Page  1
INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET 
APPRAISAL STAGE 
 
I.  Basic Information
 
Date prepared/updated:  02/18/2010 
Report No.:  AC5053
1. Basic Project Data  
 
Country:  Ghana 
Project ID:  P115247 
Project Name:  Ghana---Social Opportunities Project 
Task Team Leader:  Qaiser M. Khan 
Estimated Appraisal Date: February 22, 
2010 
Estimated Board Date: May 27, 2010 
Managing Unit:  AFTSP 
Lending Instrument:  Specific Investment 
Loan 
Sector:  Other social services (90%);Public administration- Other social services 
(5%);Public administration- Agriculture, fishing and forestry (5%) 
Theme:  Social safety nets (70%);Social risk mitigation (15%);Rural services and 
infrastructure (7%);Rural non-farm income generation (5%);Natural disaster management 
(3%) 
IBRD Amount (US$m.): 
0.00 
IDA Amount (US$m.): 
89.00 
GEF Amount (US$m.): 
0.00 
PCF Amount (US$m.): 
0.00 
Other financing amounts by source:  
 BORROWER/RECIPIENT 
2.40 
 Financing 
Gap 
0.30
2.70 
Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment 
Simplified Processing 
Simple [X] 
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 
1. 
The proposed Project Development Objectives (PDO) of the Social Opportunities 
Project (SOP) are to improve targeting in social protection spending, increase access to 
conditional cash transfers nationwide, increase access to employment and cash-earning 
opportunities for the rural poor during the agricultural off-season, and improve economic 
infrastructure in target districts.  
 
2.
The project will increase opportunities for the poor to help themselves by: (i) 
financing public works using labor intensive construction methods that create 
employment, with priority given to the poorest districts of the country, predominately 
located in the three northern regions; (ii) providing incremental support to scale up the 
conditional cash transfer program (LEAP), whereby the poorest households are paid to 
participate in education and health services; (iii) improving links between disaster 
response planning and the utilization of social safety nets; and (iv) developing the 
government#s capacity to implement safety net programs both at the central level and 
Page  2
through decentralized structures (i.e., primarily District Assemblies). In addition, the 
rehabilitation and/or development of small-scale productive infrastructure in target 
districts are/is expected to create secondary employment and income-generation effects  
 
3.
A
prudent targeting strategy is the single-most critical element for successful 
implementation of the project, in particular for the LIPWs. The project will use a 
combination of geographical and household selection. In view of the fact that geographic 
targeting will result in selection of the poorest districts (i.e., those with poverty incidence 
as high as 80 percent), the approach to targeting households for the public works program 
is to ensure a fair distribution of opportunities between all those who can work and wish 
to take part. Extensive consultations carried out during project preparation confirmed a 
strong preference for the community itself to be involved in overseeing the distribution of 
opportunities for work. The communities placed a high value on transparency and 
involving community institutions in assuring accountability. Ensuring gender equity will 
be a basic principle.  
 
4.
The will be implemented over a five year period and includes  five components: 
(i) rationalizing the National Social Protection Strategy; (ii) labor intensive public works 
(LIPW); (iii) supporting the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty Program 
(LEAP); (iv) building capacity at the central and district levels to plan and implement 
LIPW and LEAP and to strengthen the decentralization process and national disaster risk 
management programs; and (v) project management and coordination.  
 
5. 
The total cost of the proposed project is US$90 million. The project would be 
financed through a Sector Investment Loan comprising an IDA Credit of US$87.4 
million equivalent including ordinary IDA resources of US$40 million and special Crisis 
Response Window resources of US$47.4 million. The GOG contribution would be 
equivalent to US$2.6 million. Should additional funds be available from interested co-
financiers, the number of districts covered by labor intensive public works (LIPW) can be 
increased using the poverty ranking of the different districts as the criteria of selection. 
Each new district added to the LIPW will cost approximately US$2.5 million.  
 
6.
Details on project components are provided below.  
 
Component One:  Rationalize National Social Protection Policy.  
 
(US$3 million, including an IDA contribution of US$3 million)  
 
7.
This component will support to the government to help redirect its social 
protection expenditures to the most effective areas and reduce those in less effective 
activities. This would allow greater coverage of the poor despite current fiscal 
constraints. To facilitate the process, the component would finance technical assistance, 
studies, training, and Secretariat services. This would require the cooperation of many 
ministries and it would be best to give the lead to a non-sectoral ministry without any 
programs of its own in social protection but which would have the necessary interest and 
clout to lead and include all involved ministries. The best candidate for this would be the 
Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MFEP) with implementation services being 
provided by the project management and coordination team in Ministry of Local 
Government and Rural Development (MLGRD).  
 
Component Two:  Labor Intensive Public Works (LIPW).  
 
