Ministry of Agriculture Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for the Third Additional Financing of Strengthen Ethiopia’s Adaptive Safety Net (SEASN AF3) Updated February 7, 2024 Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 1 Table of Contents 1 Introduction..................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Background................................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Purpose of the Stakeholders Engagement Plan (SEP) ............................................................................ 4 2 Brief Summary of Previous Stakeholder Engagement Activities ................................................................... 6 2.1 Summary of Recent Stakeholder Engagement Activities for Third Additional Financing (3AF) .......... 6 3 Stakeholder Identification and Analysis ......................................................................................................... 8 4 Stakeholder Engagement Plan....................................................................................................................... 15 5 Implementation Arrangements for Stakeholder Engagement Plan ............................................................... 20 5.1 Roles and Responsibilities .................................................................................................................... 20 5.2 Stakeholder Engagement Methods To Be Used .................................................................................... 23 6 Information Disclosure for SEASN .............................................................................................................. 26 7 Estimated Budget for Information Disclosure............................................................................................... 28 8 Grievance Redress Mechanism ..................................................................................................................... 29 1.1 Grievance Resolution Process ........................................................................................................... 29 1.2 Grievance Logs ................................................................................................................................. 30 9 Monitoring and Reporting ............................................................................................................................. 32 List of Tables Table 1: List of Consultations for 3AF ................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: List of Consultations that SEASN’s Design takes into Account .............................................................. 7 Table 3: Description of the Project-affected Parties ............................................................................................... 9 Table 4: Description of Other Interested Parties................................................................................................... 14 Table 5: Disadvantaged and Vulnerable Groups .................................................................................................. 14 Table 6: Planned Stakeholder Engagement Activities .......................................................................................... 16 Table 7: Responsibilities of Key Actors/Stakeholders in SEP Implementation ................................................... 20 Table 8: Status of Communication Materials ....................................................................................................... 24 Table 9: Information Disclosure for SEASN ....................................................................................................... 27 Table 10: Information Disclosure Activities – Estimated Budget (TBD) (5 years) ............................................. 28 Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 2 1 Introduction 1.1 Project Background The World Bank is currently implementing the Strengthen Ethiopia’s Adaptive Safety Net (SEASN) project to support the Government of Ethiopia (GoE) implement its fifth phase of the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP5). Environmental and social issues related to the proposed project will be assessed using the World Bank’s Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) set out under its new Environment and Social Framework (ESF). One of the Standards - ESS10 - relates to stakeholder engagement. This plan identifies SEASN’s stakeholders and the arrangements for the government’s engagement with them during project preparation as well as implementation. It also provides a summary of the project’s information disclosure plan and grievance redress mechanism (GRM) and its associated activities. The plan is updated for the third additional financing. SEASN’s Project Development Objective (PDO) is to expand geographic coverage and enhance service delivery of Ethiopia’s adaptive rural safety net to improve the well-being of extremely poor and vulnerable households in drought-prone communities. Below is a description of the project components. • Component 1: Adaptive Productive Safety Net. This component will provide labor intensive Public Works (PW) opportunities for selected rural poor households in drought- prone woredas; support a mother and child package of early childhood development services targeted for selected PW participants in temporary direct support status; safety net transfers; and complementary Livelihoods (LH) services for client households. • Component 2: Improved Shock Responsiveness of the Rural Safety Net. This component will support the expansion of PSNP to additional drought-prone woredas in PSNP regions, invest in underlying systems to deliver timely and adequate assistance to households affected by drought shocks, and finance vertical and horizontal expansion of transfers in case of emergency (drought). • Component 3: Program Management Support. Activities in this component aim to consolidate several important initiatives to build systems under previous phases of the PSNP. This will enhance service delivery in the areas of payments, information for operations, and program dynamism and responsiveness to clients, including taking advantage of technology to improve the program’s efficiency and governance. The proposed project is being prepared under the World Bank’s Environment and Social Framework (ESF). As per ESS 10: Stakeholders Engagement and Information Disclosure, implementing agencies should provide stakeholders with timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information, and consult with them in a culturally appropriate manner, which is free of manipulation, interference, coercion, discrimination and intimidation. To meet best practice approaches, the project will apply the following principles for stakeholder engagement: • Openness and life-cycle approach: public consultations for the project will continue during the whole project lifecycle from preparation through implementation. Stakeholder engagement will be free of manipulation, interface, coercion, and intimidation; Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 3 • Informed participation and feedback: information will be provided and widely distributed among all stakeholders in an appropriate format; conducted based on timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information related to the project; opportunities provided to raise concerns and assure that stakeholder feedback is taken into consideration during decision making. • Inclusiveness and sensitivity: stakeholder identification is undertaken to support better communications and building effective relationships. The participation process for the project is inclusive and the stakeholders are always encouraged to be involved in the consultation process. Equal access to information is provided to all stakeholders. Sensitivity to stakeholders’ needs is the key principle underlying the selection of engagement methods. Special attention is given to vulnerable groups, particularly women headed households, youth, elderly and the cultural sensitivities of diverse ethnic groups. The environmental risk of the Project is Substantial. Although the PW subprojects are aimed at enhancing the environment and increasing the productive capacity of the natural resource base, they also have the potential for adverse environmental impacts on human populations and/or the biophysical environment if their location, design or construction do not follow good