INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: 77750 Date prepared/updated: May 1, 2013 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Indonesia Project ID: P132831 Additional Project ID (if any): Project Name: Creative Communities II Task Team Leader: Susanne Holste Estimated Appraisal Date: April 19, 2013 Estimated Board Date: N/A Managing Unit: EASID Lending Instrument: Grant Sector : Social Development (100%) Theme : Participation and civic engagement (50%); Social inclusion (50%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source: Indonesia - PSF Trust Fund US $ 4.7 M Environmental Category: C Is this a transferred project Yes [x] No [ ] Simplified Processing Simple [x] Repeater [] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [x] and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: The objective of the project is: to improve the ability of villagers, especially poor and marginalized people, to participate actively in PNPM processes using cultural expressions in project locations. 3. Project Description: The concept of Creative Communities was first introduced in 2008. Creative Communities I (CC I) was very successful in increasing public participation in PNPM and raising public’s interest in PNPM. Following the completion of CC I, PSF plans to develop a follow-up Creative Communities II (CC II) project. The proposed CC II project consists of two phases: Phase 1: Operational Setup and Phase 2: Implementation. The project will carry out community-based activities to enhance public participation and increase voices of the poor and marginalized people in PNPM. In Phase 1, the project design will be modified based on the lessons from CC I. It will also draw from the findings of a field assessment, which was conducted to collect inputs for the design of CC II, identify existing community-based activities that can support community empowerment, and suggest potential local partners. Pilot activities will be carried out in 3 sub-districts to test the design modifications. Together with PNPM stakeholders, project locations will be determined based on a set of agreed criteria. Phase 2 will implement the tested project design in approximately 50 sub-districts that receive funds from the PNPM-Rural and PNPM-Generasi programs. The locations for CC II will be informed by the findings and consultations from Phase 1. CC II will establish partnership with CSOs to carry out community-based activities that will support PNPM’s aim of community empowerment. It will also build capacity of PNPM field consultants in using creative approaches to engage with target beneficiaries. In this project, the grant financed activities under Recipient-executed will be used to deliver the following outcomes and outputs: Overall targets and KPI: 1) Increase in general public participation in PNPM-Rural/Generasi processes in project locations 2) Increased ability of poor and marginalized people to participate in PNPM-Rural/Generasi processes in project locations 3) Increased ability among PNPM facilitators and cultural groups in using arts and cultural mediums to strengthen PNPM-Rural/Generasi processes in project locations Intermediate targets and KPI (to be achieved in Phase 1): 1) Project development completed and design modifications tested 2) Trainers are trained for implementing CC II 3) Management team and operational structure established for full implementation The Project will include the following components: Components Phase1 Phase2 Component 1: Community-based cultural activities Modification of the project design based on lessons from CC I and findings X from the ongoing field assessment. The design will determine the main types of cultural tools to be used and incorporate feedback from key stakeholders. Sub-grants for CSOs to carry out community-based cultural activities such as participatory theatre, visual arts and music at the local levels. These activities will be developed with PNPM teams and conducted during PNPM processes, X X such as the community forums. Cultural tools will provide opportunities for specific poor and marginalized groups as identified with PNPM facilitators, to contribute more actively to PNPM’s consultative processes. Pilot activities will be conducted in 3 sub-districts to test the modified design. X The tested design will be replicated in around 50 sub-districts in Phase 2. X Component 2: Capacity building Training for cultural practitioners in using cultural tools to strengthen community empowerment. Capacity building support for cultural groups and CSOs in project and financial management. Type of support will be assessed X X based on specific needs and be provided through appropriate strategies including training, technical assistance, mentoring, and workshops. Technical assistance for PNPM facilitators in using cultural approaches to enhance PNPM processes. Best practices will be shared through video and X X online mediums. Incentives such as Creative Communities awards and seed funds will further encourage PNPM teams to use creative mediums. Component 3: Monitoring and evaluation A monitoring and evaluation framework outlining methods and schedule for X measuring results, including a baseline study prior to implementation. Monitoring activities include quarterly reports from grant recipient, regular X X data collection and field visits. A mid-term review at the end of Phase 1 to assess results of pilot activities X and performance of grant recipient. An evaluation study at the end of the project to measure the impacts of the X project. Perception of beneficiaries on their ability to participate in PNPM will be measured amongst other indicators. An Indonesian NGO, Yayasan Kelola, has been identified as the grant recipient. Kelola was founded in 1999 with the aim of creating opportunities for the Indonesia arts community to interact