(US$54.4 million, including an IDA contribution of US$54.4 million)  
Page  3
8. 
The objective of this component is to provide targeted rural poor households with 
access to employment and income-earning opportunities. This pertains particularly to 
seasonal labor demand shortfalls that is, the agricultural off-season from November to 
March/April, and in response to external shocks, through rehabilitation and maintenance 
of public or community infrastructure. The aim is to maximize local employment while 
rehabilitating productive infrastructure assets, which have potential to: (i) generate local 
secondary employment effects and (ii) protect households and communities against 
external shocks. The component will establish a LIPW-based social protection scalable 
instrument that provides quick-response mechanisms against external shocks, such as 
floods or droughts, during a crisis. The payment modality for LIPWs will be cash. The 
scope of works eligible for LIPWs will be defined based on labor content and scope to 
generate significant local employment.  
 
9.
The poor state of infrastructure remains a major obstacle to economic 
development in rural areas, especially in the northern regions. For example, it has been 
estimated that about 60 percent of the 11,800km of rural roads and a majority of over 900 
small (earth) dams and dugouts in the three northern regions are in poor to fair condition. 
It is expected that LIPWs will target assets that are both highly appreciated by 
communities  and allow for timing of labor inputs during the dry season:  
 
a. 
Rehabilitation and maintenance of rural feeder and access roads: Although the 
#utility# value of access roads was not rated as highly as dams, the fact that the labor 
opportunities made available are sufficient to allow for people to plan a dry season #at 
home# is highly appreciated, as well as the possibility of earning sufficient cash to 
strengthen the base of household livelihoods.   
 
b.
Rehabilitation of small dams and related public infrastructure:  Where dams allow 
for dry season irrigated agriculture, it has a dramatic impact on local livelihoods, greatly 
reducing the incentive to migrate away from the region during the dry season.  
 
c. 
Dugouts are of great significance in much of the northern region, where 
underground water sources are insufficient to provide for domestic and livestock needs 
through the dry season.  
 
10.
The LIPWs will be selected from the Medium-Term District Development Plans 
(MTDDPs) and/or related Area Council Action Plans (ACAPs) based on a set of criteria 
to: (i) maximize rural employment (high labor content); (ii) create or rehabilitate public 
or collective (i.e., community) assets; (iii) create or rehabilitate productive assets capable 
of generating secondary employment and economic development within local 
communities; (iv) undertake LIPWs within reasonable proximity of target populations; 
(v) avoid competing with labor demand from the agricultural sector (i.e., appropriate 
timing); (vi) comply with social and environmental safeguards; and (vii) ensure equal 
opportunity for women and men to participate. However, it will be necessary to review 
the MTDDPs and ACAPs in the selected project districts at the start of the project to 
update them and ensure that the respective project activities would be fully integrated 
with other ongoing feeder road and small dam rehabilitation activities that may be 
financed by other sources.  
 
11.
In line with government#s ongoing decentralization process, the labor intensive 
public works will be implemented through District Assemblies and by relevant line 
agencies like the Department of Feeder Roads, the Government Irrigation Development 
Page  4
Agency, the Department of Social Welfare, and the National Disaster Management 
Organization.  
 
Component Three:  Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty Program (LEAP).  
 
(US$20 million, including an IDA contribution of US$20 million)  
 
12.
The objective of this component is to support the full rollout of the pilot phase of 
the LEAP program by strengthening its management and administration, improving 
targeting, and providing incentives to ensure that GOG's annual budget allocations are 
sufficient.  
 
13.
There is recognition within the government and among the partners of the need to 
build additional capacity within the LEAP administration at the national, regional, 
district, and community levels to (i) allow for the rapid expansion of the program and (ii) 
adjust the program to better target the neediest. To this extent, an operational review of 
LEAP early in 2010 will prepare an Action Plan. DFID, USAID, and UNICEF are 
expected to support this action plan in the fields of capacity building to improve 
performance and effectiveness of the implementing agencies, as well as strengthening 
accountability. The project would also contribute in the form of additional 
complementary support by providing equipment, training, monitoring and evaluation 
support, and any additional technical support necessary to improve management, 
targeting, and the use of Information and Communication Tools (ICTs). Furthermore, the 
project will specifically aim to improve targeting of LEAP and its self-help aspect by 
supporting stronger enforcement of human development requirements#especially for 
households with children of school age. SOP will take the long view of building a nimble 
and flexible LEAP operation in order to meet national emergencies such as food 
shortages and famine.  
 
14.
In addition, the project will finance incentive payments to the unified treasury 
account to assure that GOG each year allocates sufficient budget for LEAP to meet its 
target of 164,370 households by 2012, and will thereby contribute to the improved human 
capital outcomes for these households. This will be done through conditional 
Disbursement-Linked Incentives (DLI), which will include: (i) success in reaching the 
target households as evidenced by actual expenditures and (ii) progress on implementing 
the Action Plan for LEAP. To ensure that these expenditures are mainstreamed into the 
GOG budget, the IDA-DLI payments will not exceed one-third of the actual budget 
expenditures in any given year of the LEAP program.  
 
Component Four:  Capacity Building.  
 
(US$5.4 million, including an IDA contribution of US$5.4 million)  
 
15.
The objective of this component is to create capacity at the national and local 
levels to implement the National Social Protection Strategy (NSPS) in selected project 
districts, with the view of enabling a gradual scaling-up and targeting at the national 
level. This component will therefore implicitly strengthen GOG#s decentralization 
program. Five distinct sets of capacity-building activities will be supported.  
 
16.
Establishing a LIPW-supportive policy and institutional framework 
(US$260,000). The project will support GOG to amend and adapt the existing policy and 
regulatory framework to stimulate a wider use of labor-based methods, both as social 
protection and infrastructure-generation mechanisms. The following specific activities 
will be undertaken: (i) a detailed review of the current policy and regulatory framework 
as it relates to labor-based methods; (ii) national consultations with all relevant 
Page  5
stakeholders; (iii) drafting of a new framework and a new bill on labor-based methods, to 
be presented to Parliament for approval; and (iv) an information and sensitization 
campaign, at the national and regional levels, for decision-makers, concerned private 
operators, and the population at-large.  
 
17.
Capacity building to support LIPW implementation (US$1,410,000)  is aimed at 
decision-makers, DA technical staff, relevant line agencies, and private contractors and 
follows the below breakdown:  
 
#
Rehabilitation and maintenance of roads (US$1,410,000):  The project will 
support the re-establishment of the training program for contractors and relevant district 
and regional road engineers by the Koforidua Training Center, which was recently 
renovated, and the terms of reference for course designs have already been prepared by 
the International Labor Organization (ILO); and  
 
#
Rehabilitation of small dams and water storage infrastructure (US$100,000):  The 
project will support limited dam and irrigation design and construction training to 
complement that being planned for 2010 under the IFAD-AfDB#funded Northern Rural 
Growth Project (NRGP).  
 
18.
Capacity building to support implementation of LEAP (US$500,000) to 
complement ongoing technical support financed by DFID and UNICEF/USAID as 
needed, with the objective of strengthening and improving the targeting and monitoring 
of the government#s social protection instruments and programs (e.g., LEAP). The 
project will also support the capacity of the central unit of the Ministry of Employment 
and Social Welfare to plan, develop, and monitor social protection and District 
Assemblies to implement the programs.  
 
19.
Capacity building for disaster risk management (US$2,350,000). There is a close 
link between disaster response planning and the utilization of social safety nets to 
effectively respond to the needs of those who are affected. The project will therefore 
support a series of inter-related capacity-building activities in the three northern regions 
and in proposed project districts: (i) strengthening national risk management strategies 
and institutions; (ii) capacity building for risk and vulnerability assessment, early 
warning, and contingency planning at the district level; (iii) public awareness raising at 
the district and community levels; and (iv) strengthening of emergency preparedness and 
response at the local and community levels. The activities supported by the project would 
be part of the overall national program of the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and 
Recovery (GFDRR) and would be integrated in its medium-term and annual work plans.  
 
20.
District and regional capacity building (US$750,000) to strengthen the technical 
and management capacities of the three Regional Coordinating Committees (RCCs), ten 
to fifteen District Assemblies (DAs), and at least two Area Councils (ACs) in each of the 
selected districts to: (i) identify, prioritize, and plan their development needs#in particular 
in terms of rural infrastructure and disaster risk management; and (ii) strengthen fiduciary 
capacities (i.e., financial management, procurement, and monitoring and evaluation). 
Capacity-building support will be implemented through on-the-job-training and specific 
short training courses tailored to the needs of RCCs and DAs.  
 
Component Five:  Project Management and Coordination.  
 
(US$6 million, including an IDA contribution of US$5.8 million)  
 
21.
The institutions, structures, and capacities of the Government of Ghana will serve 
as the foundation for project management and coordination. With the aim of bolstering 
Page  6
GOG operations, the Social Opportunities Project will fund costs associated with: project 
management and coordination; relevant technical assistance; project monitoring and 
evaluation; consultancy services; communication and training; equipment and vehicles; 
and incremental operating costs. In addition, the component will include the cost of 
annual impact evaluation surveys, including a baseline study and an end-of-the-project 
comprehensive impact evaluation study (US$1 million).   
 
3. Project Description 
The proposed project of a five year implementation period has five components: (i) 
rationalizing the National Social Protection Strategy; (ii) labor intensive public works 
(LIPW); (iii) supporting the Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty Program 
(LEAP); (iv) building capacity at the central and district levels to plan and implement 
LIPW and LEAP and to strengthen the decentralization process and national disaster risk 
management programs; and (v) project management and coordination.  
 
The total cost of the proposed project is US$90 million. The project would be financed 
through a Sector Investment Loan comprising an IDA Credit of US$87.4 million 
equivalent including ordinary IDA resources of US$40 million and special Crisis 
Response Window resources of US$47.4 million. The GOG contribution would be 
equivalent to US$2.6 million. Should additional funds be available from interested co-
financiers, the number of districts covered by labor intensive public works (LIPW) can be 
increased using the poverty ranking of the different districts as the criteria of selection. 
Each new district added to the LIPW will cost approximately US$2.5 million.  
 
Details on project components are provided below.  
 
Component One:  Rationalize National Social Protection Policy.  
 
(US$3 million, including an IDA contribution of US$3 million)  
 
This component would provide support to the government to help redirect its social 
protection expenditures to the most effective areas and reduce those in less effective 
activities. This would allow greater coverage of the poor despite current fiscal 
constraints. To facilitate the process, the component would finance technical assistance, 
studies, training, and Secretariat services to facilitate the process. This would require the 
cooperation of many Ministries and it would be best to give the lead to a non-sectoral 
ministry without any programs of its own in social protection but which would have the 
necessary interest and clout to lead but including all involved ministries. The best 
candidate for this would be the Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MFEP) with 
implementation services being provided by the project management and coordination 
team in Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD).  
 
Component Two:  Labor Intensive Public Works (LIPW).  
 
(US$47 million, including an IDA contribution of US$45 million)  
 
The objective of this component is to provide targeted rural poor households with access 
to employment and income-earning opportunities. This pertains particularly to seasonal 
labor demand shortfalls that is, the agricultural off-season from November to 
March/April. and in response to external shocks, through rehabilitation and maintenance 
of public or community infrastructure. The aim is to maximize local employment while 
rehabilitating productive infrastructure assets, which have potential to: (a) generate local 
secondary employment effects; and (ii) protect households and communities against 
Page  7
external shocks. The component will establish a LIPW-based social protection scalable 
instrument that provides quick-response mechanisms against external shocks, such as 
floods or droughts, during a crisis. The payment modality for LIPWs will be cash. The 
scope of works eligible for LIPWs will be defined based on their labor content and scope 
to generate significant local employment.  
 
The poor state of infrastructure remains a major obstacle to economic development in 
rural areas, especially in the northern regions. For example, it has been estimated that 
about 60 percent of the 11,800km of rural roads and a majority of over 900 small (earth) 
dams and dugouts in the three northern regions are in poor to fair condition. It is expected 
that LIPWs will target mainly the following assets that are both highly appreciated by 
communities  and allow for timing of labor inputs during the dry season:  
 
#
Rehabilitation and maintenance of rural feeder and access roads: Although the 
#utility# value of access roads was not rated as highly as dams, the fact that the labor 
opportunities made available are sufficient to allow for people to plan a dry season #at 
home# is highly appreciated, as well as the possibility of earning sufficient cash to 
strengthen the base of household livelihoods.   
 
#
Rehabilitation of small dams and related public infrastructure:  Where dams allow 
for dry season irrigated agriculture, it has a dramatic impact on local livelihoods, greatly 
reducing the incentive to migrate away from the region during the dry season.  
 
#
Dugouts are of great significance in much of the northern region, where 
underground water sources are insufficient to provide for domestic and livestock needs 
through the dry season.  
 
The LIPWs will be selected from the Medium-Term District Development Plans 
(MTDDPs) and/or related Area Council Action Plans (ACAPs) based on a set of criteria 
to: (a) maximize rural employment (high labor content); (ii) create or rehabilitate public 
or collective (i.e., community) assets; (iii) create or rehabilitate productive assets capable 
of generating secondary employment and economic development within local 
communities; (iv) undertake LIPWs within reasonable proximity of target populations; 
(v) avoid competing with labor demand from the agricultural sector (i.e., appropriate 
timing); (vi) comply with social and environmental safeguards; and (vii) ensure equal 
opportunity for women and men to participate. However, it will be necessary to review 
the MTDDPs and ACAPs in the selected project districts at the start of the project to 
update them and ensure that the respective project activities would be fully integrated 
with other ongoing feeder road and small dam rehabilitation activities that may be 
financed by other sources.  
 
In line with government#s ongoing decentralization process, the labor intensive public 
works will be implemented through District Assemblies and by relevant line agencies like 
the Department of Feeder Roads, the Government Irrigation Development Agency, the 
Department of Social Welfare, and the National Disaster Management Organization.  
 
Component Three:  Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty Program (LEAP).  
 
(US$20 million, including an IDA contribution of US$20 million)  
 
The objective of this component is to support the full rollout of the pilot phase of the 
LEAP program by strengthening its management and administration, improving 
targeting, and by providing incentives to ensure that GOG's annual budget allocations are 
sufficient.  
Page  8
There is recognition within the government and among the partners of the need to build 
additional capacity within the LEAP administration at the national, regional, district, and 
community levels to (i) allow for the rapid expansion of the program and (ii) adjust the 
program to better target the neediest. To this extent, an operational review of LEAP early 
in 2010 will prepare an Action Plan. DFID, USAID, and UNICEF are expected to 
support this action plan in the fields of capacity building to improve performance and 
effectiveness of the implementing agencies, as well as strengthening accountability. The 
project would also contribute in the form of additional complementary support by 
providing equipment, training, monitoring and evaluation support, and any additional 
technical support necessary to improve management, targeting, and the use of 
Information and Communication Tools (ICTs). Furthermore, the project will specifically 
aim to improve targeting of LEAP and its self-help aspect by supporting stronger 
enforcement of human development requirements#especially for households with 
children of school age. SOP will take the long view of building a nimble and flexible 
LEAP operation in order to meet national emergencies such as food shortages and 
famine.  
 
In addition, the project will finance incentive payments to the unified treasury account 
to assure that GOG each year allocates sufficient budget for LEAP to meet its target of 
164,370 households by 2012, and will thereby contribute to the improved human capital 
outcomes for these households. This will be done through conditional Disbursement-
Linked Incentives, which will include: (i) success in reaching the target households as 
evidenced by actual expenditures; and (ii) progress on implementing the Action Plan for 
LEAP. To ensure that these expenditures are mainstreamed into the GOG budget, the 
IDA-DLI payments will not exceed one-third of the actual budget expenditures in any 
given year of the LEAP program.  
 
Component Four:  Capacity Building.  
 
(US$5.4 million, including an IDA contribution of US$5.4 million)  
 
The objective of this component is to create capacity at the national and local levels to 
implement the NSPS in selected project districts, with the view of enabling a gradual 
scaling-up and targeting at the national level. This component will therefore implicitly 
strengthen GOG#s decentralization program. Five distinct sets of capacity-building 
activities will be supported.  
 
Establishing a LIPW supportive policy and institutional framework (US$260,000). The 
project will support GOG to amend and adapt the existing policy and regulatory 
framework to stimulate a wider use of labor-based methods, both as social protection and 
infrastructure-generation mechanisms. The following specific activities will be 
undertaken: (i) a detailed review of the current policy and regulatory framework as it 
relates to labor based methods; (ii) national consultations with all relevant stakeholders; 
(iii) drafting of a new framework and a new bill on labor-based methods, to be presented 
to Parliament for approval; and (iv) an information and sensitization campaign, at the 
national and regional levels, for decision-makers, concerned private operators, and the 
population at-large.  
 
Capacity building to support LIPW implementation (US$1,410,000)  is aimed at 
decision-makers, DA technical staff, relevant line agencies, and private contractors and 
follows the below breakdown:  
Page  9
#
Rehabilitation and maintenance of roads (US$1,410,000):  The project will 
support the re-establishment of the training program for contractors and relevant district 
and regional road engineers by the Koforidua Training Center, which was recently 
renovated, and the terms of reference for course designs have already been prepared by 
the International Labor Organization (ILO); and  
 
#
Rehabilitation of small dams and water storage infrastructure (US$100,000):  The 
project will support limited dam and irrigation design and construction training to 
complement that being planned for 2010 under the IFAD-AfDB#funded Northern Rural 
Growth Project (NRGP).  
 
Capacity building to support implementation of LEAP (US$500,000) to complement 
ongoing technical support financed by DFID and UNICEF/USAID as needed, with the 
objective of strengthening and improving the targeting and monitoring of the 
government#s social protection instruments and programs (e.g., LEAP). The project will 
also support the capacity of the central unit of the Ministry of Employment and Social 
Welfare to plan, develop, and monitor social protection and District Assemblies to 
implement the programs.  
 
Capacity building for disaster risk management (US$2,350,000). There is a close link 
between disaster response planning and the utilization of social safety nets to effectively 
respond to the needs of those who are affected. The project will therefore support a series 
of inter-related capacity-building activities in the three northern regions and in proposed 
project districts: (a) strengthening national risk management strategies and institutions; 
(ii) capacity building for risk and vulnerability assessment, early warning, and 
contingency planning at the district level; (iii) public awareness raising at the district and 
community levels; and (iv) strengthening of emergency preparedness and response at the 
local and community levels. The activities supported by the project would be part of the 
overall national program of the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery 
(GFDRR) and would be integrated in its medium-term and annual work plans.  
 
District and regional capacity building (US$750,000) to strengthen the technical and 
management capacities of the three Regional Coordinating Committees (RCCs), ten to 
fifteen District Assemblies (DAs), and at least two Area Councils (ACs) in each of the 
selected districts to: (i) identify, prioritize, and plan their development needs, in particular 
in terms of rural infrastructure and disaster risk management; and (ii) strengthen fiduciary 
capacities (i.e., financial management, procurement, and monitoring and evaluation). 
Capacity-building support will be implemented through on-the-job-training and specific 
short training courses tailored to the needs of RCCs and DAs.  
 
Component Five:  Project Management and Coordination.  
 
