Page 1 SIERRA LEONE-RAPID RESPONSE GROWTH POLES: COMMUNITY-BASED LIVELIHOOD AND FOOD SUPPORT PROGRAM Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) July 2010 E2564 Page 2 SIERRA LEONE-RAPID RESPONSE GROWTH POLES: COMMUNITY-BASED LIVELIHOOD AND FOOD SUPPORT PROGRAM Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) July 2010 1. I NTRODUCTION The objectives of this project are to: (i) reduce hunger and deprivation in two of the poorest districts directly affected by the global economic crisis and recent drought and flooding in the Seli River area by distributing food packages to at some 6000 people; and (ii) restore livelihoods, sustain services, and enhance local capacities through rapid response growth poles (RRGP) activities. The project is comprised of three components: Component 1 : Rapid response growth pole (RRGP) income, food and livelihood security sub- projects is composed of three sub-components implemented by the National Commission for Social Action (NaCSA) for emergency assistance through food-for-work (FfW) and cash-for- work (CfW); agricultural and fishing livelihood restoration; immediate access for remote villages; and expanded delivery of education and health services targeting about 1,200 at-risk households and broadly benefitting over 23,000 poor households affected by extreme events of flooding and severe drought. These are described below: Sub-component 1.1: District level access/transport and social services rapid response sub- projects – administered by District Councils -- (i) 40 kms of foot trails connecting remote villages to services and markets; (ii) installation of renewable energy to 2 schools and 2 health centers for evening classes targeted for vulnerable groups and 24-hr emergency medical services; and (iii) boat building and landing points for 24 marginalized villages across the river -- labor intensive works constructed by workers from 1,200 at-risk households receiving FfW during the emergency period of 6 months and 500 community- selected at-risk laborers receiving CfW over a period of 2 years, including sub-project O&M; Sub-component 1.2: Community driven development (CDD) food security and livelihood restoration sub-projects -- executed by Community User Committees (CUCs) organized by local villages for: (i) agricultural food production (swampland and upland conservation farming); and (ii) 6 Communications Centers for risk management (weather and crop forecasts, disaster risk and prevention information using telecommunications, computer, etc) – labor intensive works by 500 at-risk workers receiving CfW over a period of 2 years, including sub-project O&M; Sub-component 1.3: Small grants for at-risk and vulnerable groups administered by CUCs in identified at-risk villages following a community-based selection and approval process: (i) 50 grants/$5,000 per grant for agribusiness units (ABUs) and Fishing Cooperatives (FCs) for food security related activities (e.g. grain stock, post harvest, fishing inputs, etc); and (ii) 50 Page 3 grants/$5,000 per grant for vulnerable groups (disabled, women, youth, e.g. maternal and infant health, job skills and information, adult and youth education, self-help industries, labor intensive youth reforestation and soil conservation, etc); Component 2 : Establishment of community-based social accountability and participatory monitoring mechanisms -- capacity strengthening to ensure emergency support is carried out in a fair and flexible manner, consisting of 2 sub-components: Sub-component 2.1: RRGP monitoring and social accountability leadership training on the application of tools like expenditure tracking, report cards, and impact evaluation provided by NaCSA CDD-trained and experienced "coaches or facilitators" for 320 community leaders (local officials; FFS, ABU, FC and vulnerable groups' representatives) Sub-component 2.2: Impact evaluation -- consisting of baseline and follow-up panel socio- economic surveys; stakeholder workshops; and grievance mechanism to be contracted to a Sierra Leonian field-based NGO Component 3: Project management -- composed of a small 2-person unit under the Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR) to organize Steering Committee meetings and national workshops; distribute progress reports prepared by NaCSA (the project's implementing arm); prepare financial and audit reports and project completion reports Public consultation process Some public consultations were conducted as part of the original EIA. Further consultation of stakeholders was conducted in the project area and in Freetown during the recent EIA update studies. Moreover, plans were made for further consultation as the project is completed and operated. This was done through the medium of a formal Public Consultation and Disclosure Plan (PCDP), which was issued during the update study period. The consultations anticipated in the PCDP were as follows: • on the ToR of the re cent EIA studies, known as ‘scoping’; • during conduct of the further EIA studies; • on the present EIA report; and • during project completion, commissioning and operation. The findings of the ‘scoping’ consultations were summarised in a Scoping Report, which was also issued in 2005, and re-issued in connection with this project in July 2010. This was used to refine the scope of work for the any potential EIA studies, as needed for the sub-project grants. The scoping meetings also discussed future consultation requirements, resulting in a framework and mechanisms for consultation at and beyond project completion. The mechanisms, which are compatible with the current national and local-level institutional and regulatory Page 4 context, include the establishment of a Community Liaison Committee and a Grievance Procedure. District, Chieftain and Village leaders requested the Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR) in July 2008 to provide urgent support for 24 of the poorest villages in the Seli River area who are in danger of hunger and malnutrition. Worsening of social and economic conditions in these villages escalated in 2008 due to extreme occurrences of drought and flooding, and where the impacts of the food and fuel crisis have been severe (as shown from results of a socio- economic survey completed in December 2008). Discussions about implementing arrangements for “small but quick-implementing” sub-projects at community and district levels were first started in 2004 and 2005 by the MoEWR. At that time, there were several stakeholder consultations, a socio-economic survey (in 2004), and 2 needs assessments organized. Later, in 2007, the MoEWR organized a national stakeholders forum, and it was in this forum that the use of existing decentralization mechanisms, such as the National Commission for Social Action (NaCSA), would be applied as a model for this project. In August, 2009, local leaders from three of the poorest chiefdoms (Diang, Kalansogoia, and Kasunko) expressed concerns about persistent hunger and the rise in morbidity and mortality rates due to malnutrition, malaria, and other water-borne diseases. Another series of consultations and focus group meetings were held in these chiefdoms in August to December, 2009, organized by MoEWR and facilitated by local Sierra Leonian NGOs, to better ascertain the extent of assistance needed to address these urgent problems. The specific activities, decision making structure, and implementing arrangements were identified at these consultations and the recommendations from these consultations are reflected in the design of this proposed project. District, Chieftain and Village leaders requested the Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR) in July 2008 to provide urgent support for 24 of the poorest villages in the Seli River area who are in danger of hunger and malnutrition. Worsening of social and economic conditions in these villages escalated in 2008 due to extreme occurrences of drought and flooding, and where the impacts of the food and fuel crisis have been severe (as shown from results of a socio- economic survey completed in December 2008). Discussions about implementing arrangements for "small but quick-implementing" sub-projects at community and district levels were first started in 2004 and 2005 by the MoEWR. At that time, there were several stakeholder consultations, a socio-economic survey (in 2004), and 2 needs assessments organized. Later, in 2007, the MoEWR organized a national stakeholders forum, and it was in this forum that the use of existing decentralization mechanisms, such as the National Commission for Social Action (NaCSA), would be applied as a model for this project. In August, 2009, local leaders from three of the poorest chiefdoms (Diang, Kalansogoia, and Kasunko) expressed concerns to the Minister (MoEWR) about persistent hunger and the rise in morbidity and mortality rates due to malnutrition, malaria, and other water-borne diseases. Another series of consultations and focus group meetings were held in these chiefdoms in August to December, 2009, organized by MoEWR and facilitated by local Sierra Leonian NGOs, to better ascertain the extent of assistance needed to address these urgent problems. The specific activities, decision making structure, and implementing arrangements were identified at these Page 5 consultations and the recommendations from these consultations are reflected in the design of this proposed project. Policy, Legal and Administrative Framework The national administration of environmental management is discussed, particularly the functions of the Department of the Environment (EPD) of the Ministry of Lands, Country Planning and Environment, and the Wildlife Conservation Branch (WCB) of the Forestry and Wildlife Division of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food Security. The capacity of these institutions to monitor a large project such as BHP is noted to be limited (and recommendations for capacity-building are made in chapter 12). The national EIA Procedures of 2002 are discussed, and it is noted that recent work to update the EIA, including the consultation procedures, is in compliance with the official procedures. Relevant World Bank Safeguards Policies The World Bank Safeguards Policies that are applicable to the project are Environmental Assessment (OP/BP4.01) and Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP4.12). The project is linked to the Bumbuna Hydroelectric Environmental and Social Management Project in terms of proximity of affected villages, and in terms of the history of the origin of the request for the project. It is administered by the same Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR). This ESMF will be disclosed at the Bank Info Shop and in-country by MoEWR. As noted in the 2005 Resettlement Action Plan (RAP) and the 2008 Updated RAP reports, Sierra Leone has a dual system of land law. In the provinces, land laws are administered predominantly as part of customary law. A more general land law, consisting mainly of received English Law, applies exclusively to land in the Western Area. The Bumbuna Project is situated in the Northern Province and thus falls under the area of provincial land, in particular, the Provinces Land Act Cap 122 of the Laws of Sierra Leone 1960. Based on this law, compulsory acquisition vests in the acquiring party the total interest of the former owner. So the interest transferred would depend strictly on the way the property was previously held. For example, leasehold property would be transferred as leasehold. The only legislation in Sierra Leone that provides for compulsory acquisition of land for public works or developmental purposes is the Public Lands Act Cap 116. This Act would have served the purposes of this project but its applicability is limited and it is not applicable to the Provinces. The Constitution of Sierra Leone Act No 6 of 1991 in Sec 21 prohibits the deprivation of property except if certain stringent conditions are met for the compulsory acquisition of property in limited circumstances. Further, the Compulsory Acquisition of Property Act (Constitutional Safeguards) Act of 1961 provides for the procedure to be applied in cases of compulsory acquisition of property. Section 47 of the Act provides for compensation. The conditions that make compensation ineligible are: (a) the degree of urgency that led to the acquisition; (b) any reluctance on the part of the project affected person to sell the land; (c) any damage suffered by the person which, if caused by a private person, would not be a good cause Page 6 of action; (d) any resulting damage to the land done after the date of acquisition; (e) any later increase in the value of the land resulting in the future use of the land; (f) any outlay or expenditure made on the land after the publication of the warrant; and (g) The special suitability of the land for the purpose to which it is going to be put. In addition, no compensation can be paid for unoccupied lands. The act defines these as land left for a period of over twelve years without any use being made thereof either for habitation, water storage or cultivation. 2. I MPLEMENTATION A RRANGEMENTS The implementing agency is the Project Management Unit (PMU) of the MoEWR. The PMU will be working closely with NaCSA since the implementation model is based on NaCSA’s experiences with small-scale sub-projects and with the cash-for-work program. The main decision making body is the Steering Committee, composed of representatives from the District, Chiefdom, and government agency representatives from NaCSA, agriculture, environment, education and health. Annex 1 describes the decentralized, local institutional set-up. Most communities in Sierra Leone have recently undertaken participatory planning processes to satisfy requirements in the LGA (2004) for establishing Ward and District development plans. Accordingly, communities will apply for sub-project grants by completing simple, application forms, based on their already established priorities. This proposed JSDF project will add value to these development plans by covering gaps – such as sub-projects that involve more than one community. Thus, one of the aims of this project is to encourage the creation of inter- community sub-projects, using the RRGP concept. A description of possible sub-projects is presented in Annex 2. General procedures for grant awards are: · Village Committees : Based on existing Village Plans (under the LGA), Village Committees will submit sub-project proposals for approval by the Steering Committee; and once approved, a Community User Committee (CUC) will be formed. Members of the CUCs will be elected by the respective communities and membership will be composed of, at the minimum, 40% female and two youth representatives (one female, one male); and each CUC will contain at least one district/ward development committee member to facilitate coordination. · District/Ward Councils : Sub-project grant applications for districts (wards) will be reviewed and endorsed by District/Ward Councils based on simple feasibility criteria to ensure that the proposed sub-project is from