environmental practices. Based on the experience of the previous phases of the PSNP, these environmental risks, without an ESMF, could arise from site-specific impacts such as (i) disturbance of environmentally sensitive areas or downstream ecosystems by soil-and- water conservation (SWC) subprojects, including flood control, which, despite being intended to improve the environment, might be badly designed or sited; (ii) vegetation removal, erosion or pollution caused by poorly designed or located social infrastructure such as community roads or health posts; (iii) salinization, water logging or pollution resulting from small- scale irrigation subprojects including the use of agro-chemicals; (iv) disruption of downstream ecosystems or water flows by water subprojects. Furthermore, the expansion of PSNP5 to the lowlands which could be fragile and the potential for community water development subprojects can make the environmental risk substantial. The social risk is assessed as Substantial. Under the World Bank’s ESF, the social risk of the project is assessed as Substantial.Similar to the parent project, the potential risks could be related to social exclusion from the project benefits as well as sexual exploitation and abuse related to targeting , security and SEA risks for the project workers and the community during the implementation in conflict affected areas. The capacity of program implementers also needs strengthening to apply the ESF standards.The ESF instruments prepared for the parent project will be applied. 1.2 Purpose of the Stakeholders Engagement Plan (SEP) This SEP aims to: • Establish a systematic approach to stakeholder engagement that will help SEASN project implementers identify stakeholders and build and maintain a constructive relationship with them, in particular project affected parties. • Assess the level of stakeholder interest and support for the project and to enable stakeholders’ views to be considered in project design and environmental and social performance. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 4 • Promote and provide means for effective and inclusive engagement with project- affected parties throughout the project life cycle on issues that could potentially affect them. • Ensure that appropriate project information on environmental and social risks and impacts is disclosed to stakeholders in a timely, understandable, accessible, and appropriate manner and format. • Define roles, and responsibilities for implementation of the SEP. • Define monitoring and reporting measures to ensure effectiveness of the SEP. • Provide project-affected parties with accessible and inclusive means to raise issues and grievances and allow project implementers to respond to and manage such grievances. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 5 2 Brief Summary of Previous Stakeholder Engagement Activities SEASN follows a series of World Bank-project phases that, since 2005, have supported the GoE’s rural Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP). Over the past fifteen years, PSNP has embedded regular consultations with its various stakeholders into its programming. The below tables list those consultations that have recently taken place and affected SEASN project design. 2.1 Summary of Recent Stakeholder Engagement Activities for Third Additional Financing (3AF) Table 1: List of Consultations for 3AF MTR Series of discussion between Review and December 2022- Agreed on the government and donor Workshop June 2023 need of additional partners based on the 2 ½ financing to years performance review maintain the program impact JRIS Consultation engaging Workshop June and Borrower and stakeholders at all levels December 2023 donors agreed on including donor partners the importance of additional financing to maintain the program impact JSOC Discussion among high-level Workshop November 2023 Consensus was government officials and the reached on the heads of agency from donors need for additional financing Technical Discussion among working Meetings Monthly Inputs from working groups comprised of reviews Groups government and development consolidated to partner experts strengthen the program implementation Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 6 Table 2: List of Consultations that SEASN’s Design takes into Account Consultation Description Modality Frequency Impact PSNP5 Design Discussion between Workshop September Consolidated decision to Workshop government and donor partners 2019 shift program focus to to improve program design for extreme poverty, instead of PSNP5 food insecurity Federal and Consultation for federal and National Bi-Annual Highlighted timeliness of regional Joint regional PSNP government and payments as a key issue to Review & stakeholders as well as donor regional tackle for PSNP5 (proposed Implementation partners to discuss various meetings PBCs for SEASN) Status (JRIS) aspects of program performance Impact Discussed and presented Workshop January 2019 Highlighted program evaluation findings of 2018 impact implementation and impact workshop evaluation gaps in specific areas, including timeliness of payments, nutrition Timeliness of Discussion between Workshop October 2019 Joint government and donor payments government and donor partners partner decision to introduce workshop to improve persistent new/innovative solutions challenges around timeliness of and resulted in the payments introduction and roll- out of automatic payments. PIM Brought together governmental Workshop November Build consensus around consultation representatives from FSCO, 2019 changing aspects of PSNP NDRMC and regions to design to facilitate improve PIM for frontline operational efficiency implementers so that it is more operational and modular, and provides more clarity on processes and upcoming design changes of PSNP5. Early Warning Discussion between Workshop October 2019 Presented preliminary System – Scalability government, donor partners and options to improve the early Workshop stakeholders on the preliminary warning system to better findings from the review of the meet information national early warning system. requirements to enable early and scalable food and cash response. Technical Working Discussion among working Meetings Monthly Inputs are consolidated into Groups groups comprised of log frame for PSNP5 design. government and development partner experts on specific subject areas – livelihoods, public works, payments, shock responsive safety net, social and gender development, program management, etc. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 7 3 Stakeholder Identification and Analysis This stakeholder analysis identifies and determines the likely relationship between the project and its various stakeholders. Stakeholders are those directly or indirectly affected by a project, as well as those who may have interests in a project and/or the ability to influence its outcome, either positively or negatively. Stakeholder analyses help to identify the perceptions, interests, needs, and influence of actors on the project. ESS10 classifies stakeholders in two broad categories: “Project-affected parties� (PAPs) and “other interested parties�. Within these categories, persons or groups may be categorized as especially disadvantaged or vulnerable. Project-affected parties: persons, groups and other entities within the project area of influence that are directly influenced (actually or potentially) by the project and/or have been identified as most susceptible to change associated with the project, and who need to be closely engaged in identifying impacts and their significance, as well as in decision-making on mitigation and management measures. Table 2 provides a list of key stakeholder groups identified as project-affected parties. Other interested parties: individuals/ groups/ entities that may not experience direct impacts from the project but who consider or perceive their interests as being affected by the project and/or who could affect the project and the process of its implementation. Table 3 provides a list of key stakeholder groups identified as other interested parties. Disadvantaged or vulnerable groups: persons who may be disproportionately impacted or further disadvantaged by the projects as compared with any other groups due to their vulnerable status, and that may require special engagement efforts to ensure their equal representation in the consultation and decision-making process associated with the projects. Table 3 provides a list of key stakeholder groups identified as disadvantaged or vulnerable. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 8 Table 3: Description of the Project-affected Parties Name of Description Issues Significance Stakeholder Level Community/ Kebele level PSNP Core clients Public Works clients Due to lack of access to information of High program provisions (PIM, GSD), many lack a clear understanding of their rights and responsibilities in regard to targeting and exit criteria, work norms, transfer schedule. Should have awareness about GBV/SEAH and its related complaint handling, GRM Temporary Direct Support Due to lack of access to information on High clients program provisions (PIM, GSD), hesitate to request time off from PW activities or lack confidence to request their entitlement without participating in PW; are unaware of existence of GRM or may lack confidence in the GRM body (KAC) to present their appeals Permanent Direct Support Due to lack of access to information on High clients program provisions (PIM, GSD), lack confidence to complain about the delay or reduction of their PSNP entitlement; are unaware of existence of GRM or may lack confidence in the KAC to present their appeals; may lack awareness on GBV/SEAH issues and its related complaint handling procedures. Due to mobility issues, may require assistance collecting payments, and accessing relevant social services including health/CBHI, nutrition and education services for dependents. PSNP Those targeted through the Low access to information regarding who High Shock Responsive horizontal and vertical scaling is entitled to benefits, its duration, and the clients up of PSNP to enable them to transfer amount. May be unaware of withstand shocks existence of GRM or may lack confidence in the KAC to present their appeals, Clients Development Responsible for coordinating May not have access to the guidelines and High Agents (DAs) and implementing all PSNP- procedures needed for properly planning related activities in kebeles PW, livelihoods, GSD and nutrition activities and facilitating payments and linkages to social services for clients. Due to lack of a clear procedure for the confidential management of GBV, DAs may not properly manage GBV-related issues. Community Those who live in the May be unaware of the program’s GRM Medium members affected watershed and benefit from the by PW improved physical environment as a result of PW activities Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 9 Name of Description Issues Significance Stakeholder Level Youth in Selected youth may serve as Require training on their assigned support High PSNP community facilitators tasks, the program’s GRM, and the nature kebeles (assistant to the DAs) of GBV/SEAH violations and their related complaint procedures. Kebele Food Responsible for targeting May lack access to guidelines on the High Security Task clients appropriate inclusion and exit criteria for Force (KFSTF) program. Due to lack of awareness or accountability regarding the boundaries of their role, may not forward grievances to the KAC. Lack of awareness regarding the nature of GBV/SEAH violations may expose potential clients to risk. Kebele Appeals Manage all grievances related Lack stationary to record complaints, do High Committee (KAC) to PSNP not have an assigned office space. May lack access to procedures and guidance on how to resolve specific types of grievances. Due to lack of a clear procedure for the confidential management of GBV, KAC may not properly manage GBV-related issues. Kebele Council Need to support KAC by In some areas, lack of capacity has High reviewing GRM prevented the Kebele Council from recommendations and supporting the PSNP’s GRM as expected. communicating with the Woreda Council Health extension Deliver SBCC consultations to Overburdened with other health projects, High workers (HEWs) PW clients and not specifically incentivized to work on PSNP. Absent in lowland areas. Should they receive GBV/SEAH related complaints from PSNP clients, may not be aware of the correct procedure to manage them. Kebele Will support the planning Need to know which linkages are relevant High Name of Description Issues Significance Level Stakeholder Women implementation and monitoring to the different types of PSNP clients and Development Group of gender and GBV issues how to facilitate referrals; have related to the program. Will be awareness of GBV/SEAH violations and part of KAC to address GBV the current procedures for handling issues through complaints related to them the GRM Community Care Support linkages of relevant In areas where they exist, may be High Coalitions (CCC) PSNP clients such as TDS and weak because they are a voluntary group. and/ or social PDS to available and relevant workers social services like health, nutrition, education * Woreda level program operators include government (450 woredas), and NGOs (37 woredas) WoA FS Lead overall coordination of the In some woredas, overlapping High desk PSNP planning, implementation responsibilities and weak coordination and monitoring in woreda between FS desk and DRM/EW, resulting in duplication of efforts. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 10 Name of Description Issues Significance Level Stakeholder EW and Lead the timely collection and In some woredas, overlapping High Response desk communication of woreda level responsibilities and weak coordination EW data for accurate and between FS desk and DRM/EW, timely early warning resulting in duplication of efforts. information. Oversee the provision of In some areas, low capacity of High WoLSA/ WoWSA linkages to social services for WoLSA/ WoWSA affects PDS and TDS clients and implementation of PDS case facilitate case management Upon management (although available at the request, need to be available to woreda level, may not reach kebele dispense guidance on labor- easily) related grievances submitted to the KAC. May collaborate with Women, Children and Youth Affairs desk in Office of Agriculture, which will take the lead to address issues related to gender mainstreaming and GBV Women, Will oversee implementation and Children and reporting on gender and GBV. It Youth Affairs will also collaborate with desk in WoLSA/WoWSA on child labor Agriculture related issues. office Office of Depending on capacity at Need to be familiar with program High Women, woreda level, will advise on objectives and activities, as well as Children and gender mainstreaming in the safeguards. Has not previously engaged Youth project planning and with PSNP. Affairs implementation, and consult Name of Description Issues Significance Level Stakeholder on issues related to gender, GBV, children and youth Woreda Technically responsible for Are not well integrated into High Health Office mainstreaming of nutrition component PSNP activities; PSNP of the program overlaps with a lot of hotspot woredas and Woreda Health Offices are busy managing emergencies Woreda Support KACs by reviewing their In some areas, due to lack of Council recommendations for GRM and knowledge or capacity, has forwarding their decisions to the WoA FS not engaged in the desk management of the PSNP GRM to level of responsibility assigned in the PIM. Finance Oversee the financial management of High Office PSNP in woreda, responsible for timely preparation of payroll and disbursement Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 11 NGOs Provide transfers and oversee public Need support from donors and High works across 37 woredas. Supported by government bodies to USAID. discharge their responsibilities Coordinate with government woredas and share experience regarding implementation of GSD and nutrition and livelihood components. Regional level BoA - Coordinates annual implementation plans High Regional FS and budgets for the region, support training and capacity buildings for woredas, print and distribute client cards BoA - NRM Approve and monitor PW activities High BoLSA/ BoWSA Responsible for ensuring compliance with High labor and social standards Bureau of Ensure suitable accounting system for High Finance regional and woreda levels is established; collect, aggregate, and report on all financial data from BOLSA, BOA, woredas EW and Response Transfer EW data to the federal level on High Directorate a monthly basis, coordinate humanitarian interventions BoWCYA Oversee gender, children, and youth Need to be familiar with High issues mainstreaming