Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE I. Basic Information Date prepared/updated: 12/06/2010 Report No.: AC5798 1. Basic Project Data Country: Nicaragua Project ID: P121779 Project Name: Nicaragua Social Protection Task Team Leader: Theresa Jones Estimated Appraisal Date: December 6, 2010 Estimated Board Date: February 17, 2011 Managing Unit: LCSHS-DPT Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Other social services (100%) Theme: Social safety nets (100%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): 0.00 IDA Amount (US$m.): 19.50 GEF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 PCF Amount (US$m.): 0.00 Other financing amounts by source: BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 0.00 Environmental Category: C - Not Required Simplified Processing Simple [] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery) or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies) Yes [ ] No [X] 2. Project Objectives The proposed Project will support the implementation of the family and community- based social welfare model. The Project Development Objectives are to: (i) improve the basic conditions of welfare and social wellbeing of extremely poor beneficiary families with children in selected poor localities; (ii) strengthen the capacity of the Ministry of the Family to implement the family and community-based social welfare model; and (iii) support the improvement of the integrated school nutrition program through implementation of a change in food content. 3. Project Description The proposed Project will finance activities in three components. The first component is: Improving the basic conditions of welfare and social wellbeing of extremely poor families (US$11.1 million). The aim is to improve extremely poor families# basic conditions of welfare and social wellbeing through supporting the gradual implementation of the Family and Community-based Social Welfare Model. The Model combines community-based educational workshops, family counseling, and family grants (transfers). This component will support three subcomponents: (i) Community-based Educational Workshops: The aim of this Subcomponent is to support the MIFAN in Page 2 strengthening the organization and structure of the community-based workshops and improve their content and develop additional modules; (ii) Family Counseling: The objective of this Subcomponent is to provide personalized counseling for families who have one or more children not going to school and/or working. MIFAN#s professional social workers will meet with the families at least once a month for two years and will work closely with these families on the development and implementation of a tailored Family Improvement Plan; and (iii) Family Grants (transfers): This Subcomponent will provide family grants in the selected localities to all the families with children under the age of 13 years conditional on parents regular attendance to the community-based educational workshops. Component 2. Strengthening of MIFAN#s Capacity (US$3.9 million). This component aims to strengthen the efficiency, effectiveness, and management of the family and community-based social welfare model by building the capacity in the Ministry of the Family. In addition to supporting implementation of the Model in the selected localities to be covered under Component 1, these activities would support MIFAN#s overall vision to align all of its programs with the new model. There will be three Subcomponents: (i) Strengthening the operational and administrative capacity of the MIFAN: This Subcomponent will strengthen the operational and administrative capacity of the MIFAN to implement the family and community-based social welfare model; (ii) Development and Implementation of a Registry of the Beneficiaries of Social Assistance Programs: This Subcomponent will support the design and implementation of improvements in the information available on beneficiaries of social assistance programs of the Ministry of the Family; (iii) Project Management and Evaluation: This Subcomponent will strengthen the MIFAN at the central, regional and local levels for the technical management, coordination, supervision and evaluation of the proposed Project. Component 3. Support to the Integrated School Feeding Program (US$4.5 million) This Component will improve the Integrated School Nutrition Program through the implementation of a new school lunch in targeted municipalities. The Component would finance the Program in the 26 municipalities prioritized under the Component 1 of this Project during the second semester of the 2011 school year and the first semester of 2012 for nearly 110 days, promoting improvement in public primary school attendance and student retention. Approximately 243,000 primary school children would benefit from this Program in the 26 municipalities. The estimated cost of the school feeding is about US$0.17 per child, per day including transportation, which is comparable to the unit costs of school feeding programs in other Central American countries. The Component will finance the school lunch, nutrition-educational materials and the administrative costs of the Program, including the transportation and distribution of the lunch to the schools. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis The proposed Project will benefit extremely poor families in selected localities in 26 municipalities in six targeted Departments (Chinandega, Leon, Matagalpa, Esteli, Madriz, and Jinotega). The proposed Project would also support capacity building of the Ministry Page 3 of the Family so that they could met their objective to implement the family and community-based social welfare model (without transfers) eventually nationwide. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists Ms Kristine M. Ivarsdotter (LCSSO) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01) X Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11) X Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) X Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) X Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60) X II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: The project triggers the safeguard policy, OP 4.10 (Indigenous Peoples). The indigenous population is estimated to be approximately half a million people. According to the census in 2005, the indigenous people numbered about 400,000 in about 900 communities in the Carribean Coast. Although indigenous people live in all zones and most departments in Nicaragua, a large part is also integrated with the national population. Given the objectives of the project to: (i) improve the basic conditions of welfare and social wellbeing of extremely poor beneficiary families with children in selected poor localities; (ii) strengthen the capacity of the Ministry of the Family to implement the family and community-based social welfare model; and (iii) support the improvement of the integrated school feeding program through implementation of a change in food content, it is expected that the project would have a positive impact on consumption levels, schooling of children, and utilization of social services, including for the indigenous population who are often the poorest. Recommendations from the IPP have been included in the Project design and will be included in the financing plan of the Project. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: Indigenous peoples and ethnic communities will benefit from project activities, mainly the improvement in the capacity of the Ministry of the Family to work with extremely poor families and the progress made to date to articulate social services at the local level to ensure that they reach these families. The indigenous and ethnic communities (afro- descendants), live on a socio-economic level which is lower than the rest of the Page 4 population in Nicaragua. For example, the income per capita is significantly lower, and close to 100% of some indigenous communities do not have public services such as health, drinking wáter and electricity. The positive impacts, therefore, are expected to be significant for indigenous people in particular. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. Given the nature of the project no adverse impacts are expected. 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 Recipient has conducted a social assessment satisfactory to the Bank. This assessment was completed the last week of October and concluded the first week of November. Outcomes of this assessment have been included in the IPP. The social assessment also analyzed the possible impact of the new modality proposed under the school feeding component. The Bank has received and approved of a final version of the IPP, dated November 14, 2010. The IPP describes a set of activities to be supported under the capacity-building component of the Project which focuses on promotion and communication strategies adequate for indigenous populations to ensure their understanding of the model, its validation in the indigenous communities targeted under the Project, as well as consultations and adaptations for the eventual application of the model in the South Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAS) and the North Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAN). The IPP also includes the costing and indicators by which progress will be measured, as well as a summary of how other findings are already included in the Project Components. During the first year of the Project, the adaptation of the Model will be completed for the indigenous communities which are located in seven of the 26 municipalities. In addition, the Model will be culturally adaptation for those indigenous communities in the Atlantic Coast, which are not targeted under the Project, but where the MIFAN would eventually implement the Model in the future. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Key stakeholders include staff within the Ministry of the Family and other government agencies such as the Ministries of Education and Health, and the rural poor, including indigenous communities, who are living in the targeted departments. Consultations were carried out in 4 localities with both groups of stakeholders. The IPP, dated November 14, 2010, has been finalized, approved and will be disclosed in both the Infoshop and the MIFAN's website prior to appraisal. It will also be disclosed, i.e. made available to indigenous peoples communities, at strategic locations. The exact mechanisms for consultations during project implementation are still being defined. B. Disclosure Requirements Date Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Page 5 Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Yes Date of receipt by the Bank 11/30/2010 Date of "in-country" disclosure 12/03/2010 Date of submission to InfoShop 12/06/2010 Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of "in-country" disclosure Date of submission to InfoShop * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources, 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 (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? Yes If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager review the plan? Yes If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? N/A The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's Infoshop? Yes Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? Yes All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities Yes Page 6 been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Yes Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Yes Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? Yes D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Ms Theresa Jones 12/06/2010 Environmental Specialist: Social Development Specialist Ms Kristine M. Ivarsdotter 12/04/2010 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Mr Glenn S. Morgan 10/07/2010 Comments: Sector Manager: Ms Helena G. Ribe 12/06/2010 Comments: