Document of The World Bank Report No: 55461 v1 RESTRUCTURING PAPER ON A PROPOSED PROJECT RESTRUCTURING OF THE CORAL REEF REHABILITATION AND MANAGEMENT PROJECT (PHASE II) FROM THE LOAN NO. 4740-IND/CREDIT NO. 3910-IND/GEF TF053350-IND APPROVED ON MAY 25, 2004 TO THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA MAY 20, 2010 Indonesia Sustainable Development Unit Sustainable Development Department East Asia and Pacific Region 1 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CCEB Coastal Community Empowerment Boards CRITC Coral Reef Information and Training Center CPUE Catch Per Unit Effort CF Community Facilitator DPL Village Marine Protected Area KKLD Kawasan Konservasi Laut Daerah (District Marine Conservation Area) LKM Lembaga Keuangan Mikro (Micro Finance Institution) LPSTK Lembaga Pengelola Sumberdaya­Terumbu Karang (Community Management Unit) MCA Marine Conservation Area MoFor Ministry of Forestry MCS Monitoring, Control, and Surveilance PHKA Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation Renstra Strategic Plan for Coral Reef Management developed at all Government levels ­ District, Province, National, and National Parks RPTK Coral Reef Management Plan SPP Sea Partnership Program SETO Senior Extension and Training Officer SML Suaka Margasatwa Laut (Marine Wildlife Reserve) TWAL Taman Wisata Air Laut (Marine Tourism Park) TA Technical Assistance VCSF Village-level Credit and Saving Facilities Regional Vice President: James W. Adams Country Director: Joachim von Amsberg Sector Manager(s): Sonia Hammam and Magdolna Lovei Task Team Leader: Hongjoo J. Hahm 2 INDONESIA CORAL REEF REHABILITATION AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHASE IIP071316 CONTENTS Page A. SUMMARY................................................................................................................ 4 B. PROJECT STATUS.................................................................................................. 4 C. PROPOSED CHANGES .......................................................................................... 6 ANNEX 1: RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND MONITORING .................................. 14 ANNEX 2: REALLOCATION OF PROCEEDS ......................................................... 18 3 INDONESIA CORAL REEF REHABILITATION AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHASE II RESTRUCTURING PAPER SUMMARY 1. The proposed changes of COREMAP II respond to recommendations made in the Mid- Term Review (May 2008) and in the second quarter FY 10 supervision mission to restructure the project; they are intended to meet project development objectives, to achieve target indicators, and to facilitate disbursement of remaining funds. This is a second order restructuring and the major modifications being proposed are: (a) modification of Key Performance Indicators; (b) changes to project activities by simplifying the implementation of seed fund operations and cancelling several activities related to the community (partial credit guarantee, district grant, etc); (c) conducting additional oversight on safeguards; (d) introducing some formalized institutional changes such as increasing number of participating district from 6 to 7 (as a result of a split in district boundaries in Buton and the creation of Wakatobi as a separate district), and decreasing number of participating villages from 416 to 358, as well as a transfer of management responsibility of certain National Parks to MMAF; (e) introducing a financing plan for disbursing remaining funds and reallocation of IDA/IBRD; (f) extension of a cumulative two years from original closing date (now December 31, 2011); and (g) an implementation for Project extension. PROJECT STATUS 2. Past Performance and Implementation Issues. Despite initial delays in implementation and intermittent budget problems, the Project has made important steps in: introducing the institutional platform for Program management, the necessary policy support and the development of community programs to promote improved coral reef management. In particular, the Project has been very successful in raising public awareness. The program is still making progress on: (i) developing properly managed district conservation areas; (ii) implementing sustainable community-based management systems that provide recovery and restoration of reefs and ecosystems; (iii) involving communities in surveillance and monitoring; and (iv) endorsing local regulations and strategic plans. 