in the project program objectives and planning and activities, as well as implementation safeguards. Has not previously engaged with PSNP. Name of Stakeholder Description Issues Significance Level BoH Technically responsible for High mainstreaming of program’s health and nutrition component. Federal level MoA- FSCO Responsible for program’s High overall coordination, implementation, and monitoring MoA - NRMLE Responsible for program’s High community asset building component and ensure full functioning of regional substructures MoA- Responsible for overseeing and High Women, Affairs Lead monitoring of GBV. It will Executive also collaborate with MoWSA on child labor related issues NDRMC Ensure full functioning of key Government has issued directive High systems such as early warning revising institutional and needs assessments arrangement for emergency response, which has yet to be Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 12 operationalized. MoF Responsible for program’s High overall financial management, and transfer of funds to BOFEDs, FSCO MoWSA – Responsible for coordinating High Social Protection with the regional substructure Coordination Lead to provide necessary training Executive, Women’s and support to enable the Right Protection and monitoring of social safeguards Response Lead of SEASN – OHS, GBV, child Executive labor – as well as the tracking of labor- related grievances submitted to the program GRM MoH Responsible for overseeing of PSNP works with the Nutrition High nutrition mainstreaming, Case Team but to be effective, coordinating with regional needs to collaborate with other substructure to provide MoH directorates such as the necessary training and support Health Extension Directorate. to enable the delivery of health Need for MoU to be signed at a services ministerial level. Ministry of Labor and Engages in design of High Skills livelihood component E-payment providers Provide technological service Dependent on network to facilitate High to speed up cash transfer payments. payment Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 13 Table 4: Description of Other Interested Parties Name of Description Significance Stakeholder Level Environmental Regulatory agency for the management of environmental and social issues High Protection associated with the implementation of subprojects. Authority Donors Development partners who co-finance the PSNP. High Media May report on impacts of PSNP to the general public. High Water, Roads, Provide technical backstopping to ensure quality PW implementation. Medium Education Financial Service Third party payment service providers. Medium Providers Table 5: Disadvantaged and Vulnerable Groups Name of Stakeholder Issues Significance Level Sub Saharan African Includes pastoralist communities. Project interventions High Historically Underserved may have unintended consequences on their Traditional Local communities. Communities Pregnant women and lactating May be forced to engage in PW. High mothers Women in male-headed and May experience GBV/SEAH at home, or on their way to High female-headed beneficiary PW site or payment collection. households Polygamous households Co-wives and their children are dependent on one male High household head and may therefore be treated (irrespective of the number of dependent children each of them has) as one family during the targeting for PSNP. The elderly May have challenges accessing payments. High Disabled/persons affected by May have challenges accessing payments. High chronic diseases/bedridden Children May be exposed to harm when taken to PW sites by their High caretakers or left at home alone when parents are performing PW. May be withdrawn from school to attend PW. Protracted IDPs May be excluded from project interventions despite High vulnerability. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 14 4 Stakeholder Engagement Plan Stakeholder engagement activities need to provide specific stakeholder groups with relevant information and opportunities to voice their views on topics that matter to them. PSNP is a highly interactive program, and clients have frequent opportunities to interact face-t o - face with program implementers (for example, during PWs, SBCC consultations, livelihood consultations, and transfer pickups). Taking into account the large-scale directly affected population (approximately 8 million), and the fact that the project will extend support to ‘new’, currently excluded, woredas as well as re -allocate the caseload geographically, the SEP will capture the views of sample communities in: • Existing PSNP-supported woredas where caseload changes are planned; • Existing PSNP-supported woredas where caseload re-allocation is planned; • ‘New’, currently excluded woredas in PSNP regions where the PSNP will be introduced for the first time. Progress Status: The above planned activities were completed during the design and implementation of the parent project. The SEP will pay particular attention to: • any historically underserved traditional communities affected, to ensure that services provided will be appropriate; • especially vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, including the elderly, persons with disabilities, female-headed households, orphans and vulnerable children; • Neighboring communities that might be directly or indirectly affected by the project. Progress Status: ESAC has addressed the need of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups Table 6 outlines the consultations scheduled to take place during project implementation. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 15 Table 6: Planned Stakeholder Engagement Activities Consulting/ With Whom Frequency Channels of Engagement Purpose Progress Report Entity Engagement Methods Targeting CFSTF Community Every 2 years for large Community Community Full retargeting, partial Community consultations are (Community scale retargeting of core committee meeting retargeting - To ensure conducted annually as part of the Food Security caseload, and annually inclusion of poor and annual update process. Task Force) for minor adjustments; Through posting of vulnerable PAPs in program and as required for client lists targeting of transitory clients. KAC in select Community After each Through availing GRM/ Through To hear any complaints The KAC is operational in PSNP communities targeting/program exit the service of KAC hearing of regarding targeting inclusion Kebeles. This was supported by the exercise and to Community grievances of and exclusion. GRM annual review that was carried periodically thereafter following listing of any appellant To receive, respond or escalate out for the years 2021 and 2022. client list. to other complaints regarding Additionally, spot-checks have further PSNP implementation corroborated the functionality of the KAC. Kebele Food Community At the beginning of the Community General Community To discuss and verify the During the annual update, the KFSTF Security Task program and Assembly meeting results of the targeting engages in detailed discussions and Force(KFSTF) every two years. processes, as well as the list of verification processes. eligible households and whether they are categorized for Permanent Direct Support (PDS) or PW, views on project design, target subproject environmental and social potential risks, mitigation measures, grievance redress mechanisms and SEP Planning for PW Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 16 Development Community Annual and every 5 Community Community To request and plan for type of During the annual Public Works Agents (DAs) years gathering and discussion for PW required for watershed (PW) planning session, a consultation discussion. need process is undertaken to prioritize identification PW activities. This involves active and engagement with the community prioritization watershed team to ensure that the selection and prioritization of PW activities align with the community's needs and objectives, based on the government’s Community Based participatory Watershed/Rangeland Development Guideline (CBPW/RDG). DAs Concerned Annual Consultations with Environmental ESMF for PW households affected households and social During screening process, considering screening the nature of sub-projects that may have potential impacts, the DA conducts consultations with households that could potentially be affected. Social Development FSCO Disadvantaged and Once Enhanced Social Community For the ESS, this study will be vulnerable groups Assessment and consultations undertaken to ensure SEASN Consultations with disadvantaged and Consultations meets the needs of all clients in vulnerable groups were conducted at the appropriate manner, with a the outset of the program design. particular focus on the most vulnerable and historically underserved populations. FSCO Clients and program Once Gender Analysis and FGDs and KIIs Assess and analyze risk of A gender analysis and GBV implementers GBV Risk GBV/SEAH in program and assessment, including SEAH, were Assessment develop risk mitigation carried out during the project measures, conducted during the preparation phase and risk mitigation project preparation measures were developed. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 17 Consulting/ With Whom Frequency Channels of Engagement Purpose Progress Update Entity Engagement Methods Program Review and Monitoring (*on a sample basis) FSCO PSNP Clients and Every 2 years Livelihood Impact FGDs and To assess program impacts on implementers at Assessment household clients. A livelihood impact assessment has regional and woreda surveys not been conducted yet, as the level livelihood activities did not commence during the initial two years of the project. The assessment will be carried out at the completion of the project. FSCO PSNP Clients and Annual National Spot KIIs and To ensure program operational Spot check was conducted in 2023, implementers at Checks* household compliance and the conclusive report resulting regional and woreda surveys from this assessment was submitted level to the bank. The findings were further presented in the December 2023 JRIS FSCO Implementers + Bi-Annual JRIS/RRM Meetings To monitor progress on results Regions + Woreda Donors FSCO PSNP Clients and Annual PW and Key informant To assess program compliance and The planning and implementation of implementers at Livelihoods interviews, results PW and LH reviews have been regional and woreda Planning and focus group conducted annually. A level Implementati discussions comprehensive report detailing the on Reviews* outcomes of these reviews was subsequently submitted to the client and the World Bank. FSCO PSNP Clients and Annual GRM Review* Key informant To assess functionality and GRM annual review was conducted implementers at interviews, performance of the program’s once to encompass the years 2021 regional and woreda focus group GRM and 2022. Procurement processes for level discussions the 2023 review are currently underway. NRMLE Community and PW End of Project Public Works Key informant To assess outcome of PW Scheduled to be conducted at the end implementers Outcome interviews, interventions of the project. Assessment* focus group discussions Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 18 WoLSA/WoWSA Community and PW Quarterly Monitoring Visits To assess labor standards on PW Monitoring is conducted through implementers, PW sites with regard to child labor, RRTM and JRIS activities in sites OHS, and GBV selected woredas. This monitoring is also integrated into spot-checks and PW reviews. MoWSA faces challenges due to the absence of budget allocations and weak coordination issues thus quarterly monitoring has not been possible thus far. Stakeholders’ Engagement Plan for Third Additional Financing 19 5 Implementation Arrangements for Stakeholder Engagement Plan The FSCO is responsible for the PSNP’s day-to-day program management, including environmental and social management and addressing potential environmental and social risks. MoA-FSCO will be responsible for engaging with stakeholders and managing the program’s GRM and MoA –Women, Children and Youth Affairs Directorate will also be responsible for GBV. 5.1 Roles and Responsibilities Previously, FSCO processed the majority of stakeholder engagement activities on an individual basis, by assigning an available expert to review its terms of reference and oversee its contracting. Moving forward, FSCO will formalize this role by establishing a Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person to regularly follow up and track Stakeholder Engagement. To implement the various activities envisaged in the SEP, the Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person will need to closely coordinate with other key stakeholders, including other government agencies and PAPs. The roles and responsibilities of these actors/stakeholders are summarized in Table 7 below. Table 7: Responsibilities of Key Actors/Stakeholders in SEP Implementation Actor/Stakeholder Responsibilities Progress Report National level MoA - Food Security • Planning and implementation of the SEP (lead • Done Coordination Office all related activities) • Management and implementation of program • Ongoing GRM • Ongoing management and supervision are in • Coordination/supervision of contractors on place for various activities, including PW&LH ESCP/SEP activities Review, GRM Review, Spot Check, GBV • Monitoring and reporting on social performance Stakeholder Mapping etc… to GoE and WB • Monitoring is done through JRIS, RRA, spot- • Assign Stakeholder Focal Person to manage check, GRM review, PW&LH Review etc… PSNP stakeholder engagement and monitor the management, resolution, and reporting • Focal person for SEP and GRM assigned at the of grievances by communicating with the federal level regional GRM focal person MoA – Women • Monitoring of and reporting on issues • While the lead Executive involves in RRM, Social Affairs Lead related to GBV and reported to program JRIS, Spot-checks, and other monitoring Executive GRM. activities, more engagement is required going forward. MoWSA– Social • Sign a tripartite MoU with MoA and MoH for • Done Protection and joint coordination, implementation and • Incidents related with OHS and Child Labor Coordination Lead monitoring of linkages for the program’s are included in the ESIRT training on Executive social services component monitoring and reporting was and during the • Monitoring of and reporting on issues related ESMF ToR. In addition, child labor is to OHS and child labor, and as well as monitored by spot-check, PW&LH review, tracking labor-related issues reported to the JRIS/RRM program GRM • In collaboration with LASS TC, GBV • Collaborate with MoA-WAD on GBV issues stakeholder mapping in sample regions was and participate in federal taskforce. conducted and tools developed, GBV code of conduct developed, GBV prevention and response guideline prepared 20 Actor/Stakeholder Responsibilities MoH – MCHLE - • Sign a tripartite MoU with MoA • Signed Nutrition and MoWSA for joint • Member of the LASS TC, Engage in SBCC and Coordination Office coordination, implementation nutrition-related activities and monitoring of linkages for • Monitoring SBCC and Nutrition related activities are the program’s social services included in the annual PW review. The level of component engagement from the Ministry is low and requires • Provide technical support attention to address and improve it. on the implementation of health and nutrition provisions of the program • Monitor and report on SBCC, health and nutrition status as part of the national nutrition reporting system Regional level BoA-FSCO • Inform FSCO of any issues related to • As part of the quarterly and biannual technical working their engagement with stakeholders; group’s /committee’s performance report, regional BoA • Monitoring and reporting on updated FSCO about stakeholders’ engagement. gender and social development • Gender and social development performance has performance to federal FSCO been monitored and reported to federal FSCO as • Transmit and resolve complaints part of quarterly, biannual and annual program caused by the project progress report. interventions in close • Regions assigned GRM focal person to monitor collaboration with and as the management, resolution, and reporting of directed by FSCO grievances. • Assigns GRM focal person to monitor • Appeals escalated to regional levels have been the management, resolution, and managed and addressed relevant bodies and reporting of grievances. This focal communicated to the community. person will be responsible for • The gender desk in BoA have been monitoring receiving the list of appeals and issues related to GBV and reported to the program resolutions from the woreda level and GRM, to report to FS bureau. transmitting them to the federal GRM focal person. • The gender desk in regional BoA will be monitoring