(US$6 million, including an IDA contribution of US$5.8 million)  
 
The institutions, structures, and capacities of the Government of Ghana will serve as the 
foundation for project management and coordination. With the aim of bolstering GOG 
operations, the Social Opportunities Project will fund costs associated with: project 
management and coordination; relevant technical assistance; project monitoring and 
evaluation; consultancy services; communication and training; equipment and vehicles; 
and incremental operating costs. In addition, the component will include the cost of 
annual impact evaluation surveys, including a baseline study and an end-of-the-project 
comprehensive impact evaluation study (US$1 million).   
 
Page  10
4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard 
analysis 
22. 
Three of the administrative regions in the Northern Savannah Zone: Upper East 
Region, Upper West Region, and Northern Region.   
 
5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists 
Ms Nyaneba E. Nkrumah (AFTEN) 
Ms Beatrix Allah-Mensah (AFTCS) 
 
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: 
Social: The World Banks ASPEN environmental screening identified the project as 
category B. This means that impacts are likely to occur but such impacts can be mitigated 
or avoided altogether. To this extent, the project triggered four safeguards policies: (i) the 
involuntary resettlement, OP/BP 4.12, (ii) the Environmental Assessment, OP/BP 4.01 
and(iii)Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37.For these triggered policies, the Government of 
Ghana has prepared a Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) and an Environmental and 
Social Management Framework (ESMF. A Dam safety report for the rehabilitation of 
existing dams will be done shortly.  
 
The main purpose of the RPF is to clarify applicable resettlement principles, 
organizational arrangements, and design criteria. Its objectives are consistent with 
avoiding or minimizing involuntary resettlement or land acquisition where possible; 
where unavoidable, ensuring that compensation and resettlement are designed and 
implemented with sustainability as the prime focus; and ensuring that affected persons 
are supported to improve their livelihood or at least restore them to pre-displacement 
levels. The RPF therefore sets out the legal and administrative framework, which 
includes the systems of land ownership and tenure as well as the socio-economic 
characteristics of beneficiary districts. It also details the consultation processes, eligibility 
criteria, and methodology for valuation of assets and a clear entitlement policy and 
compensation payment processes. In order to ensure that implementation of the RPF is on 
Page  11
course and accountability aligned, the RFP has articulated monitoring and evaluation 
with clear delineations of monitoring indicators and the responsibilities of agencies.  
 
The RPF outlined sections on organizational arrangements for implementation and 
monitoring and a template for the design of a resettlement action plan should that become 
necessary after identification of exact project sites or locations. The project will prepare a 
resettlement action plan or an abbreviated resettlement action plan (given the number of 
affected people) if land-seizure, displacement, or resettlement occurs or when peoples 
livelihoods are affected due to limited access to assets or source of livelihood during 
implementation. The RPF outlines measures for building the capacity of officials 
responsible for implementing the RPF.  
 
Environment. The environmental impacts of the project cut across the pre-construction, 
construction, and post-construction phases of sub-project implementation. The 
environmental analysis indicates that most negative impacts are likely to be minimal and 
largely related to the construction phase. These impacts include air and dust emissions, 
noise and vibration, open pits/trenches, disposal of construction waste, and public 
safety/health concerns.  
 
The project will also fund the rehabilitation of small dams, and the safety of these dams, 
pre- and post-rehabilitation, will need to be technically assessed. The dams, however, are 
small, pre-existing dams, and the borrower will arrange for an independent dam specialist 
to: (i) inspect and evaluate the safety status of the existing dam, its appurtenances, and its 
performance history; (ii) review and evaluate the owner's operation and maintenance 
procedures; and (iii) provide a written report of findings and recommendations for any 
remedial work or safety-related measures necessary to upgrade the existing dam to an 
acceptable standard of safety. For small dams such as the ones in this project (less than 
15 m), generic dam safety measures designed by qualified engineers are adequate. Other 
negative impacts related to dams include siltation and the modification of flow of water 
courses, stream drainage issues, and possible water quality degradation. The ESMF has 
included a set of mitigation measures to address these issues, and where the negative 
impact may be more serious, an environmental management plan (EMP) will be 
developed as indicated in the ESMF to address the impacts.  
 
The ESMF addresses both Ghanian and World Bank requirements. Of the former, the 
legal, policy, and administrative framework are enumerated at the national level. The 
latter covers safeguard policies as well as descriptions of environmental and social 
baseline conditions. The ESMF also discusses the potential social and environmental 
impacts and the screening processes for identifying these impacts.  
 
To avert or minimize these impacts before, during, and after sub-project 
implementation, the ESMF outlines mitigation measures for each possible negative 
impact and the costs associated with mitigation and safeguard training, and a list of 
responsible actors within the ministries to monitor compliance. In terms of mitigation, the 
ESMF contains draft environmental and social clauses that will be used by the project to 
ensure that the contractor complies with environmental and social safeguards in the 
project. In addition, prior to any construction work, the ESMF also provides an 
environmental screening checklist that should be used for every sub-project to identify 
potential negative impacts prior to construction. The district engineer, with support from 
the EPA, will be responsible for ensuring that contractors comply with environmental 
mitigation measures put in place to minimize any negative impact (e.g., dust, noise, and 
Page  12
land erosion/degradation) that may disturb the natural habitat. To ensure this, further 
checklists and monitoring will occur by an environmental specialist (assigned or 
recruited). Finally, reporting to the project and the Bank will ensure oversight of 
mitigation measures.   
 