and work together. With its base in Jakarta, it has trained over 1,000 artists and art practitioners representing approximately 300 arts and cultural organizations throughout Indonesia. Its Art Grants program has supported over 3,000 arts practitioners working with 172 performing art groups. Yayasan Kelola was awarded a JSDF grant to manage CC I in 2008. Its management of the previous grant was satisfactory and it was audited with an unqualified opinion. The proposed project is rated as category C because it will only finance participatory and capacity building activities. The project will carry out community-based activities conducted in a participatory and sensitive manner. The project will partner with local community groups that are familiar with local people in implementing its activities. As a sub-project to support PNPM, CC II will follow the best-practice principles for indigenous peoples’ involvement to ensure that the policy requirements of OP 4.10, which are incorporated into the Implementation Guidelines for Social and Environmental Safeguards (IGSES) as a safeguard framework under PNPM Rural. The IGSES will be incorporated into the project and training modules so that trainees will become familiar with it. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: Locations will be identified during Phase 1 of this project in consultation with key stakeholders. Locations will be selected from those receiving funds from PNPM-Rural and PNPM-Generasi programs. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Mr Juan Martinez (EASER) Mr Dennie Stenly Mamonto (EASIS) 6. SAFEGUARD POLICIES THAT MIGHT APPLY Safeguard Policies Triggered Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/BP No The project will carry out community- 4.01 based activities to strengthen PNPM outcomes, and no physical intervention is involved. These activities will refer to the umbrella guidance from PNPM-Rural’s IGSES. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No See explanation above Forests OP/BP 4.36 No See explanation above Pest Management OP 4.09 No See explanation above Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP No See explanation above 4.11 Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 No See explanation above Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP No See explanation above 4.12 Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No See explanation above Projects on International No See explanation above Waterways OP/BP 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP No See explanation above 7.60 II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguards Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: There are no safeguards issues and impacts associated with this project. It only consists of community-based and capacity building activities and hence will not create any large-scale, significant, or irreversible environmental or social impacts. Potential social and environmental safeguards issues related to the Creative Communities Project will be followed by using the Implementation Guidelines for Social and Environmental Safeguards (IGSES) of PNPM Rural. This IGSES will be one of the training activities. Creative Communities II project is classified as an Environmental Category C project. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: There are no potential significant long-term adverse impacts triggered by this project. Mitigation against any negative impacts that might occur in PNPM-Rural can be managed through classroom and practical training. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts. N/A 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described. During implementation of PNPM-Rural IV Government distributed the IGSES to all project facilitators. During preparation of PNPM 2012-2014 consultations were held on implementation experiences and these will be reflected in the IGSES updates. Yayasan Kelola was established in 1999 as national arts organization. With its base in Jakarta, it has so far supported cultural activities in 26 provinces all across Indonesia. It has some experience in safeguard issues. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people. Project stakeholders are the community groups, government officials and its consultants responsible for PNPM. The ultimate stakeholders are the poor and marginalized people who will benefit from an increased ability to participate in PNPM processes and influence the use of funds. Stakeholder consultations were held for the update of the IGSES of PNPM-Rural 2012- 2014. B. Disclosure Requirements Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to N/A appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of “in-country� disclosure Date of submission to Info Shop 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 N/A appraisal? Date of receipt by the Bank Date of “in-country� disclosure Date of submission to Info Shop *If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: The safeguards framework (IGSES) for PNPM-Rural 2012-2014 was disclosed on September 17, 2012. It is used as the umbrella framework for all PNPM-Rural operations. 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? No If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM) review N/A and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the N/A credit/loan? OP/BP 4.10 – Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework (as appropriate) No been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Sector Manager N/A review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and N/A approved by the Regional Social Development Unit or Sector Manager? D. Approvals: Signed and submitted by: Task Team Leader: Susanne Holste 05/11/2013 Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Juan Martinez 04/27/2013 Comments: Sector Manager: Jan Weetjens 05/13/2013