INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: ISDSA7486 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 27-Jan-2014 Date ISDS Approved/Disclosed: 25-Feb-2013, 21-Jun-2013, 27-Jun-2013, 08-Jul-2013, 30-Jan-2014 I. BASIC INFORMATION 1. Basic Project Data Country: Philippines Project ID: P118904 Project Name: Learning, Equity and Accountability Program Support Project (P118904) Task Team Lynnette Dela Cruz Perez Leader: Estimated Estimated 06-Mar-2014 Appraisal Date: Board Date: Managing Unit: EASHE Lending Investment Project Financing Instrument: Sector(s): Primary education (70%), Secondary education (30%) Theme(s): Education for all (100%) Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP No 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)? Public Disclosure Copy Financing (In USD Million) Total Project Cost: 300.00 Total Bank Financing: 300.00 Financing Gap: 0.00 Financing Source Amount Borrower 0.00 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 300.00 Total 300.00 Environmental B - Partial Assessment Category: Is this a No Repeater project? 2. Project Development Objective(s) The project development objective is to improve the quality of grade 1 to 3 reading and math skills of children in Target Regions and Target Schools, with a special focus on those belonging to Target Disadvantaged Groups. Page 1 of 7 3. Project Description The proposed project will continue to support the implementation of the government's Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA). This proposed US$300 million operation will build on Public Disclosure Copy the gains and experiences of the Bank's ongoing project, the National Program Support for Basic Education (NPSBE) project, which spearheaded support to the implementation of the government's BESRA. The proposed project considered DepED's limited capacity and focuses on a number of critical reforms in areas that are lagging behind. This was also meant to maximize the project's contribution to the achievement of MDG and EFA goals. In line with both government and Bank emphasis on "convergence" to improve project impact, the project will also work in areas covered by the Philippine Government's CCT project (the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program or 4Ps). The proposed interventions are intended to selectively address remaining gaps in terms of learning and access, strengthening and expanding some of the critical reforms started in NPSBE1 but which were not completed or fully implemented. The idea is to keep the project simple yet strategically critical by linking it to the Government's comprehensive but complex basic education reform agenda. The Learning, Equity and Accountability Program Support Project (LEAPS) seeks to improve the quality of teaching and learning of reading and math skills in the early grades and improve coverage for disadvantaged populations in basic education in the selected target areas and schools. This will be achieved through strengthening teacher capacity in assessment and teaching of reading and math for Grades 1 and 2; strengthening of enabling mechanisms to foster accountability and incentives for good performance; and improved targeting and evidence-based implementation of programs supporting disadvantaged groups. The Project would implement the following components: (i) Component 1: Improvement of Teaching and Learning in Grades 1 to 3 Reading and Math; (ii) Component 2: Strengthening of Accountability and Incentives of Department of Education Employees; and (iii) Component 3: Improvement of Program Design for Targeting Disadvantaged Groups. Specifically, Component 3 will support the improvement of access and quality outcomes for the following disadvantaged Public Disclosure Copy groups: poor students residing in areas far from a school or learning center, out of school youth, indigenous peoples and persons with disabilities. 4. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) For the purposes of the Project, the “target areas” are Regions 5, 8, 9, CAR and CARAGA. This selection of areas considers the request of government for Bank assistance to focus on the poorest regions in the country, as indicated in the recently-released 2012 poverty statistics. These regions also face significant challenges related to other components of the project: reading and math scores, dropouts, malnutrition (as a function of poverty), incidence of disability and concentration of indigenous peoples. The choice of beneficiary communities/schools within each selected division will be done through a methodology that would allow credible impact analysis. Final selection of the target schools/ divisions will be done during project implementation. It is highly possible that a lot of the target areas will have presence of indigenous students since indigenous communities are among the disadvantaged areas in the country where educational outcomes are low. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Maria Loreto Padua (EASPS) Page 2 of 7 Gerardo F. Parco (EASPS) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Public Disclosure Copy Environmental Assessment OP/ Yes OP 4.01 is triggered due to the need to assess and BP 4.01 take into account, in an integrated manner, the social aspects of the project, particularly its impact on IPs. However, while OP 4.01 is triggered, no separate instrument is required. During the project concept stage, the government proposed the inclusion of classroom construction into project activities to be financed by the loan, at which time OP 4.01 was triggered. To address routine environmental issues, the DepEd prepared an Environmental Code of Practice for classroom construction. As project preparation progressed, however, the government decided not to finance any school construction or rehabilitation as part of the LEAPS project. The final project design also excludes the financing of any other civil works, acquisition of potentially hazardous school laboratory equipment or materials/chemicals to be used in laboratories. Therefore, no negative or long-term environmental impacts are expected for any activity under the project. The PDO of improving the early grade reading and math skills of students in the target areas can be achieved independent of classroom construction through the conduct of professional development activities Public Disclosure Copy for teachers to enhance their assessment and teaching skills, training of principals and head teachers to strengthen field-level support system. The project’s special focus on disadvantaged groups involves the implementation of alternative delivery modes and alternative learning system which are usually done outside the classrooms. In view of these, the team did not trigger OP 4.01 even though it was triggered at the Program Concept Note stage. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No There is no impact on Natural Habitats. Forests OP/BP 4.36 No There is no impact on Forests Pest Management OP 4.09 No The project will not involve the use of Pesticides. Physical Cultural Resources OP/ No N/A BP 4.11 Page 3 of 7 Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 Yes The proposed project is anticipated to have positive impact on indigenous students in terms of increasing their access to basic education. Public Disclosure Copy Specifically, Component 3 of the LEAPS focuses on disadvantaged groups, including IP students. In view of this and given the presence of IPs in some project sites/areas, the IP policy is triggered. In close coordination with the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP), the DepED updated its existing IPPF based on the the lessons learned under the NPSBE and provides more specific strategies for implenting IP- sensitive strategies which will be pursued under Component 3 of the LEAPS. It aims to expand learning opportunities for IP learners through the design and implementation of culturally appropriate learning modalities; put in place mechanisms for the effective and sustained implementation of IP education; and support IP learning systems and other learning modalities. The draft IPPF includes the consolidation and analysis of IP data primarily through from the Basic Education Information System (BEIS) which serves as a screening procedures as well as monitoring tool. Once the specific target schools are identified during implementation phase, DepED will prepare specific IP plans for the schools that cover IP students as part of the Public Disclosure Copy School Improvement Plans, which will involve broad participation of the specific IP groups in each target school. The draft enhanced IPPF has been presented to the NCIP Board with no major comment. The DepEd, through its Indigenous Peoples Education Office (IPsEO), will regularly consult with NCIP as part of its regular inter- agency committee on IP Education at national and sub-national levels. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP No No involuntary resettlement is expected. 4.12 Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No N/A Projects on International No N/A Waterways OP/BP 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No N/A 7.60 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management Page 4 of 7 A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify Public Disclosure Copy and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project does not include any construction. There are no impacts on the physical or biological environment. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: LEAPS is anticipated to improve access of IPs to basic education. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. n/a 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. The DepEd has adopted a National IP Education Policy Framework and 5-year Strategic Plan (Department Order No. 62 s. 2011) which, to a large extent, was propelled by the IPPF under the NPSBE1. DO 62 defines the Department’s policy guidelines and strategic directions for ensuring improved access of IPs to culturally-responsive basic education . In line with the policy framework, Component 3 of LEAPS explicitly seeks to improve access of IP to basic education. The DepEd has likewise prepared an updated IPPF, with broad consultation from the NCIP, which articulates the strategic priorities for implementing the IP-responsive basic education. The Indigenous Peoples Education Office (IPsEO) was also formally created by virtue of Department Order 103 s. 2011 as a dedicated unit that will be responsible for ensuring the Department’s strategic objectives and plan for IP education will be implemented and monitored not just as a compliance to safeguards but as a national commitment to achieve improved basic education outcomes. The IPsEO is provided with budget (i.e., approximately Php100M or US$2M for 2012) as part of the Departments’ regular appropriations to ensure efficient coordination and monitoring Public Disclosure Copy of IP education across the various units of DepEd and in partnership with NCIP, the National Basic Sector Council for IP and other external stakeholders. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. The development of the enhanced IPPF was based on the National IP Education Framework and Strategic Plan which involved very extensive consultations at the local and national level. The Framework was formally adopted by virtue of DepED Order No. 62, s. 2011 and formally launched with participation from broad multi-stakeholder s in Ocbore 2011 as part of the IP month. Moving forward, the implementation of the enhanced IPPF, which is drawn from the IP Education Framework and Strategic Plan, will involve participation of the IP groups through their involvement in the formulation of the School Improvement Plan for areas/schools with IP students as well as through the regular participation of NCIP in DepEd inter-agency committee for IP Education at the national and sub-national levels. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other Date of receipt by the Bank 20-Dec-2012 Date of submission to InfoShop 19-Dec-2012 Page 5 of 7 For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors "In country" Disclosure Public Disclosure Copy Philippines 20-Dec-2012 Comments: OP 4.01 is triggered due to the need to assess and take into account, in an integrated manner, the social aspects of the project, particularly its impact on IPs. However, while OP 4.01 is triggered, no separate instrument is required. Social document was already disclosed on December 20, 2012. Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework Date of receipt by the Bank 20-Dec-2012 Date of submission to InfoShop 19-Dec-2012 "In country" Disclosure Philippines 20-Dec-2012 Comments: If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/ Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] report? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Public Disclosure Copy Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] Sector Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Page 6 of 7 Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] in the project cost? Public Disclosure Copy Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed Yes [ ] No [ ] NA [ ] with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? III. APPROVALS Task Team Leader: Name: Lynnette Dela Cruz Perez Approved By Regional Safeguards Name: Peter Leonard (RSA) Date: 29-Jan-2014 Advisor: Sector Manager: Name: Luis Benveniste (SM) Date: 30-Jan-2014 Public Disclosure Copy Page 7 of 7