4 Table 1. Figure of Implementation Performance Ratings 2005 ­ 2010 Code May 2005 May 2006 Jan 2007 Mar2008 June 2009 Jan 2010 Development Objective S S MS MS MS MU Global Objective S S MS MS MS MU Implementation Progress S S MS MS MS MU Financial Management S MS MU MS MU MU Project Management S S S S S MS Counterpart Funding S S S S S MU Procurement S MS MS MS MU MU Monitoring & Evaluation S S HS HS S MU Public Involvement HS HS S S S S Government Commitment HS HS S S S S 3. On overall program management, the institutional units needed to support the project are in place. The areas that need to be strengthened are primarily the horizontal level inter- institutional coordination, and the vertical coordination through institutions at national, provincial and district levels. There has been slow progress on procurement of goods, which is attributed mainly to budgetary issues at the local level. This has led to the carrying over of district plan packages from 2009 to 2010. Continued annual review/monitoring will be provided to ensure that current arrangements are effective throughout the proposed project extension time. Issues related to financial management include: (i) the delay of district Parliament and Government to approve DIPA that contributed to setbacks in disbursement of village grants and seed funds; (ii) lack of report reconciliation between NCU and RCU/PMU, (iii) lack of technical assistance and supervision from CFs and SETO to assist community management units and Micro Finance Unit on financial management aspects; and (v) lack of technical assistance in implementing District Grants. Local government commitment in implementing the project plays a significant role in accelerating the approval process of DIPA and the achievement of targets. Mitigation measures to address these issues have been proposed and are set forth in the proposed changes section below. 4. Disbursement. The Project disbursements as of January 13, 2010, are detailed in Table 2. Total disbursement from the IBRD Loan (Loan No. 4740-IND), IDA Credit (Credit No. 3910- IND), and GEF Grant (Grant No. TF053350-IND) includes advances to the Special Account (SA). Hence, overall actual expenditure for the Project as a whole is 42%, as of January 2010. Table 2: Disbursement Status of Project in US$ (as of 27 April 2010) Amount after Amount at revision* (Actual Disbursement signing value) (Actual) Available (Actual) IBRD 33,200,000 30,197,626 11,702,851 18,494,775 IDA (eq USD) 23,000,000 23,687,159 23,555,016 132,143 GEF 7,500,000 7,500,000 2,972,981 4,527,019 Total 63,700,000 61,384,785 38,230,848 23,153,937 *Cancellation of $3,002,374 of IBRD loan has been requested by the GOI 5 PROPOSED CHANGES 5. The restructuring program focuses on consolidating and increasing support for activities in which the Project has been relatively successful, as well as simplifying, deleting and strengthening implementation processes of activities and existing institutions ( NCU, NPIUs, PMUs, LPS-TKs, Pokmas, LKM, etc). (a) Results/indicators. Most of the KPIs have not been met and results from the review process show that the long list of indicators for outcomes and outputs are mixed and at times not attributable to the project, and therefore not the best reflection of project progress. These need to be rationalized. The incompleteness of useful data (both bio- physical and socio-economic) is also an indication of poor project monitoring and weak project implementation. Improved coordination and more robust data collection, analysis and reporting are necessary. During the November 2009 supervision mission there was extensive discussion between the Project team and the World Bank team regarding needed revisions to the indicators. Annex 1 shows the project achievements in relation to Key Performance Indicators and proposed changes. (b) Components. There are no changes to the Project Components. However, the Bank Task Team and borrower have agreed on an Action Plan (and reallocation of funds) to complete the remaining project activities over the extension period that highlight the following: · Reduce number of participating villages from 416 to 358 villages to maintain and enhance the quality of support and results. The change implications will be cancellation of activities, cost and revising target output indicators (see Annex 1). · Strengthen the micro credit program (LKMs) by supporting the 257 already established micro credit units at existing villages and establish new micro credit units only at 101 new participating villages. The Project will no longer support financial intermediaries at the District level for disbursing revolving funds but will support the establishment of village-level credit and saving facilities (VCSF) in new participating villages and strengthen the capacity of existing VCSF which have been established in current participating villages to accelerate the delivery of community funds. The change implication will require a revision to the legal agreement "Schedule 2;Part B; Subcomponent 3;Activity (b).". · Increase seed fund allocation to well-performing villages in order to improve the support for development of income generating activities that go beyond supplementing income to shifting to sustainable alternative activities and creating working example for other villages. This will involve a change in parties who sign the Village Lending Agreement to increase the necessary accountability to ensure sustainability of seed fund operations. The implication will be an increased allocation of the seed fund category, increased credit size and number of target beneficiaries/village, and will require a change of the legal agreement "Schedule 4; Paragraph 12; Activity (b). 