Comment based on Project M&E records Revised Annual Local Government Text Value 1% 30% 43% budget in participating States Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 incorporating Community development plans increases Comment Number of LGAs yearly incorporating community plans into the local government plans and budget expenditures increased from 186 to 443 and over N470m disbursed. Revised Direct project Beneficiaries Number Value 0.00 1750000.00 3200000.00 20 (measured by the number of Date 01-Jul-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 poor people with access to Comment estimated based of which 40% social services) on number of women benefiting estimated based communities and on number of households. benefiting communities and households. Intermediate Results Indicators Status Indicator Name Core Unit of Measure Baseline Actual(Current) End Target Revised Completed microprojects, that Text Value 300 4946 (4646 new 7500 are operational and maintained microprojects ones) one year after completion. Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 Comment This is from the M&E records of the FPSU. Revised Health Centers built or Text Value 50 1065 (1015 new 1300 rehabilitated ones) Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 Comment from M&E record of FPSU Revised Classrooms built or Text Value 100 1300 (1200 new 2000 rehabilitated ones) Date 31-Mar-2009 31-Dec-2012 31-Dec-2017 Comment from M&E record of FPSU Revised Students enrolled in primary Text Value 0 29,046 new 47000 education schools supported by enrolments (Boys project 16, 298, Girls 12,748) Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 Comment This is annual 25 per 21 measure classroom Revised LGAs that received training Text Value 0 50% 65% have integrated CDD approach Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 in the formation of their Local development plans Comment 50% of participating LGAs. This is annual measure. Revised Project funds that are Text Value 0% 65% 75% channeled to community- Date 31-Mar-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 driven investments Comment About 65% of total disbursement to date has gone to community investment component. Exact proportion will be known at end of year. Revised Community Development Number Value 0.00 2433.00 3750.00 Plans that are approved and Date 30-Jun-2009 28-Jun-2013 31-Dec-2017 funded Comment At the Reported number At end of beginning of of funded CDPs project project in FPSU record New Gender and Vulnerable Groups Number Value 0.00 0.00 300.00 (GVG) (women/gender and Date 31-Dec-2017 other vulnerable groups) register available in Comment communities implementing CSDP. New Gender and Vulnerable Groups Number Value 175.00 5000.00 (GVG) (women/gender and Date 31-Dec-2017 other vulnerable groups) enrolled in schools, vocational Comment 22 centers and apprenticeship schemes. . 23 Annex 2 Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF) Nigeria: Community and Social Development AF (P148215) . . Project Stakeholder Risks Stakeholder Risk Rating Moderate Risk Description: Risk Management: Work closely with Ministry of Finance and National Planning Commission to ensure There is a strong commitment by Government, Civil that the issue of overall coordination for community level support programs and Society, Community groups and Donor Partners to operation is sorted out and the operation is integrated into the national development improve welfare of poor communities and increased agenda. service delivery and utilization at the community level Most State Governments, LGAs, World Bank, European Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Union, DFID, UNICEF, USAID, WHO are all active in Both In Progress Both this regard. However, the major risk is lack of coordination and instability of local government level Risk Management: administration. Participate in policy and strategy discussions to carefully isolate the complementary role of all stakeholders (including donors) in social protection interventions. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Risk Management: CSDP is state-focused and would build on existing partnerships with all stakeholders including Civil Society and private sectors to ensure combined efforts. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Implementing Agency (IA) Risks (including Fiduciary Risks) Capacity Rating Moderate Risk Description: Risk Management: 24 A capacity building program would continue to be part of the project especially for The capacity for implementation is weak at Federal, State designated Project Implementation staff along with an incentive package at the Federal, and Local Government levels. State and the LGA levels. IEC, Study Visits, training and skills building programs as well as Peer Learning activities would be built into project design and work plan, to improve the capability of community groups to handle accounting, supervision, monitoring and reporting responsibilities, among others. At the start of the implementation a South-South Learning Program, including study visits to Indonesia, Colombia and Pakistan where CDD approaches to promote livelihood of beneficiaries are done, will be undertaken. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Risk Management: Professional Staff, private sector and Civil Society will also play essential roles in the implementation as was done in the parent project. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Governance Rating Substantial Risk Description: Risk Management: CSDP has a strong government buy-in. The implementation units and process would be The political and economic governance in Nigeria before, protected as much as possible from political interference through the use of existing during and after the elections of late 2014/ early 2015 maysystems and legislation in the operational process. Given the proposed contribution and pose significant challenges. There are also security disbursement approach, state funding of agencies will be more forthcoming. Only State challenges –especially on terrorism, religious and tribal Agencies with budget line and regular government subventions will be able to issues and also kidnapping for monetary gains. This poses implement operation. The period of extension without additional financing will be used implementation risk and especially for supervision by the to judge readiness of State participation. State Agencies are expected to be funded solely World Bank team. by government during the period. Objective criteria would be developed for targeting and the selection of beneficiaries, especially for the new component, and included in the The Federal and State Governments are strongly Project Implementation Manual. The CSDP AF design will benefit from the lessons and committed to making progress on the MDGs. There is also experience of the Nairobi Hub on Conflict and Fragile State work and will be flexible to a widespread renewed commitment to service delivery to respond appropriately to external and global changes. Due diligence and anti-corruption the poor – as recently announced in the transformational strategies which will include disclosure mechanism, third party monitoring, independent agenda of the administration Government. However complaints investigating units, hot lines and use of community monitoring and budget releases, in some States, to the project unit could grievance panel. This approach was successfully used in the parent operations in the be a challenge as in the parent project. Country. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: 25 Also political interference which sometimes affects the Client In Progress Both management decisions especially on procurement and financial management is still a concern especially at the Risk Management: Federal level. Using existing government public institutions for implementation of the additional financing will ensure that the security challenges will not directly isolate and disrupt the activities supported by the IDA resources. Also where and when the security challenges escalate and the Bank team is unable to supervise the operations, local teams and consultants will be hired for supervision. Security risk assessments will be part of the quarterly project performance reviews. Should the situation deteriorate, the Government will agree with IDA on necessary project adjustments Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Risk Management: In addition to the existing Governance Framework and Financial Regulations and Procedures currently utilized in the country, a Governance and Accountability Action Plan (GAAP) is already in use in the parent project and will be updated. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Client In Progress Both Risk Management: The project will also involve communities and CSOs in project implementation and monitoring to improve oversight and accountability. The Bank team (including FM and procurement specialists) will undertake supervision of the project at least 3 times a year in the first two years and will focus on key risks. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both Not Yet Due Implementation Risk Management: The project will use IDA procedures (FM and procurement) which are less susceptible to fraud and corruption relative to government systems. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Implementation Risk Management: 26 The mitigation measures, i.e. provision for open display of contracts, funds disbursed etc. at Agency and community level, and hot lines in each agency for reporting fraud and corruption, is working. Also an independent Investigating officer from relevant agencies of Federal and State government has been identified to help investigate reports. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Client In Progress Both Project Risks Design Rating Substantial Risk Description: Risk Management: The weakness of the Federal Unit, FPSU, for the The FPSU is currently been restructured and strengthened by the Federal Government. Coordination, Monitoring and Funding of the CSDP may A reformed FPSU agreeable to the World Bank is a condition for constitute a major challenge. The complexity of a four effectiveness/disbursement under the additional finance. Capacity building activities of component operation also requires a strong M&E system. the project will be around the agreed roles and responsibilities at the Federal and State There are increasing security challenges and conflict levels. A Manual will be prepared for the new Component 4. The preparation of such a situations in the North Eastern part of the country. There Manuel will be a disbursement condition for the AF. The manual will be integrated into are also religious and tribal conflicts and kidnapping of the existing manual of the CSDP to make for easy implementation. Use of third party people for monetary gains in other parts. monitors, local NGOs and other civil society groups for supervision, monitoring and evaluation will be explored and if the situation escalates the World Bank and the Borrower (client) will reassess the operation. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Client In Progress Both Social and Environmental Rating Substantial Risk Description: Risk Management: An Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), and Resettlement The project has a B environmental safeguard category due Policy Framework (RPF), PMP were prepared, consulted upon and disclosed by the to possible limited environmental and social impacts. client in Nigeria and World Bank InfoShop prior for the parent project. The ESMF and RPF have been updated. Most of the works are small and localized; for larger works, ESMPs and RAPs will be prepared, consulted upon and disclosed, as and when necessary during project implementation. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Risk Management: 27 Potential community tensions will be mitigated by the intensive focus on community participation and ownership, as well as third party monitoring of processes, activities and results by specific CSO’s and CBO’s. Further, mechanisms to facilitate ongoing feedback from citizens will serve to ensure that any potential issues are flagged as early as possible. An effective grievance redress system will also serve to mitigate against the escalation of any project related issues. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Client In Progress Both Program and Donor Rating Moderate Risk Description: Risk Management: There is interest by multiple of partners in Service The Country Assistance Framework recently agreed upon by all donors in the Country Delivery (Health and Education) and Social Safety Nets. has established thematic groups for joint operations and sharing of information. The Working independently with the same Federal and State World Bank Task team is represented in each of the Thematic groups. The CAF will Agencies will lead to competition and poses a risk ensure collaboration, coordination and complementarity on development assistance to government, among partners. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability Rating Substantial Risk Description: Risk Management: Weak M&E system and inadequate financial management A strong M&E system is already in place at the Federal and State levels and the arrangements and inexperienced staff could lead to interface between the Federal and State is IT enabled. The project will use an existing unsatisfactory financial management of project activities and well-functioning Project Financial Management System at the Federal level. in Federal unit and State Agencies implementing the Regular external audit and implementation support by IDA supervision will also help to project and lead to poor quality of delivery. Insufficient strengthen FM oversight. The project will continue to appoint professionally qualified knowledge and experience of World Bank procurement and experienced procurement officer for each State. Intensive country office-based practices in new Federal Agencies and some States might supervision, by the task team will include procurement and FM specialists to provide delay implementation. Additionally poor record keeping support to the Agencies. A national impact evaluation is already planned and will be and political interference in procurement processes will executed during the additional financing. add to project risks. Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency: Both In Progress Both Overall Implementation Risk: Rating Substantial 28