the approved menu of options, and will not duplicate existing or planned development interventions of districts, NaCSA or other donors and NGOs. Sub-project proposals from the District/Ward Councils will be approved by the Steering Committee. · Steering Committee : A multi-stakeholder Steering Committee, chaired by the Minister of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR), and composed of representatives from government agencies, district/ward, CUCs, and NGOs will approve the eligibility criteria for defining beneficiaries and the sub-project proposals. Throughout implementation, the project will provide: Page 7 ƒ District and Village/Community Coaches who will help in the preparation of detailed sub- project plans; ƒ Legal Assistance will be made available for drafting the 3-party MoU which will be signed by authorized representatives of the CUC, District/Ward Councils, representative of the Steering Committee; ƒ CUC Contractors (e.g. NGOs) who will assist the CUCs with implementing and monitoring their sub-projects; ƒ Relief Centers at the district level (2 districts) to coordinate the food-for-work and cash-for- work schemes, patterned after NaCSA decentralized set-up; initial funding for 2 coordinators, but later financing will be built into the District Development Plans; and ƒ Communications Centers at the village level, comprising between 5 to 10 villages per center, to be managed by 3 village youth workers; initially funded by the project in the first year, but later financed from the 5% contributions from sub-projects (specified in the contract prior to sub-project execution between the beneficiary and CUCs). General Grant Rounds or Cycles It is anticipated there will be two cycles for awarding sub-project grants. This reflects a learning- by-doing approach since this would be the first time that the MoEWR would be implementing sub-projects. Even though MoEWR will be relying heavily on the experienced staff and ongoing programs of NaCSA, the project is proposed to be undertaken in a simple and straightforward manner and using village and district coaches who will assist in sub-project design. The recommended first round of sub-projects identification and approval process will take place within three months after project effectiveness, possibly by first quarter 2010, with at least two to three sub-projects awarded for each of the three districts. Lessons from this First Round will be used to refine implementation processes before the next round, which is expected to start by end- 2010. Selected communities will initially receive training on grant procedures and project implementation. These communities, as noted earlier, will be selected on the basis of three composite poverty indicators: (i) deprivation – villages identified to have severe incidence of hunger and disease, with high morbidity and mortality rates; (ii) remoteness – as defined in terms of access to basic social services, with remote communities receiving higher scores than those closer to existing social services; and (iii) vulnerability – as defined by topography and land use, such as hilly terrain and drought-stricken areas receiving higher priority, compared to villages near more fertile swamplands. Based on the Procedure Manual, CUCs will be trained on infrastructure O&M. Local NGOs may be contracted to provide this training. The PMU of MoEWR will maintain a roster of organizations that CUCs can engage to provide these services. Special Programs for Vulnerable Groups Vulnerable groups -- youth, women, and disabled people -- capacity building components will consist of three main activities: 1. Village-based marketable trade skills program for young women and men : consisting of outreach training in five or six villages selected through stakeholders consultations. Page 8 Between 20 to 25 youth leaders from nearby villages will participate in a course. On-the- job expe rience with ‘mentors’ (local trades people- carpenters, masons, etc.- who will take on participants as apprentices) will be covered. 2. Business and life skills for youth, women, and disabled groups : an outreach training program for these vulnerable populations in the areas of business and life skills will be held in the poorest, remote villages and coordinated with delivery of livelihood sub- projects; 3. Community-based small grants for vulnerable groups : this small grants scheme will provide a limited amount of funds (up to $5,000 per grant) to cover small-scale social mobilization projects that will help in organizing groups of youth, women, and disabled people and using a simplified application form (e.g. to fund focus group meetings; small group livelihood; sports-or other social-related organizing events, etc) A local expert working with youth and disabled groups, and a gender specialist, will be hired to assist in the design of training activities and to help in the preparation of applications. As needed, the experts will also identify NGOs and training institutions active in the area. For example, the experts may work with local trades people who could act as mentors for youth, women, and disabled apprentices in the village-based livelihood and training programs, and to provide the trainees with starter kits to disseminate and upgrade their tools to other villages (e.g., a tried-and- tested program was the farmer field schools, introduced in Sierra Leone by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization). 