6 6. The Project will also introduce key changes to improve Project performance, including: · Undertake a special program to improve the approach and capacity of Human Resources in the role of coordination. Additional support to human resources only outlines a shift in priorities for implementation and expenditure of RCU activities. · Undertake a special program to improve the commitment of local government. PAD "Component 2; Sub-component (4) and Activity 4.1" will provide support to establish Coastal Community Empowerment Boards (CCEBs) at the District level, chaired by the District Head and consisting of policy makers and stakeholders in the overall coral reef ecosystem. Technical assistance and operating costs are provided. Therefore, the proposed changes only outlines a shift in priorities to strengthen certain activities, through: (i). Workshops and meetings between legislative and executive actors at the provincial/district level that are supported by the Minister of Marine Affairs and Fisheries and the World Bank to encourage increased local government commitments regarding COREMAP and the necessary support in terms of budget and regulations and policies (perda/perdes). (ii). Comparative studies to identify success stories from executive and legislative relationships and their coordination at provincial/district levels--from other regions or other countries. 7. Additional support to human resources only outlines a shift in priorities for implementation and expenditure of NCU and PMU activities. · Develop successful alternative income generating activities through a comprehensive process. This should begin by determining or scaling-up appropriate prospective income generating programs (marketable, quick return, and higher value) and followed through by providing the appropriate facilitation and technical assistance. The proposed changes only outline a shift in priorities for implementation and are in line with the Project design. · Ensure more intensive monitoring and evaluation as part of the institutional arrangements of the Program that support measurement of new outcome indicators. The changes proposed only outline a shift in priorities for implementation, which are in line with original Project design. 8. Some basic formal changes will also be a part of Restructuring including: · Increase the number of participating districts from 6 to 7 as a result of provincial restructuring, where one previous district i.e Buton was divided in to two, i.e Buton and Wakatobi. Apart from that, so far the project has built a network of community­based MCAs in Pangkep, Selayar, Buton, Sikka, Biak and Raja Ampat. Since Wakatobi already has a marine protection program under the Wakatobi Marine National Park, the project would not plan to create an additional KKLD/District Marine Protected 7 Area/Network of community-based MCAs in Wakatobi district. The changes proposed will incorporate Wakatobi (formally as a province) into the Project and will also require changes to the legal agreement "Article1; paragraph (aa)" and "Schedule 2; Part B; Sub-component 4; Activity( c)". · Cancel all partial credit guarantee programs to avoid conflict with government regulations and lengthy processing. The changes proposed will cancel the activity from the legal agreement "Part 2; Sub-component 3; Activity (d) and Schedule 4; paragraph 17; Activity (a)" and fund allocation. · Cancel the remaining District Block Grant program to avoid conflict with government regulations and lengthy processing. District block grants were outlined in the legal agreement " Schedule 2; Part B; Sub component 3, Activity (h) " and "Article 1; paragraph (i) & (j)" and "Schedule 4; Paragraph 15". The changes proposed will cancel the activity from the legal agreement and reallocated to seed funds. · Cancel the pilot program for carrying out visits by employment agents from participating districts and provincial capitals to participating villages in remote areas to evaluate work opportunities for fishers and reef gleaners outside the participating village because these have been not been well received by communities. This program was outlined in legal agreement " Schedule 2; Part B; Sub component 3; Activity (g)". The changes proposed will cancel the activity from the Legal Agreement and reallocate funds. (c) Safeguards · COREMAP Phase II is classified as a Category B Project. Some safeguards policies are triggered but effects are limited in their impact and are technically and institutionally manageable (see PAD Technical Annex 10). Safeguards triggered by the Project include OP 4.01, 4.04, and 4.10. This Restructuring does not change the technical and institutional aspects of the Project, and therefore does not trigger changes to the Safeguard status. The existing environmental and social impact framework (ESIMF) still applies to the Project but strengthened monitoring will be required to ensure that implementation is progressing appropriately. · The Client continues to develop Coral Reef Management and Park Management Plans. The current status is that the Coral Reef Management Plans have been developed (incorporating public consultations) at the village levels (i.e. RPTK at 257 villages). A review of the village coral reef management plans was conducted on the Second Supervision Mission in November 2006 ; and a review of the ESIMF application results was undertaken during Mid Term Review in April 2008. During First Supervision Mission conducted in January 2006, the Bank recommended the NCU to translate the ESIMF in Bahasa Indonesia and distributed them to all PMUs. 8 · Current review deems that the existing IP framework is sufficient due to the limited impacts being introduced as a part of restructuring. The only notable activity that could have an impact at the community level are part of an additional top up of resources for seed funds. These funds are very limited and do not require changing the existing framework. The framework was developed based on OD 4.30 and will be reviewed and updated to be consistent with OP 4.10. (d) Institutional arrangements · Facilitate the transfer of TWAL Kapoposang, SML Raja Ampat, and TWAL Padaido from Ministry of Forestry to MMAF to increase management effectiveness. This activity is not specified in the Legal Agreement and PAD and the changes proposed will hold MMAF accountable with the same standards as MoFor (PHKA) for implementation responsibility and financial and procurement arrangements. · Streamline the role of the RCU. The MTR recommended simplification as well as a more concentrated effort on focusing resources for visible and sustainable results on the ground. This also applies to the RCU role, which should focus on: (a) advocating support from provincial level decision makers to strengthen implementation to address District level issues, including budget allocations for timely release of counterpart funds; (b) increasing public awareness of COREMAP objectives and enhancing education tools at the provincial level to support project Districts in outreach activities; (c) regularly liaising with provincial level agencies (e.g. Marine Police, Navy, Judiciary, etc) to strengthen monitoring, control and surveillance; (d) advocating uptake of useful models from COREMAP districts by strategic non-COREMAP coastal districts within the province, (e) reviewing provincial level procedures, rules and regulations for fishing and carrier vessels to ensure they support sustainable fishing methods and protection of coral reefs, initially in Project Districts, and (f) coordinating technical assistance for needed coral reef management research and scientific monitoring to improve management results in COREMAP areas. A critical first step will be to define RCU performance targets with the COREMAP team over the next two years. Therefore restructuring will formalize the coordination role of the Provincial level (RCU) to invest in undertaking the aforementioned streamlining and refocus. This requires changes to the Credit Agreement and Grant Agreement on "Schedule 4; Paragraph 2." 9 (e) Financing · Project Costs: Table 3: PROJECT COST (IBRD, IDA and GEF) by Category Category original amount (in USD) Revision (in USD) 1 Goods 5,856,513 4,223,426 2 Community Services 8,496,807 7,980,612 3 workshops and training 10,392,082 10,790,751 4 consultant services 10,603,959 9,900,354 5 Studies and surveys 3,245,275 6,490,145 6 Incremental Operating Costs 8,498,978 4,100,530 7 Fellowships and Scholarships 2,504,342 2,133,390 8 Awareness and educational service 6,502,427 5,065,680 9 District and Village Grants 6,299,617 9,119,585 10 Front-end Fees 332,000 332,000 11 Unallocated amount 968,000 561,154 Total 63,700,000 60,697,627 · Financing Plan. The Project budget allocation for CY 2010-2011 is outlined in Table 2, disbursing US$ 15,873,909 in 2010; and US$ 7,280,028 in 2011: Table 4. Budget Allocation in 2010 ­ 2011 Budget Plan 2010-2011 No. Description IBRD IDA GEF Total 1 Goods 1A Under part B.1(e) and (f), B.2(g), B.4(b) 339,712 - 289,793 6,29,505 of the project 1B Under other parts of the project (except - - 1,099,086 1,099,086 Part B.5) 2 Community Support Services 2,054,188 - 1,064,817 3,119,005 3 Workshops, Training 3A Under part B.1(a), (b) and (c) of the 1,900,000 - 881,233 2,718,233 project 3B Under other part of the project (except 1,845,076 - 315,466 2,160,542 Part B.5) 4 Consultants' Services 4A Under part B.4 (b) of the project - - 639,770 639,770 4B Under other part of the project (Except 1,019,856 532,432 - 1,552,288 Part B.5) 5 Studies