2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future 
activities in the project area: 
The initial assessment noted that the project will have more positive than negative social 
impacts. With the positive impact, it is noted that the project will bring about cohesion in 
the community and serve as a rallying point for communities benefitting from the project 
to begin engaging in more empowering processes for themselves as individuals and for 
their communities as a whole. It will lead to income for the individuals which will 
translate into the wider community during the agricultural off-season and reduce the level 
of vulnerabilities. This can increase the potential for social capital and build stronger 
communities, which will contribute to ownership and sustainablility. In addition, the 
project has the potential of curbing the youth migration to the South as an annual affair 
due to the habitual lean agricultural season. On the negative side, the potential exists for 
tension between adjacent communities where one is benefiting and not the other. 
Similarly, the expectation from communities could be overly high with regard to the 
overall benefit from the project at the individual and community levels. The ESMF has 
outlined measures to address these issues, among others including sensitization, 
information dissemination, and participation and inclusion of beneficiaries or their 
representatives at every stage of the project preparation and implementation. These steps 
will ensure that the possible negative impacts are not only mitigated but are in fact 
positively harnessed for overall benefits.  
 
The social assessment exercises carried out to inform the project design suggested that 
all the selected activities under the LEAP and LIPW components will address compelling 
problems of poverty in northern Ghana. At the same time, there are many poor people in 
northern Ghana who will still fall outside of the reach of these pilot efforts. Most poor 
people in northern Ghana rely on kin, community, or civil society organizations for such 
support as they receive to help them recover from shocks and cope with seasonal 
deprivation. This emphasizes the importance of the work to be done in strengthening the 
architecture of social protection under Component 1.   
 
3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize 
adverse impacts. 
The alternative to the World Bank participating in the Ghana Social Opportunities Project 
would be: (i) that less of these environmentally beneficial works would be undertaken or: 
(ii) they would be undertaken without the need for compliance with World Bank 
environmental or social safeguards.   
 
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 Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development (MLGRD) has overall 
responsibility for the project, yet the implementation of component activities will be 
handled by different agencies, including District Assemblies (DAs) and the National 
Page  13
Disaster Management Organization (NADMO). By implementing the Community-Based 
Rural Development Project (CBRDP), the MLGRD has acquired a level of capacity in 
safeguards as per World Bank policy requirements. Under the CBRDP and in 
collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Ghana, the MLGRD 
developed a manual to train selected District Assembly officials while processing the 
environmental impact assessment for sub-projects at the community level. While this is 
commendable, it is not sufficient to ensure safeguards compliance by the SOP. The 
ESMF and RPF have identified capacity-building activities for the various key 
stakeholders to ensure understanding of safeguards and application of implementation 
and monitoring measures to achieve sustainability and to avoid or reduce negative 
impacts. For both the RPF and ESMF, a budget estimate for the required training and 
capacity building has been included. This training will cover staff at the local, district, 
and even national level. The combination of an agency well-versed in national and World 
Bank safeguard policies and requirements (i.e., EPA-Ghana) and ministries with on-the-
ground experience in projects similar to the SOP fosters a solid working relationship.  
 
35.
During the preparation of the ESMF and RPF, there was extensive consultation 
with stakeholders at the national, district, and community level. These included staff of 
the CBRDP at the national level, District Assembly officials, and community opinion 
leaders, including chiefs and ordinary citizens. The process for preparing these 
safeguards documents requires consultations and information disclosure.   
 
5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and 
disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. 
Approximately 100 individual were consulted during the preparation of the RPF. The 
main aim of the consultations was to involve potential beneficiaries and sensitize them, 
solicit their views and inputs, and identify potential impacts and people while assessing 
the level of safeguards compliance in the three northern regions. The consultations 
involved group discussions with a number of people, including women and children, and 
interviews with local institutional heads like District Assembly officials and NGOs. In 
sum, the project was overwhelmingly viewed as beneficial yet seen to be responsible for 
implementing measures to compensate those affected (displaced) by it.  
 
37.
Additionally, the design of the project was heavily informed by a Participatory 
Poverty and Vulnerability Assessment (PPVA), supported by DFID, UNICEF, and the 
World Bank, which was commissioned to inform the design of poverty reduction policies 
in Ghana with a focus on the North.  Two rounds of PPVA fieldwork contributed to the 
design of the project. Both rounds of work were carried out in twelve communities in 
northern Ghana:  three in the Northern Region, three in the Upper West Region, and six 
in the Upper East Region. The PPVA also undertook fieldwork in five communities in 
the south of Ghana, with a focus on northern migrants working outside of their home 
area.  
 