3. E NVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL S CREENING , A SSESSMENT AND M ANAGEMENT Environment and social safeguards issues will be addressed and incorporated in the screening of all sub-project activities. There will be an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) checklist for sub-projects to assist local governments to screen and carry out environmental and social appraisal of activities and prescribe a set of mitigation and monitoring measures during implementation and operation of the sub-projects to eliminate, offset, or reduce adverse environmental and social impacts to acceptable levels; and establish a screening process for sub-projects so as to enable local government staff to identify potential environmental and social impacts of sub-projects and to address them by incorporating the relevant mitigation measures into the designs of the sub-projects. The following steps will be applied to address environment and social issues at all stages of the sub-project cycles (village-level infrastructure projects). E E n n v v i i r r o o n n m m e e n n t t a a n n d d s s o o c c i i a a l l p p r r o o c c e e d d u u r r e e s s a a p p p p l l i i e e d d i i n n N N a a C C S S A A v v i i l l l l a a g g e e g g r r a a n n t t p p r r o o j j e e c c t t s s ( ( a a s s a a p p p p l l i i e e d d b b y y G G o o S S L L ) ) 1 1 . . T T a a r r g g e e t t i i n n g g & & P P r r o o m m o o t t i i o o n n Objective : Ensure that environmental and social issues are introduced to beneficiaries Actions : 2 2 . . P P r r o o j j e e c c t t F F o o r r m m u u l l a a t t i i o o n n Objective: Ensure that environmental and social issues are considered at earliest stages of project cycle . Page 9 ƒ Educate beneficiaries about environmental and social issues and NaCSA requirements ƒ Promote environmentally beneficial and socially acceptable projects ƒ ƒ Ensure conformity with national environmental and social policies and strategies Actions: ƒ Provide technical assistance directly to project formulators when needed or direct them to qualified specialists. ƒ ƒ Ensure impact and mitigation measures are considered by project proposers 3 3 . . P P r r o o j j e e c c t t A A p p p p r r a a i i s s a a l l Objective : Ensure that environmental and social impacts have been analysed and appropriate mitigation measures designed. Actions: ƒ Screen proposals to categorize projects by type of environmental review and social impacts that will be needed. ƒ ƒ Carry out either an Environmental Review, Limited Environment Assessment or full EA, or a Social Assessment, Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plan, or Indigenous Peoples Plan Framework to identify impact and design mitigation measures. 4 4 . . P P r r o o j j e e c c t t A A p p p p r r o o v v a a l l Objective: Select the most needed and environmentally and socially sound projects. Actions: ƒ Once project is screened and any environment review or social assessment is completed, project can be approved if it meets environment viability criteria. ƒ ƒ If environment and social recommendations are not satisfactorily included in project design, project may be rejected. 5 5 . . P P r r o o j j e e c c t t I I m m p p l l e e m m e e n n t t a a t t i i o o n n & & S S u u p p e e r r v v i i s s i i o o n n Objective: Prepare contracts with environment and social safeguards clauses for implementing partners. Actions: ƒ Undertake site visits to ensure that environment and social criteria and mitigation measures are incorporated into the project as required by the contract. ƒ Require design changes if unforeseen impacts occur. ƒ ƒ Approval of environmental and social context required to issue final payment for construction 6 6 . . M M o o n n i i t t o o r r i i n n g g & & E E v v a a l l u u a a t t i i o o n n ƒ Site visits during execution and operation to assess success of environment and social screening and mitigation efforts ƒ Determine if changes needed to improve environment and social impact assessment process ƒ ƒ Meet with contractors and communities to get feedback. S S o o u u r r c c e e : : N N a a C C S S A A H H a a n n d d b b o o o o k k , , 2 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 ; ; u u p p d d a a t t e e d d 2 2 0 0 0 0 9 9 The Government of Sierra Leone (GoSL) is familiar with World Bank environment and social safeguards policies, and the Project Management Unit (PMU), under the Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MoEWR) has been set up as an integral part of the ministry. Some of the personnel who have been trained on safeguards