issues related to GBV and reported to the program GRM, to report to FS bureau. BoLSA/BoWSA • Monitoring of issues related to • As part of the RRM and JRIS, BoLSA/BoWSA OHS, child labor, as well of monitored compliance of child labor provisions in tracking of labor related the PW. grievances reported to the • Periodic joint missions including the RRM and program GRM, to report to FS JRIS missions monitored grievances related to bureau labor management. • Monitoring of progress and status of stakeholders with regard to linkages • Quarterly and biannual reports on functionality of to social services, to report to FS regional technical working groups where bureau stakeholders represented used as a tool. • Woreda level 21 Woreda Food • Participate in the implementation of • Ongoing: Woreda Food security desk is playing a greater Security Desk assigned activities in the SEP; role in planning, organizing, and participating in the • Provide report on all grievances implementation the SEP in their respective areas. submitted to the GRM to the • Ongoing: Part of quarterly, biannual and annual Regional GRM focal person; reports to regions, woreda food security desk • Make available project information compiled and provided a report on grievances (brochures, flyers) and GRM submitted to the KACs and woreda procedures to the public. • Done: posters and brochures with relevant project • Provide guidance for the formation of information and GRM procedures have been posted the Kebele Appeals Committee in public places and availed by Woreda food security • Support awareness-creation activities desk. • In woredas with MIS, input list of • Done: Woreda food security desk he processes and grievances and their resolution into the supported provide guidance for the formation of the system Kebele Appeals Committees. • Approve the use of woreda • Done and ongoing: part of their regular visit and contingency budget community consultation, woredas food security desk • The women, children and youth desk implements awareness-creation activities in PSNP in office of agriculture will monitor kebeles. issues related to GBV and reported to • Ongoing: Program MIS has been developed in a way to the program GRM, to report to FS capture grievances resolution process and reports. Its bureau. WoLSA/WoWSA will be part rollout and implementation is happing in phased of the woreda BoA women, children approach. and youth desk . • Ongoing: both the women desk in office of agriculture and WoLSA/WoSA have engaged in the periodic joint monitoring the GBV in PSNP kebeles. Woreda NRM Desk • Regarding Voluntary Asset Donation, • Done and ongoing: Development Agents confirmed that along with DA, confirms that the the voluntary asset donor understands the procedure to voluntary asset donor understands the be followed in the land donation; and facilitates the procedure to be followed. Once signing and filing of donation agreement. confirmed, facilitates the signing and filing of four copies of the agreement (one completed copy is filed at the Kebele Land Administration Office; one at the DA’s office, one remains with the donor, and one is filed at the Woreda NR Case team office.) Woreda Council • Assist in resolving escalated and • Done and ongoing: Part of the grievance resolution unresolved appeals process, woreda council has been addressing appeals escalated to woreda. 22 Actor/Stakeholder Responsibilities WoLSA/ WoWSA • Raise awareness about program and provide • Done and ongoing. guidance to community structures (CCCs, • Done in selected regions and woredas: associations of elderly and persons with LASS stakeholder mapping was disability) conducted in selected regions and now • Conduct mapping of potential stakeholders for social planned to scale up into the remaining service linkages regions and woredas. • Upon request, provide guidance to KAC on labor- • Done and will continue as a regular related grievances submitted to GRM task. • Monitor and report on social safeguards – OHS, • Done and ongoing: Part of the joint child labor. WoLSA/ WoWSA will be part of the periodic monitoring task, WoSA/ woreda office of agriculture Women, Children and WoLSA has been engaging on youth desk and collaborate on the implementation. monitoring of social safeguard issues including child labor. Woreda Health Office • Plan and implement health and nutrition component Done and ongoing. of the program • Jointly (with woreda office of agriculture (WoA)/ Food security desk and WoLSA) implement, monitor and report on SBCC and linkages to social services component of program Community level KAC • Receive grievances from PAP • Done and ongoing: confirmed by the • Provide a listing of the grievances received and GRM review. their resolution to the Kebele Council and Woreda Council within two months of the complaint being heard. Kebele Council • Assist in establishing and ensuring the effective • Done and ongoing: GRM review operation of the KAC noted that kebele council providing a • Review unresolved appeals from KAC and forward strong support for the establishment them to the Woreda Council and the Woreda Food and functionality of PSNP KACs. Security Desk every quarter • Done and ongoing: Confirmed by • Forward the list of grievances, their resolution the GRM review. and any unresolved cases to the Woreda Council • Done and ongoing: confirmed by the GRM review. DA or KFSTF • Ensures that up-to-date listings of clients and • This is done as part of a listing of appeals and appeal resolutions are regular task of the program’s posted in public locations at woreda, kebele grievance redress mechanism and community levels. by the Kebele Appeal • With regard to voluntary asset donation, after committees. Since the satisfying him/herself that the donor is making program grievance the donation on a voluntary basis, the DA • This is done as part of the arranges a meeting between the donor(s), the procedure when voluntary DA, the Chair of the Kebele Land land donation happened. Administration Committee, and the Woreda NR Expert. PAP • Invited to engage and ask questions about Done and ongoing: the Project during community gatherings • Lodge their grievances using the Grievance Redress Mechanism defined in the SEP 5.2 Stakeholder Engagement Methods To Be Used Public/Community Meetings At the national level, FSCO will organize a project launch meeting for national and regional 23 stakeholders. At the community level, DAs will organize community gatherings to disclose relevant project information including information on targeting, environment and social impacts and the GRM. Progress status: The activities mentioned above have been complete Enhanced Social Assessment and Consultation The project will implement social development plan captured from the consultation with disadvantaged and vulnerable members of the community. Progress status: The activities mentioned above have been completed Communication Materials Written information will be disclosed to the public through a variety of communications materials, including brochures, flyers, posters, etc. The communications materials will be produced by the FSCO.FSCO will also create a webpage on the Ministry of Agriculture’s website, to be updated regularly with key project updates and reports on the project’s performance. The website will also provide information about the grievance mechanism for the project’s GRM. Progress status: Communication materials were prepared and disseminated to regions. The below table shows the number of materials disseminated to regions. Table 8: Status of Communication Materials S.N Region Poster Brochure Total 1 Oromia 40964 127095 168059 2 SNNPR 35328 109950 145278 3 Sidama 4212 17025 21237 4 Amhara 43990 132990 176980 5 Dire Dawa 1470 20790 22260 6 Afar 8718 28995 37713 7 Harari 390 1140 1530 8 Somali 30568 96975 127543 Total 165,640 534,960 700,600 Information Desk at the Woreda Level Information desk at the Woreda Office of Agriculture will provide information to local residents, PAPs and stakeholders on SEASN’s project interventions and contact details of the stakeholder engagement focal point. Brochures and fliers on various project related social and environmental issues will be made available at these information desks. Progress status: While there is no dedicated notice board specifically designated for PSNP, the existing kebele notice boards are utilized for communication purposes. Program Review and Monitoring Surveys FSCO will organize a number of surveys to