Mozambique - Decentralized Planning and Finance Project

ISDS THE VVORLD BANK GROUP A WorIld Frac'oi P,I Prrty InfoShop Report No: AC83 Integrated Safeguards Data Sheet (Updated) Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 05/21/2003 Section I - Basic Information A. Basic Project Data Country: MOZAMBIQUE Project ID: P001807 Project: Decentralized Planning and Financing Project Task Team Leader: Lance Morrell Authorized to Appraise Date: April 25, 2003 IBRD Amount ($m): Bank Approval: August 26, 2003 IDA Amount ($m): 36.60 Managing Unit: AFTUI Sector: Sub-national government administration Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan (SIL) (30%); Central government administration (30%); Status: Lending Micro- and SME finance (20%); Roads and highways (20%) Theme: Rural services and infrastructure (P); Decentralization (P); Administrative and civil service reform (P); Rural policies and institutions (P); Small and medium enterprise support (S) I.A.2. Project Objectives: The overall objective of the Decentralized Planning and Finance (DPFP) Project is to strengthen the institutional capacity of local administrations to plan and manage investments in rural districts in a participatory and accountable manner. Strengthening of capacity will be done using a learning-by-doing approach of district investment grants, as well as other forms of capacity building, particularly in the areas of participatory planning, financial management and works management. The project will also assist central government ministries and agencies to develop a more conducive policy and institutional framework for good governance, development management and public service delivery in rural districts. I.A.3. Project Description: Overall description: The project is intended as the first stage of a long-term program of institutional strengthening, building upon reforms and pilots already underway. The DPFP would develop and extend the GOM's capacity building program for district administrations to plan and manage investments in rural districts in a participatory and accountable manner. Much of the capacity building would be through learning-by-doing, using Local Investment Grants to finance small-scale public investments in rural areas. The DPFP would also support training of district and  2 ISDS provincial officials to fulfil a broad range of local government responsibilities for public administration, including planning, accounting, procurement and monitoring. The project would also assist the GOM to develop a more conducive policy and institutional framework for good governance, development management and public service delivery in rural districts. The DPFP is thus a capacity building project for local administrations in Mozambique, using technical assistance, training and development grants to support learning-by-doing. Geographic scope: The Minister of Planning and Finance requested the Bank to focus on four provinces in the central zone of the country: Zambezia, Sofala, Tete and Manica. These provinces were prioritized based on (i) poverty focus and (ii) relative absence of other programs on local planning and finance. At effectiveness, a pre-programmed number of districts in these provinces can qualify for funds under the Local Investment Facilities. Extensive consultations have been held throughout the four provinces and in Maputo during preparation. All four provinces will receive general capacity building support for district staff in core areas of governance from effectiveness. Overall institutional and policy reform support will also be provided under the project to strengthen the national program of the Government of Mozambique. Province and District roles: The Provincial level will play the key role in (i) determining district eligibility for financing under the project and subsequent years' eligibility based on performance; (ii) providing mentoring and technical assistance to Districts in the areas of participatory planning and budgeting, financial management, works management and supervision; and (iii) identifying training needs for district and some provincial staff and procuring training from appropriate suppliers. The primary role of the Districts should be to (i) engage rural communities in the setting of priorities through a participatory planning and budgeting process and (ii) develop basic financial and works management skills through learning-by-doing and targeted training courses. lTo attain its objectives, the DPFP would include five components: 1. Participatory District Planning 2. Local Investment Grants 3. Capacity Building Component 4. Policy Reform Component 5 . Project Coordination Component Component 1. Participatory District Planning The Participatory District Planning Component would develop a District-level participatory planning system based on civil society consultation and participation. It would deepen and expand the experience of a decentralized planning and finance pilot in Nampula province financed by UJNCDF, UNDP and the Netherlands. The outputs of the participatory planning process would be District strategic and annual plans that would form part of the GOM's annual planning and budgeting cycle. The component would have two objectives (i) develop public sector capacity for district planning and accountable plan imrnplementation and (ii) Develop capacity among rural communities to effectively participate in district planning. The project will provide Technical Assistance in planning as well as the development of methodological tools for community participation and planning. Component 2. Local Investment Grants Financing for small rural infrastructure included in the annual plans would be made available to eligible  3 ISDS districts as local investment grants, up to a certain threshhold and according to a set of qualification criteria. There will be three grant windows or "facilities". Facility I will finance investments in district administrative infrastructure and will be managed by the province (the District is beneficiary but has no management role). Facility 2 will finance investments in small-scale public social infrastructure prioritized by communities through a process of participatory planning. The menu of eligible subprojects would include, among others, primary schools, health posts, rural water supply and sanitation, small-scale irrigation, feeder roads and bridges and rural markets. The Provinces will take on co-management responsibility (with Districts) for the financial and works management of Facility 2 as well as oversight and mentoring responsibility for Districts. Works under Facility 