and fiduciary management from existing WB/IDA assisted projects (e.g. Project Implementation Units) have been moved to the newly established PMU. In addition, there are experienced officers in t he GoSL’s National Page 10 Commission for Social Action (NaCSA), who have successfully implemented decentralized sub- projects, including use of relevant environment and social safeguards framework. Lastly, the twinning of international consultants with local staff in GoSL, and with partners in the NGO and business community, is aimed at further improving competence for dealing with safeguards issues. This ESMF provides the guidelines that GoSL’s NaCSA is currently using for decentralized sub-projects involving districts, wards, and villages. The following criteria have been adopted: · The sub- projects do not envisage displacing any settlers · The sub-projects will not be located in environmentally important areas, nor destroy habitats without providing adequate mitigation efforts · The small-scale infrastructure investments under Component B will cover various sectors such as village renewable energy systems; repairs of village water supply, mini hydro, drainage, sanitation; improvement of existing solid waste management; construction of foot paths; repairs or enhancements (electrification) of schools and health facilities; boat building; debris clearance for boat landing points; etc The exact nature of the small-scale investments cannot be foreseen at this time, since they will only be identified and managed by local governments (villages) through a participatory planning and budgeting process during project execution. The potential environmental and social effects of these common community development projects, however, are well understood, unlikely to be significant, and readily manageable. These small sub-projects will be operated and managed by Community User Committees (CUCs). 4. M ONITORING AND R EPORTING Two general components for monitoring and evaluation (M&E) will be applied to environmental and social screening, and in the assessment of design and mitigation measures in cases where there are identified environmental and social impacts. One is the use of stakeholder social accountability mechanisms, which will be applied with a component focused on environmental and social safeguards. The other is participatory project monitoring and evaluation, where local leaders will be trained in assessing the quality of application of environmental and social safeguards. The project has a separate activity for training and capacity strengthening on safeguards monitoring and evaluation. Page 11 The mechanisms and roles for M&E more broadly include: S S t t a a k k e e h h o o l l d d e e r r S S o o c c i i a a l l A A c c c c o o u u n n t t a a b b i i l l i i t t y y M M e e c c h h a a n n i i s s m m s s B B e e n n e e f f i i c c i i a a r r i i e e s s ƒ Social accountability training, as an inherent aspect of the beneficiary-driven community driven development (CDD) approach, will include a section on environmental and social safeguards screening and application; ƒ Imbedded in implementation with transparent criteria for the award of grants, is a separate section on environmental and social safeguards; etc. ƒ Beneficiaries are self-monitoring the screening and application of environmental and social safeguards criteria; S S u u b b - - P P r r o o j j e e c c t t s s / / D D i i s s t t r r i i c c t t M M & & E E C C o o m m m m i i t t t t e e e e ƒ A more formal stakeholder M&E mechanism with representatives of district stakeholders [Community User Committee (CUC) and possibly, ward development committees and district officials] will be used as part of safeguards M&E; ƒ Tracking of environmental and social safeguards key indicator; P P a a r r t t i i c c i i p p a a t t o o r r y y P P r r o o j j e e c c t t M M o o n n i i t t o o r r i i n n g g a a n n d d E E v v a a l l u u a a t t i i o o n n D D e e c c e e n n t t r r a a l l i i z z a a t t i i o o n n S S e e c c r r e e t t a a r r i i a a t t S S t t a a f f f f i i n n N N a a C C S S A A a a n n d d P P r r o o j j e e c c t t M M a a n n a a g g e e m m e e n n t t U U n n i i t t , , M M o o E E W W R R ƒ Monitor overall progress towards the achievement of project results (against project development objective and performance indicators), including application of relevant environmental and social safeguards; ƒ Monitor district/ward and community activities in terms of consistency, and where relevant, quality of application of, environmental and social safeguards; I I n n d d e e p p e e n n d d e e n n t t E E x x t t e e r r n n a a l l M M & & E E C C o o n n s s u u l l t t a a n n t t ƒ Contracted (preferably from Africa region) M&E evaluator will include an assessment of quality of implementation of the ESMF, as applied; An external (preferably African regional) M & E expert will help design M&E elements that will include a separate section on environmental and social safeguards. A M&E database system, such