and Surveys 1,197,968 - 32,071 1,230,039 6 Incremental Operating Cost 1,556,436 - 824,501 2,380,937 7 Fellowships and Scholarship 830,000 - - 830,000 8 Awareness and Educational Services 2,796,400 - - 2,796,400 9 District and Village Grants 876,513 490,287 - 1,366,800 10 Front-end Fees 166,000 - - 166,000 11 Un-allocated 2,465,332 - - 2,465,332 Total 17,047,481 1,022,719 5,083,737 23,153,937 10 · Reallocation is provided in detail in Annex 2 · Cancellation. The initial amount of the Loan was US$ 33.2 million, Credit SDR 15.7 million (US$ 23.0 million Equivalent) and A GEF Grant in the amount of US$ 7.5 million. Cancellation of Loan amount USD 3,002,374 was requested by GOI through the MOF letter dated July 7, 2009 and February 4, 2010 to be deducted from the original loan allocation. (f) Closing date The project was approved by the Board on May 25, 2004 and became effective on January 28, 2005. The original closing date was December 31, 2009 but the MTR recommended an extension to ensure that targets were met. An interim one-year extension is already in place to allow time to prepare restructuring plans for the Project without interrupting ongoing activities. This Project Paper proposes a restructuring plan and an additional extension of the closing date to December 2011 for Loan/Credit No. 4740-IND/3910-IND and GEF Grant No. TF053350- IND. Cancellation of Loan amount USD 3,002,374 was also requested. The Project Restructuring Plan developed in conjunction with the Government endorses this request for an additional 12-month extension through December 2011, to implement the proposed changes. Since this is a two-year cumulative Project extension, RVP approval will be required. (g) Implementation schedule Table 5: Program Priority Schedule 2010 ­ 2011* No. Detail Program PAD Legal Management 2010 by 2011 by Agreement Responsibility quarter quarter 1 Improve commitment and Not implicitly stated Not implicitly All institutions X X X X X X X coordination of Government and stated Parliament at District and Component2; Sub- Provincial levels, as well as component (4) and Part B; Sub- improving the overall Activity 4.1 component 4; coordination role at NCU to and activity (a) improve the overall Component 1; Sub- component (1); and implementation processes of the activity 1.1) Part A ; Program, including working Subcomponent 1; towards endorsing local activity (a) government regulations for implementation and adopting process/development of national strategic plan. 1.1 Workshop on program NCU and X X coordination and sustainability PMU at local government level 1.2 Comparative study to locations NCU and X X with more advanced coral reef PMU management practices 1.3 Increased oversight of CCEB NCU and LIPI X X X X coordination including strengthening CRITC 2 Strengthen the management of Component 2; Sub- Part B; MMAF, X X X X X X National Park, District component (5); Subcomponent MoFor, Management Conservation Area Activity 5.1,5.2, 5.3 5; Activity (a), District, 11 No. Detail Program PAD Legal Management 2010 by 2011 by Agreement Responsibility quarter quarter (MCA) and Village no-take (b) and (c) Village zones Component 2; Subcomponent (4); Part B; Activity 4.3 Subcomponent 4; Activity (c) Component 2; Subcomponent (2); Part B; Activity 2.3 Subcomponent 2; Activity ( c) 2.1 Continue developing district NCU, PMU, X X X X X X based marine conservation area and relevant management plans (KKLD) and government increase efforts to introduce offices at integrated coastal management district/ local principles within broader marine levels management areas. 2.2 Strengthening collaborative law Component 2; Part B; NCU, RCU, X X X X X enforcement through the Subcomponent (2); Subcomponent PMU--and development of an improved Activity 2.7 2; Activity (g) overseen by MCS program; focus on MMAF reducing dynamite fishing and other illegal fishing practices 2.3 Coordinate the management of MMAF and X X X X X X X national parks MoFor 3 Implement COREMAP Phase II Component 2; Part B; NCU, PMU, X X X X X X X X in 101 new villages Subcomponent (1); Subcomponent LIPI Activity 1.5, 1.6 1; Activity (d) and (e) Component 2; Subcomponent (2); Part B; Activity 2.2, 2.3, Subcomponent 2.6,2.7,2.8 2; Activity (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) Component2; Subcomponent (3); Part B; Activity 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, Subcomponent 3.5, 3.6, 3.8 3; Activity (a), (b), (c), (e),(f), (h) 4 Enhance monitoring, research, Component 1; Part A; LIPI CRITC, X X X X and analysis of ecological, Subcomponent (1); Subcomponent NCU, RCU, socio-economic, and fisheries Activity 1.2 1; Activity (a) PMU indicators and disseminate the results in accessible formats to Component 1; key stakeholder groups; Subcomponent (2); Part A; provided needed TA and Activity Subcomponent strengthen coordination between 2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,2.5,2.6 2; Activity (a), NCU, CRITC and communities (b), (c), (d), (e), involved in monitoring (f) 4.1 Increase the role of SPP in PMU NCU, RCU, X X X X and RCU programs especially in PMU, CRITC, CRITC development and SPP national scientific monitoring / data secretariat collection 12 No. Detail Program PAD Legal Management 2010 by 2011 by Agreement Responsibility quarter quarter 4.2 Workshops and increased LIPI X X X X commitment on improved scientific data collection 5 Work towards official adoption Component 3; Part C; Bupati, LIPI, X X X X of Coral reef ecosystem Subcomponent (2); Subcomponent PMU conservation materials into the Activity 2.1 2; Activity (a) local education program. 