assess the quality of program implementation. These will include: Livelihood Impact Assessments, PW and Livelihoods Review, GRM Reviews, PW outcome assessment, and GSD and nutrition (see Table 5). Grievance Redress Mechanism In compliance with the World Bank’s ESS10, a project- specific grievance mechanism is set up for the project to handle complaints and issues (see Chapter 8). Detailed communications materials (specifically a GRM brochure or pamphlet) will be developed to help PAPs become familiar with the 24 grievance redress channels and procedures. SEASN will also work to establish an MIS-based GRM to better enable FSCO to capture and track grievances from submission to resolution and communication with complainants. The initial effort to resolve grievances to the complainant’s satisfaction will be undertaken by the KAC. The KACs will provide a listing of the grievances submitted and their resolution to the Kebele and Woreda Councils, who will then submit it to the Regional GRM focal person for final submission to the FSCO. Progress Status: KACs are established and operational in all PSNP kebeles, serving as the primary point of contact for any grievances and appeals related to the project. Communication materials (posters and brochures) for GRM have been developed, printed, and disseminated to various regions (Refer table 3). Although the GRM module is incorporated into the MIS, it has not been rolled out yet. The MIS rollout extended to over 300 woredas across all regions to all MIS experts. Tailored training for GSD experts will be conducted in the next budget year. Training, workshops Trainings on a variety of topics and issues will be provided to FSCO and other relevant government service providers. Issues covered will include sensitization to targeting, PIM, environment and PW, livelihoods, FM, labor issues, gender, case management and linkage, and GRM. PSNP clients will receive SBCC consultations to raise awareness about GSD and nutrition. PW clients who receive livelihood interventions will also participate in financial literacy and skills training. Technical skills training courses will be designed and offered to woreda-level stakeholders (e.g., WoLSA/ WoWSA, EW desk, Finance Office etc.), in line with the activities they intend to carry out as part of the program. Progress status: The following trainings have been conducted at the beginning of each FY including Targeting, PIM awareness, MIS, ESMF, GSD and nutrition, LASS, SBCC, Community Based Participatory Watershed Development, GIS/GPS, Livelihood, Financial Management, procurement, Monitoring and Evaluation, Review Program biannual review meetings will be organized to provide and collect periodic feedback on project implementation progress and identify and discuss new and emerging issues. Progress status: Joint Rapid Response Mission (RRM) quarterly and Joint Review and Implementation Support (JRIS) mission biannually to review project implementation, collect feedback, and implementation issues on timely basis. 25 6 Information Disclosure for SEASN Disclosing project information is essential for meaningful consultation on project design and for stakeholders to understand the potential opportunities of the project as well as its risks and impacts. To enable meaningful consultations with stakeholders, FSCO will disclose the following information: • The purpose, nature and scale of the project • The duration of proposed project activities • Information from the environmental and social assessment process, regarding potential risks and impacts of the project on local communities, including: o Proposals for mitigating risks and impacts o Potential risks and impacts that might disproportionately affect vulnerable and disadvantaged groups o Description of differentiated measures taken to avoid and minimize disproportionate risks and impacts • The proposed stakeholder engagement process, highlighting ways in which stakeholders can participate and contribute during project design and/or implementation • The time and venue of proposed public consultation meetings, and the process by which meetings will be notified, summarized and reported • The process and means by which grievances can be raised and addressed To disclose project information widely, FSCO will continue to use the existing webpage on the Ministry of Agriculture’s website. All future project-related social monitoring reports listed in the above sections will be disclosed on this webpage. An easy to understand guide to the terminology used in the social reports or documents will be provided on the website. All information brochures/fliers will be posted on the website. Contact details of the Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person will also be made available on the website. Upon disclosure of project information, provision will be made for secure portals where the general public and concerned stakeholders may submit their comments, observations and questions regarding the project. For information disclosed through meetings, instant feedback will be collected through designated rapporteurs who will be available during the meetings. Participating stakeholders shall also be given freedom to take their own minutes of the proceedings and share a copy with the rapporteurs. After the deadline for submission has passed, comments placed in suggestion boxes will be collected from the sites for consolidation, analysis and inclusion into the project documents. A summary of how comments were taken into account will be made and shared with the stakeholders through project implementation inception meetings once concerned authorities make the final decision on the project. Progress Status: The project has been employing various channels through posters, brochures, woreda information desks, and kebele notice boards to disseminate and disclose information including consultations, with relevant information about the project including targeting and annual update criteria, GRM resolution procedures, beneficiaries’ entitlements, gender and social development provisions, roles and responsibilities of implementors and beneficiaries, and other components of the project. In addition, the project documents such as E&S, legal and financial agreements have been disclosed through the MoA website. Table 9 provides information on other means of project disclosure. 26 Table 9: Information Disclosure for SEASN With Channels of Engagement Frequency and Timing Purpose Whom Engagement Methods FSCO All Once, beginning of National Meetings To launch project stakeholders implementation project launch and disclose meeting information to general public FSCO Regional Once, beginning of Project launch Meetings To launch project stakeholders implementation meeting and disclose information to general public Woreda Community Throughout Information Fliers, To disclose and implementation table brochures, information about Kebele FS posters, GRM SEASN and its offices summary GRM to local communities in relevant languages KFSTF/ PSNP Annual GRM Community To ensure clients are DAs/ KAC clients/ throughout gathering/Fac informed about the Community implementation e to face project level GRM. meetings FSCO All During project Project website Key project To disclose stakeholders implementation updates, information about information SEASN to general about GRM public 27 7 Estimated Budget for Information Disclosure The FSCO, through its Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person, will be responsible for planning and implementation of stakeholder engagement activities, as well as other relevant outreach and disclosure activities. In order to ensure successful SEP implementation, a series of capacity building activities are necessary for which the project has to provide adequate funding. The stakeholder engagement activities so far mentioned may be part of other project documents, so it is possible that they have also been budgeted for in other plans. A tentative budget for the project’s information disclosure is reflected in Table 10. This table will be updated to include all stakeholder activities, including workshops, trainings, and program review and monitoring activities. Table 10: Information Disclosure Activities – Estimated Budget (TBD) (5 years) Total cost Update Stakeholder Engagement Activities Quantity Unit Cost, USD # of years (USD) Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person 1 12,000 5 60,000 Assigned Information Disclosure Project launch meeting at national level 1 5,000 1 5,000 Completed Project launch meeting at regional level 8 3,000 1 24,000 Completed Program wide community gatherings on 1 2M 1 2M Completed project design and GRM (via cascading through government structures) Information Desk and communications 487 5 10,000 Completed materials at woreda Total 2,099,000 28 8 Grievance Redress Mechanism A grievance redress mechanism is currently in place for the PSNP, and modernizing this paper-based system through the establishment of an MIS is envisioned under Component 3 of the project: Enhanced Service Delivery. However, until the MIS supported GRM module becomes operational across all PSNP woredas by end of 2024, the current paper-based GRM will continue to serve as per the agreed standards. FSCO is responsible for managing the GRM by assigning a Stakeholder Engagement Focal Person at the federal level. This focal person will communicate with the regional GRM focal persons assigned by the Regional BoA, who will receive listings of appeals and their resolution from the Woreda Food Security Desk, which in turn would have received it from the Woreda Council, Kebele Council, and KAC. Through this arrangement, FSCO should be able to address and report on grievances raised at the grassroots level. 