2 would typically be carried out by small private contractors and private inspectors would be responsible for physical progress inspections. Facility 3 will provide very small discretionary funds to District Administrations for direct community contracting for micro-projects. It is expected that each District will receive no more than $10 000 per annum thus limiting exposure while increasing responsibility and capacity for financial management and supervision through "learning by doing" . The project will provide technical assistance to government officials as well as a management quality assurance function to strengthen the capacity of provincial and district staff to carry out their responsibilities in financial and works management. The intention is to use and/or improve existing government systems and procedures as far as possible. In addition, support may be provided to small private contractors to enable them to effectively deliver quality infrastructure. The funding of investments at the District level would be on a programmatic basis. Each District would receive an initial annual allocation based on selection or eligibility criteria. The specific sub-projects to be financed each year would be selected locally, confirmed for financing eligibility at the Provincial level, and prepared and implemented with Provincial technical assistance and project coordination unit oversight. Subsequent annual allocations would be made available subject to the proper utilization of the previous year's allocation, including participation and information sharing with local communities. Component 3.Capacity Building: This component aims to strengthen the capacity of local administration officials to undertake key local government functions more effectively. Capacity building activities for key Provincial and District officials would be provided based on the identified roles and responsibilities of civil servants at each level, and are likely to include training in basic public administration, planning and budgeting and selected technical subjects. Specific training needs and content will be identified with the assistance of contracted technical experts. The outputs will include training needs assessments and plans for each province, developed in a manner consistent with the national training system and DPFP program requirements. Training funds will be made available to the provinces to purchase appropriate zourses from available suppliers. The type of training purchased will include both supply-driven and demand-driven content. Furthermore, the component will support the placement of better qualified local administrative personnel in key posts in the civil service, through technical assistance in recruitment, pre- and in service training as well as improvements to living and working conditions as necessary. Component 4. Policy Reform. This component would consist of technical assistance to the Ministry of Planning and Finance and to the associated Minsistries (State Administration and Works & Housing) to improve decision-making through policy analysis and for the further development of the institutional and policy framework for decentralization. The support will primarily take the form of a Technical Assistance facility to purchase specific pieces of analysis and conduct consultations and/or pilots needed to develop and test reforms and methodological tools. The use of the facility will be linked to its zontribution towards decision-making in respect of progress towards decentralization. Indicators of such progress are set out in a policy reform matrix agreed between the GOM and Bank. Component 5. Project Coordination. This component would consist of a small core team of project  4 ISDS coordination staff at central and provincial level who would fulfil some World Bank-specific fiduciary functions and provide technical assistance to the government officials responsible for project implementation and GOM fiduciary functions. The component would also include the project monitoring and evaluation system which will be developed in coordination with the national program and other donors. It will include the strengthening of responsibilities by provinces for monitoring and mentoring of district performance over time. Financial audits as well as a management quality assurance function will also be financed out of this component. I.A.4. Project Location: (Geographic location, information about the key environmental and social characteristics of the area and population likely to be affected, and proximity to any protected areas, or sites or critical natural habitats, or any other culturally or socially sensitive areas.) Please refer to the project description above (Geographic Scope). Districts will participate on a programmatic basis and on the basis of eligibilty of selection criteria to be agreed by appraisal. B. Check Environmental Classification: B (Partial Assessment) Comments: Construction and operations of sub-projects, which are to be selected and implemented annually on a programmatic basis, may have negative environmental impacts which would need to be avoided or mitigated. C. Safeguard Policies Triggered Policy Applicability Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) 0 Yes 0 No Natural Habitats (OP/BP/GP 4.04) 0 Yes * No Forestry (OP/GP 4.36) 0 Yes * No Pest Management (OP 4.09) 0 Yes * No Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) 0 Yes * No Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) 0 Yes * No Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12) 0 Yes 0 No Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) 0 Yes * No Projects in International Waterways (OP/BP/GP 7.50) 0 Yes * No Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP/GP 7.60)* 0 Yes * No *By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims on the disputed areas Section II - Key Safeguard Issues and Their Management D. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues. Please fill in all relevant questions. If information is not available, describe steps to be taken to obtain necessary data. II.D.la. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts. Infrastructure investments under Component 2 will likely have some environmental impact. The investments under this component fall under various sectors such as water supply, drainage, sanitation, solid waste management, access roads, construction of schools and health facilities. In addition, the investments are sectorally varied given that the they are determined by local-level priorities which will differ from one local government to another. Due to the diverse nature of the investments, the potential environmental and social impacts and the scope of environmental and social analysis for each investment would also vary. However, the anticipated types of investment are common community development  5 ISDS projects whose potential environmental and social effects are well understood, unlikely to be significant, and readily manageable. The project does not intend to displace any settler within the project location. However, given the uncertainties of land acquisition, a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) was prepared in accordance with OP 4.12, and Resettlement Plans subsequently developed and presented for approval, when land taking is necessary. In addition, the RPF establishes the resettlement and compensation principles, organizational arrangements and design criteria to be applied to meet the needs of the people who may be affected by the project activities requiring land acquisition and /or denial, restriction or loss of access to economic resources. It will specify a format for reporting and verifying that land given to government as a "voluntary donation" by communities is in fact not at the expense of any villagers. [I.D. I b. Describe any potential cumulative impacts due to application of more than one safeguard policy or due to multiple project component. Unlikely - will be determined before any sub-projects are approved for funding. II.D. 1 c Describe any potential long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area. Unlikely - will be determined before any sub-projects are approved for funding. II.D.2. In light of 1, describe the proposed treatment of alternatives (if required) Consideration of alternatives will be part of the design of the proposed subprojects. II.D.3. Describe arrangement for the borrower to address safeguard issues The Environmental Assessment and Social Management Framework (ESMF) will establish a mechanism to determine and assess future potential environmental and social impacts of subproject investments under the proposed DPFP. The ESMF establishes the screening process or mechanism for the subprojects to enable the LGs to identify potential environmental and social impacts of subprojects and to address them by incorporating the relevant mitigation measures into the designs of the subprojects. The Environmental Mitigation Plan (EMP) which is prepared as part of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) would consist of a set of mitigation measures, monitoring and institutional 'measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the subprojects to eliminate adverse environmental and social impacts, offset them or reduce them to acceptable levels. A Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) has been prepared and Resettlement Plans subsequently developed and presented for approval when land taking is necessary. iI.D.4. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. During the technical analysis for the design of the project, participatory approach was used whereby all the key stakeholders (Line Ministries, donors, Civic Society Organizations, LGs, etc) were consulted and a number of feed back workshops organized to enable them to have inputs and validate the conclusions and recommendations of the technical studies. The participatory approach adopted during the program design shall continue during the implementation phase. The same policy requires local level, through a participatory manner, to prepare rolling development plans incorporating plans of lower local level. This 'legal provision has been strengthened under the project by making it a minimum access criterion for local level. For sub-projects, local governments will be required to apply the environmental checklists for appraising their investments and comply with the mitigation measures contained therein and will carry out consultation with the beneficiaries prior to incorporating them into development plans. Documents on the environmental and social management of future subprojects will be reviewed and subsequently disclosed to the public. The RPF and ESMF reports will disclosed to the public by the Bank and the Government of Mozambique prior to appraisal.  6 ISDS E. Safeguards Classification. Category is determined by the highest impact in any policy. Or on basis of cumulative impacts from multiple safeguards. Whenever an individual safeguard policy is triggered the provisions of that policy apply. [ SI. - Significant, cumulative and/or irreversible impacts; or significant technical and institutional risks in management of one or more safeguard areas [X] S2. - One or more safeguard policies are triggered, but effects are limited in their impact and are technically and institutionally manageable [ S3. -No safeguard issues I SF. - Financial intermediary projects, social development funds, community driven development or similar projects which require a safeguard framework or programmatic approach to address safeguard issues. F. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Analysis/Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank 3/31/2003 Date of "in-country" disclosure 5/14/2003 Date of submission to InfoShop 5/15/2003 Date of distributing the Exec. Summary of the EA to the ED Not Available (For category A projects) Resettlement Action Plan/Framework: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank 3/31/2003 Date of "in-country" disclosure 5/14/2003 Date of submission to InfoShop 5/15/2003 Indigenous Peoples Development Plan/Framework: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of "in-country" disclosure Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop Not Applicable Not Applicable Pest Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of "in-country" disclosure Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop Not Applicable Not Applicable Dam Safety Management Plan: Expected Actual Date of receipt by the Bank Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of "in-country" disclosure Not Applicable Not Applicable Date of submission to InfoShop Not Applicable Not Applicable If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why. Signed and submitted by Name Date Task Team Leader: Lance Morrell 05/16/2003 Project Safeguards Specialists 1: Project Safeguards Specialists 2: Project Safeguards Specialists 3: Approved by: Name Date  7 ISDS Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Serigne Omar Fye 05/16/2003 Sector Manager/Director: Jaime M. Biderman 05/16/2003 For a list of World Bank news releases on projects and reports, click here SEARCH FEEDBACK SITE MAP SHOWCASE M