6 Document, popularize and New Activity. Added New Activity. NCU, LIPI, X X X X distribute community best in Component 2; Added in Part B; PMU, SPP practices and lessons learned in Subcomponent 2; Subcomponent coral reef management. Activity 1.7. 2; Activity (i) 7 Develop financial and Component 2 ; Sub Part B; NCU and X X X X X X X management systems and Component 3; Subcomponent PMU programs for supporting Activity 3.2. 3; ; Activity (b) supplemental income generating activities at 101 additional villages and strengthen these processes at the 257 existing villages. Beyond economic activities, e.g. LKM, and alternative income generating programs, also provide additional support to community improvement programs for improving community infrastructure. 8 Close out the Project in an New Activity. Added New Activity. All institutions X X X X orderly fashion i.e. plan and in Component 1; Added in Part undertake an end of project Subcomponent (1); A; review, finalize the Project Activity 1.5 Subcomponent Implementation Completion 1; Activity (e) Report, turnover of assets to appropriate agencies and process all pending financial transactions involving the World Bank, and prepare assessment for continuing COREMAP mission. * The procurement plan will be updated to reflect the changes in the implementation schedule and it will be approved as per procurement guidelines. 13 ANNEX 1: Results Framework and Monitoring INDONESIA: Error! Reference source not found. Table A1. Key Performance Indicator Analysis and New Proposed Indicator Key Performance Indicator Achieved Comment New Proposed Indicator Management Empowerment managed fully-protected no-take Effectively and collaboratively zones, covering 10%, on average, of reefs in all project managed areas by EOP. Retained Retained Biophysical Significant improvements in live coral relative to non-project areas, in 80 % cover in project managed areas of samples sites Reef fish population improved based Key Performance Indicator Achieved Comment New Proposed Indicator on CPUE of fishers using traditional reef fishing gear and/or visual census in selected project sites at EOP in 80 % sample sites, compared to expected decline in control areas (outside project areas) Socio economic and poverty Total income of project beneficiary group members increased by 10 % by EOP At least 70% of fishers/beneficiaries in coastal communities in program managed areas perceive the project has had a positive impact on their welfare 15 Table A2. Arrangements for Results Monitoring Project Development Objective (PDO): to establish viable reef management systems in at least six priority districts, through a financially sustainable program that is nationally coordinated but decentralized in implementation, in order to empower and to support coastal communities to sustainably co- manage the use of coral reefs and associated ecosystem resources, which will revive damaged or preserve intact coral reef ecosystems and in turn, enhance the welfare of these communities in Indonesia. Revised Project Development Objective: Retained. *The PDO will not change as stated in the PAD, but a discrepancy in the Legal Agreement will be adjusted to match the PAD. Revised Key Performance Indicators (KPI) D=Dropped Data Source/ Responsibility for C=Continue Cumulative Target Values Frequency Core PDO Level Results Unit of Methodology Data Collection N= New Baseline Indicators* Measure YR7 R=Revised YR 6 (EOP) Indicator One: Collaboratively managed fully- R % of 0% - At least 10 % of Annual reports by Area demarcated by Dinas KP in each protected no-take zones, covering collaborativel collaboratively managed PMU,NCU on MCA Dinas KP program district, PMU 10%, on average, of reefs in all y managed fully-protected no-take legalized by village except Wakatobi project managed areas by EOP. fully-protected zones in program ordinance and district no-take zones district are in MCA Perda à which exist in à program à districts à ÃÃÃÃà ÃÃà ÃÃÃà % of 70 % (retained) ÃÃà C Operating cost 0% - Annual budgets for Annual budget report Manager at PMU ÃÃÃÆ!ÈÄà allocated by program activities in each from PMU, NCU ÃÃÈà participating district. à district ÄÃÃÃà ÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà à ÃÃà % of à respondents in participating 70 % (retained) C district who - Independent survey at EOP Beneficiary, household NCU know about surveys the importance of coral reefs Indicator Two: Significant improvements in live R % of data for each Statistically significant Annual survey conducted RRI and LIT surveys District monitoring team coral cover in project managed Live coral district improvement in coral by district monitoring team in each program district, areas relative to non-project areas, coverage in available in cover in project areas in each program district, results compiled at NCU in 80 % of samples sites sampling site more detail relative to non-project results published by NCU in at NPIU LIPI areas and increase in participating coral cover in no-take districts zones by X% relative to compared to controls. (X% is the 16 non-project average increase area observed in no-take zones after a five year period in the Coral - Triangle area--as reported in the literature). Reef fish population improved based on CPUE of fishers using Non Project traditional reef fishing gear and/or area ­ TBD X% increase in CPUE Monthly community-based Dinas KP, PMU visual census in selected project R Reef fish over baseline in project fisheries monitoring, Fishers' logbooks, data sites at EOP in 80 % sample sites, population in sites relative to controls reports by Dinas KP & sheets recorded by compared to expected decline in sample site in (as above, EOP target PMU community members at control areas (outside project areas) participating will be based on reported key landing sites district increases in the literature for CTI reefs adjacent to no-takes zones.) Indicator Three: Total income of project beneficiary R Total income Information - 10 % beneficiary income Annual and bi-annual Household/beneficiary District monitoring team, group members increased by 10 % of project available increase from baseline reports by district and/or surveys NCU by EOP beneficiary from and a statistically Independent evaluation group member baseline significant increase over teams to PMU, NCU socio- non-project household economic incomes in same district. surveys A positive impact on 70 At least 70% of % of beneficiaries EOP report by NCU fishers/beneficiaries in coastal R - - supported by results Household/beneficiary District monitoring team, communities in program managed from intermediate survey NCU areas perceive the project has had a indicators. positive impact on their welfare The Intermediate Indicators were developed per Project Component and since the Components remain unchanged, no changes are required to the Intermediate Indicators as set forth in the PAD. However, any structural changes to the Legal Agreements will be automatically updated in the Intermediate Indicators accordingly (i.e. change in number of target districts and number of villages) 17 ANNEX 2: Reallocation of Proceeds Table A3. Category Reallocation of Loan/IBRD (in USD) Loan/IBRD (in USD) No Category Original Proposed 1. Goods 2,200,000 1,004,184 a Under part B.1(e) and (f), B.2(g), B.4(b) of the project 1,300,000 500,100 Under other parts of the project (except Part B.5) 900,000 504,084 B 2. Community Support Services 4,000,000 3,326,712 3. Workshop and Training 4,800,000 5,459,321 A Under part B.1(a), (b) and (c) of the project 1,900,000 1,900,000 b Under other part of the project (except Part B.5) 2,900,000 3,559,321 4. Consultants' Services 5,800,000 4,021,403 a Under part B.4 (b) of the project 2,100,000 1,750,200 b Under other part of the project (Except Part B.5) 3,700,000 2,271,203 5. Study and Surveys (except Part B.5 of the project) 1,800,000 4,026,846 Incremental Operating Cost (except Part B.5 of the 6. 4,500,000 1,613,508 project) 7. Fellowships and scholarships 1,300,000 1,310,420 8. Awareness and Educational Services 3,800,000 3,365,134 9. District and Village grants 3,700,000 5,176,944 10. Front ­end Fees 332,000 332,000 11. Unallocated 968,000 561,154 Total 33,200,000 30,197,626 Balance to be cancelled 3,002,374 Table A4: Category Reallocation of IDA (in SDR) IDA (in SDR) No Category Original Proposed 1. Goods a Under part B.1(e) and (f), B.2(g), B.4(b) of the project 750,000 292,200 b Under other parts of the project (except Part B.5) 480,000 640,075 2. Community Support Services 1,700,000 1,806,960 3. Workshop and Training a Under part B.1(a), (b) and (c) of the project 750,000 48,430 b Under other part of the project (except Part B.5) 1,900,000 2,424,100 4. Consultants' Services a Under part B.4 (b) of the project 750,000 672,650 b Under other part of the project (Except Part B.5) 1,840,000 2,649,279 5. Study and Surveys (except Part B.5 of the project) 950,000 1,643,142 Incremental Operating Cost (except Part B.5 of the 6. 2,110,000 1,080,555 project) 7. Fellowships and scholarships 820,000 560,335 8. Awareness and Educational Services 1,840,000 1,157,850 9. District and Village grants 1,770,000 2,684,424 Total 15,660,000 15,660,000 19