1.1 Grievance Resolution Process Information about the GRM will be shared during the community gatherings, and posters will be displayed in public spaces such as government offices and health posts. Information about the GRM will also be posted on FSCO’s webpage under the MoA website. Progress Update: During annual participatory PW plan approval and annual update the community is informed about the existence of the project GRM and KAC. A total of 165,640 posters and 534,960 brochures have been printed and distributed to regions. The overall process for the GRM is comprised of five steps. Step 1: Uptake. At the Kebele level, project stakeholders are able to provide feedback and submit complaints through the KAC, which is comprised of several members.68 Keble Manager; chair of the KAC,will be available at kebele office once a week to receive grievances in person resolve. Standardized intake forms for acknowledgement receipt and grievance listing is developed and distributed. Step 2: Sorting and processing. Complaints and feedback is compiled by the Kebele Manager/DA and recorded in a register. Cases should be resolved within one month of being heard. 68 KAC is comprised of the following: 1 elected Kebele Council member (not the chairperson), 1 DA, 1 or 2 members of the Community Care Coalition (if existing in the kebele, 1 of whom should be female), 1 health extension worker, one social worker (if represented in the kebele and if available female), two elder representatives (one of whom should be female). One Development Agent (DA). Aside from the DA and Kebele Council member, everyone else is a volunteer and may or may not be literate. To mitigate this, the project will establish a literate youth community facilitator as a member of the KAC to serve as its secretariat. 29 The project GRM manual was developed and Kebele level PIM translated into six regional working languages (Amharic, Afaan Oromo, Sidamu Affu, Afi Somali, Afar, and Tigrigna and soft copies of the documents have been disseminated to all stakeholders. Cases will initially be sorted and processed into the following four categories: i) appeals (disagreement with decisions passed by program implementers); ii) implementation concerns (dissatisfaction with the quality of implementation); iii) program design (procedures and parameters set by the National level or the Region that requires changes to the program); iv) transparency and right based (cases that filing and investigating must ensure greater delicacy and anonymity). Step 3. Acknowledgement and follow up. Kebele Manager/DA will facilitate timelier and more proactive follow up of cases. Standardized intake forms for acknowledgement receipt and grievance listing will also be distributed. Step 4. Verification, investigation and resolution. The KAC will be responsible for collecting additional information and investigating through field visits, consultation with community elders and residents and cross-checking documents (PIM, PSNP GRM Manual). When relevant, the KAC will reach out to confer with the social worker at WoLSA/WoWSA. A template document is provided to the KAC so that they can document their verification, investigation and resolution process. The KAC will give resolution to the appeals and send a listing of the cases to the Kebele and Woreda Council, who in turn will validate the recommendation and forward the appeal to the Woreda Food Security Task Force for implementation. Step 5. Feedback and Monitoring and Evaluation. The KAC will inform the grievant about the resolution of their appeal and their right to escalate the appeal if they are not satisfied with the decision. Within four weeks of the complaint being heard, the KAC will report and provide a listing of all the grievances heard and resolved to the Kebele Council, who in turn will share the list to the Woreda Council. In woredas where the MIS system is operational, the Woreda Food Security Desk will be responsible for inputting the grievances into the system. In woredas where the MIS is not yet operational, the Woreda Food Security Desk will forward the appeals listing to the regional GRM focal person, and they in turn will forward it to FSCO. 1.2 Grievance Logs KACs will maintain grievance logs, and regularly submit copies to the Kebele and Woreda Councils, who will then distribute upwards. FSCO will maintain a master grievance log. The grievance logs will include the following information. • Individual reference number • Name of the person submitting the complaint, or other feedback, address and/or contact information (unless the complaint has been submitted anonymously) • Details of the complaint or feedback • Date of the complaint • Name of committee person who registered the complaint (acknowledge to the complainant, investigate, propose resolutions, etc.) 30 • Details of proposed resolution, including person(s) or body (e.g., WFSTF) who will be responsible for authorizing and implementing any corrective actions that are part of the proposed resolution • Date when proposed resolution was communicated to the complainant (unless anonymous) • Date when the complainant acknowledged, in writing if possible, being informed of the proposed resolution • Details of whether the complainant was satisfied with the resolution, and whether the complaint can be closed out • Date when resolution is implemented (if any, whether successful or otherwise. If unsuccessful, reason it wasn’t resolved). 31 9 Monitoring and Reporting The Stakeholder Engagement Plan will be periodically revised and updated as necessary in the course of SEASN project implementation to ensure that the information presented herein is consistent, and that the identified methods of engagement remain appropriate and effective in relation to the project context. Any major changes to the project related activities and to its schedule will be duly reflected in the SEP. Annual and quarterly internal reports on public grievances, enquiries, and related incidents, together with the status of implementation of associated corrective/preventative actions will be collated by responsible staff and referred to FSCO’s senior management. The report will provide a mechanism for assessing both the number and the nature of complaints and requests for information, along with the Project’s ability to address those in a timely and effective manner. Information on public engagement activities undertaken by the project during the year may be conveyed to stakeholders described as follows. • A number of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be monitored by the project on a regular basis, including the following parameters: o Number of public consultations held by woredas on beneficiary entitlements (annually) o Number of communications materials on beneficiary rights developed and disseminated to clients o Number of press materials published/broadcasted in the local, regional, and national media. Central Point of Contact The point of contact for the Stakeholder Engagement Program is: Name: [Wro Seida Kedir] Organization: Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security Coordination Office Address: Email: seiedaware@yahoo.com Telephone: 0911599511 Website: www.moa.gov.et 32 33