as the one established for the Decentralization Secretariat (NaCSA), and managed by an M&E expert, will also be set up using quantitative and qualitative evaluation indicators that will also cover environmental and social safeguards measures. Page 12 5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL CHECKLIST A checklist to assess the application of environmental and social safeguards will be used. This checklist is organized into the types of sub-project activities, and if applicable, their potential impacts on the environment and on affected communities. Short Term Emergency Support Food-for Work and Cash-for Work Schemes District Relief Centers 200 households 24 villages 2 districts District RRGP livelihood sub-projects: 12 sub-projects at district level: Farm to market foot trails Hybrid/renewable energy for existing schools and health centers Boat landing points (clearing debris) Long term rapid response growth pole (RRGP) livelihood and food security sub-projects Village small-scale water supply systems (repairs of water wells; water pumps) 12 sub-projects at district level: Powering village centers communications and training Energizing agribusiness centers; Communications centers to provide agricultural risk management works (agricultural weather and crop forecasting; agricultural market information and extension training) Increasing fish outputs, boat building, etc Small grants 100 small grants: farmer field schools; agribusiness units, fishing cooperatives to improve agricultural livelihoods RRGP monitoring and social accountability Community leadership training Youth, women, and disabled groups NaCSA village training program on expenditure tracking, report cards, etc POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACTS Will the site activity include/involve any of the following potential issues and/or impacts: 1. Rehabilitation of existing community centers · Site specific vehicular traffic · Increase in dust and noise from construction · Construction waste [ ] Yes [ X] No 2. New construction of foot trails; boats (canoes) · Excavation impacts and soil erosion · Increase sediment loads in receiving waters · Site specific vehicular traffic · Increase in dust and noise from demolition and/or construction · Construction waste [ ] Yes [ X] No 3. Repairs of water boreholes, existing water supply systems · Effluent and / or discharges into receiving waters [ ] Yes [X] No Page 13 4. Any type of historic building(s) and districts · Risk of damage to known/unknown historical or archaeological sites [ ] Yes [X] No 5. Acquisition of land 1 (as applicable) · Encroachment on private property · Relocation of project affected persons · Involuntary resettlement · Impacts on livelihood incomes [ ] Yes [X] No 6. Hazardous or toxic materials 2 · Removal and disposal of toxic and/or hazardous demolition and / or construction waste · Storage of machine oils and lubricants [ ] Yes [X] No 7. Impacts on forests and/or protected areas · Encroachment on designated forests, buffer and /or protected areas · Disturbance of locally protected animal habitat [ ] Yes [X] No 8. Handling / management of medical waste · Clinical waste, sharps, pharmaceutical products (cytoxic and hazardous chemical waste), radioactive waste, organic domestic waste, non-organic domestic waste · On site or off-site disposal of medical waste [ ] Yes [X ] No 9. Traffic and Pedestrian Safety · Site specific vehicular traffic · Site is in a populated area [ ] Yes [ X] No 1 Land acquisitions includes displacement of people, change of livelihood encroachment on private property, including restriction of access and covering persons living and/or squatters and/or operate a business (kiosks) on land that may be acquired. 2 Toxic / hazardous material includes and is not limited to asbestos, toxic paints, removal of lead paint, etc. Page 14 Annex 1: Overlap of Traditional and Local Governance Structures: Responsibilities for Implementation of the ESMF at Local Level D D i i v v i i s s i i o o n n o o f f r r e e s s p p o o n n s s i i b b i i l l i i t t y y b b e e t t w w e e e e n n t t r r a a d d i i t t i i o o n n a a l l l l e e a a d d e e r r s s a a n n d d l l o o c c a a l l g g o o v v e e r r n n m m e e n n t t Traditional Leaders Local Government Main Responsibility Under traditional practices Allocation of community land, dispute settlement to promote community harmony, peace and security; customs, cultural and traditional practices. Under the local government Act (2004): Primary responsibility for planning development and government services delivery in Districts; project identification, approval and implementation responsibilities; coordination of extension services of line ministries in the district. Primary Actors ƒ Paramount Chiefs ƒ Village Chiefs ƒ Mama Chiefs ƒ Village Elders Chiefs are elected by Traditional Authorities (TAs) a college typically comprised of local land-owning lineages. ƒ District Councils and various Committees ƒ Ward Development Committees District Councils and Ward Development Committees are elected. WDCs must include 5 men and 5 women. The Paramount Chief sits on the Council and heads the WCDs in their Chiefdoms Development Instruments ƒ Not applicable ƒ Annual and longer-term District Development Plans built on Ward Development Plans and district- level initiatives ƒ Ward Development Plans building on community and village level interests O O t t h h e e r r A A c c t t o o r r s s I I n n f f l l u u e e n n t t i i a a l l i i n n L L o o c c a a l l D D e e v v e e l l o o p p m m e e n n t t ƒ Local religious leaders (specifically, the Village Imam or Priest) ƒ Secret Societies for men (Poro – ƒ Civil society interests (e.g. academia, training institutions, youth organizations) ƒ Private sector interests (e.g. mining and Page 15 with hunter traditions) and women (Sande) ƒ Teachers, instructors, retired civil servants and other educated persons living and working in the communities villages ƒ Formative farmers’ trade groups in the basin ƒ Rural development cooperatives agro-processing industries, construction companies and smaller trading companies in the basin) ƒ National and local media ƒ SLANGO, an umbrella organization representing national and international NGOs. ƒ NAF/SL, a national association of farming cooperatives that hopes to become the voice of the community-driven rural development process. Page 16 ANNEX 3: Description of Project Communities The selection of the country’s 2 poorest districts (Koinadugu and Tonkolili) is based on criteria defined in the government’s CAS for Sierra Leone and the PRS. The CAS supports a decentralization approach for poverty reduction, including transfer of resources to support decentralized governance. It is also consistent with the scope of the July 2008 Food Crisis Response Development Policy Grant (P113219), which was aimed at stabilizing the economy while empowering District/Ward Councils. The project affected communities identified for the RRGP are one of the poorest in Sierra Leone, with subsistence levels below $1.00 per day, qualifying them as recipients of food aid based on criteria developed by the UN World Food Programme. During the decade-long civil unrest, many houses and lands in the Seli River Area were burned and assets destroyed by rebels who wanted to occupy the area and capture its resource rich mines. About 40% of youth in the area were recruited as “boy soldiers,” and several of the victims of the atrocities remain unemployed. Due to the large number of war refugees, the U.N. established 2 of its largest post-conflict camps in the area. The project will cover 2 districts, 6 chiefdoms, approximately 23,359 households, and about 147,966 people in the Seli River Area. There are 24 poor villages and within these villages, the poorest 200 households will be selected through a village nomination process and verified through socio-economic appraisal done by local Sierra Leonian NGOs. The criteria for direct food-for-work and cash-for-work will be based on the definition used by U.N. World Food Programme. The table below summarizes the distribution of population across these districts. D D i i s s t t r r i i c c t t C C h h i i e e f f d d o o m m / / W W a a r r d d H H o o u u s s e e h h o o l l d d s s 2 2 0 0 0 0 5 5 C C e e n n s s u u s s P P o o p p u u l l a a t t i i o o n n 2 2 0 0 0 0 5 5 C C e e n n s s u u s s Kasunko 3,818 21,415 Diang 2,480 17,501 Koinadugu Kalansogoia 2,502 17,009 Sambaya Bendugu 3,336 22,704 Kafe Simiria 3,563 18,397 Tonkolili Kholifa Rowala 7,660 50,940 Total 23,359 147,966 Page 17 ANNEX 4: Environmental and Social Screening Process and Responsibilities Stages Management responsibility Implementation responsibility 1. Screening Environmental and Social Impacts of Sub- Projects with some infrastructure: Selection including public consultation NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 2. Determination of appropriate environmental and social categories NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 2.1. Selection validation NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 2.2. Classification of Project: Determination of Environmental Work Review of screening CUCs, District Officials CUCs, District Officials 3. Implementation of environmental work NaCSA CUCs, District Officials 3-1. If EIA is necessary NaCSA NaCSA 3.1.a Preparation of terms of reference NaCSA, PMU NaCSA, PMU 3.1.b Choices Consultant NaCSA, PMU SC 3.1.c Realization of the EIA, Public Consultation Integration of environmental and social management plan issues in the tendering and project implementation, NaCSA, PMU NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 4. Review and Approval NaCSA, PMU SC 4.1 EIA Approval (B1) NaCSA, PMU NaCSA, PMU 4.2 Approval simple measures (B2&c) NaCSA, PMU NaCSA, PMU 5. Public Consultation and disclosure NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 6. Follow up and monitoring NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials 7. Development of monitoring indicators NaCSA, PMU CUCs, District Officials