38.
In relation to areas covered by the SOP, the PPVA found strong support in all 
communities consulted for the provision of dry season income-earning opportunities and 
productive infrastructure through labor intensive public works. The consulted 
communities had mixed experiences working with contractors on previous LIPW 
projects. In some cases, the relationships progressed smoothly while in others, complaints 
Page  14
arose of contractors failing to pay individuals, harassing workers (including sexual 
harassment of women), or providing work opportunities at the wrong time of the year.  
 
39.
On the basis of the consultations carried out, the following has been concluded:  
 
40.
LIPW activities should support large segments of work (e.g., rehabilitation of 
dams and feeder roads) that provide reasonably large #blocks# of dry season wage labor 
opportunities to the beneficiaries (meaning an average of at least 20 days per person 
between November and March/April). It should undertake the kinds of projects that 
communities are accustomed to doing with unpaid communal labor (e.g., rehabilitating 
school blocks and clinics). Through adopting the approach of only paying for labor when 
it is beyond the scale that voluntary self-help activities can provide, the project should 
avoid the risk of undermining important traditions of community self-help. The strong 
preference for supporting activities that provide a major block of labor is also due to the 
perception that a sufficient incentive is needed to prevent young men and women from 
leaving on seasonal labor migration to the south of Ghana.  
 
41.
Projects should reflect community preferences. On the basis of the fieldwork 
carried out in the PPVA and the pre-appraisal mission the menu includes: small dams, 
dugouts, and access roads.  
 
42.
Communities should be involved in managing the distribution of work 
opportunities. Given the high general incidence of poverty in northern Ghana - and the 
intention to use area-based targeting of poor areas within the North for LIPW - the 
recommended approach to target households at the community level is to ensure a fair 
distribution of opportunities between all those who can work and wish to take part. 
Consultations carried out through the PPVA and the pre-appraisal mission confirmed a 
strong preference for the community itself to be involved in overseeing the distribution of 
opportunities for work. The communities placed a high value on transparency and 
involving community institutions in assuring accountability. Two elements are 
recommended: (i) a community meeting to establish the principles for allocating work 
opportunities and (ii) using the unit committee to oversee the execution of what has been 
decided. All of this is in line with existing practices for managing the distribution of 
opportunities within communities according to locally recognized norms of fairness and 
transparency.  
 
43.
On the whole the project preparation studies revealed that gender bias should not 
be a major problem as opportunities for females and males in public works tend to be 
well balanced.  
 
44.
The PPVA found a very limited impact or awareness of public safety nets. The 
main findings in relation to LEAP are that: (i) its outreach remains very limited among 
the poor in northern Ghana; (ii) the primary use of the LEAP grant is for food, although 
the teams also found instances where money was used to purchase small animals, pay 
NHIL, or purchase school uniforms; and (iii) a perception existed in the two communities 
where specific research on LEAP was conducted that the selection process favored 
contacts of the #local agent# and did not reach the most vulnerable. The delivery of more 
robust livelihood options to the working poor in northern Ghana through LIPW can, 
therefore, be expected to have a positive impact on enhancing the livelihood security of 
the non-working poor on communities where benefits are delivered.   
 
Page  15
B. Disclosure Requirements Date
 
Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: 
Was the document disclosed 
prior to appraisal?
 Yes 
 
Date of receipt by the Bank 
01/18/2010 
 
Date of "in-country" disclosure 
01/29/2010 
 
Date of submission to InfoShop 
01/27/2010 
 
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?
 Yes 
 
Date of receipt by the Bank 
01/27/2010 
 
Date of "in-country" disclosure 
02/16/2010 
 
Date of submission to InfoShop 
02/11/2010 
 
Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: 
Was the document disclosed 
prior to appraisal?
 
Date of receipt by the Bank 
 
 
Date of "in-country" disclosure 
 
 
Date of submission to InfoShop 
 
 
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/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment 
 
Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report? 
Yes 
If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) 
review and approve the EA report? 
Yes 
Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the 
credit/loan? 
Yes 
OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement 
 
Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy framework/process 
framework (as appropriate) been prepared? 
Yes 
If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector 
Manager review the plan? 
Yes 
Page  16
OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams 
 
Have dam safety plans been prepared? 
No 
Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts 
(POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? 
N/A 
Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements 
been made for public awareness and training? 
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 
been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard 
policies? 
Yes 
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: 
Mr Qaiser M. Khan 
02/18/2010 
Environmental Specialist: 
Ms Nyaneba E. Nkrumah 
02/18/2010 
Social Development Specialist 
Ms Beatrix Allah-Mensah 
02/18/2010 
Additional Environmental and/or 
Social Development Specialist(s): 
Mr John William Fraser III 
 
Approved by: 
 
Sector Manager: 
Ms Lynne D. Sherburne-Benz 
02/18/2010 
Comments: