Document of
The World Bank
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Report No: ICR00005423
IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT
(TF0A3307 and TF0B0149)
ON A
SMALL GRANT
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$3.2 MILLION
AND THE ADDITIONAL FINANCING SMALL GRANT
IN THE AMOUNT OF US$350,000
TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE
FOR A
CONFLICT RESPONSE AND RECOVERY PILOT AND CAPACITY BUILDING PROJECT (P158091)
{June 14, 2021}
Social Sustainabilty And Inclusion Global Practice
Europe And Central Asia Region
Regional Vice President: Anna M. Bjerde
Country Director: Arup Banerji
Regional Director: Steven N. Schonberger
Practice Manager: Varalakshmi Vemuru
Task Team Leader(s): Mariia Nikitova, Klavdiya Maksymenko
ICR Main Contributor: Oleksandra Shatyrko
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
3R Project Eastern Ukraine: Reconnect, Recover, Revitalize Project
ATO Anti-Terrorist Operation
CL4RD Collaborative Leadership for Resilience and Development
CPF Country Partnership Framework
EU European Union
FM Financial Management
GCA Government-Controlled Areas
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
GoU Government of Ukraine
GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism
ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report
IDP Internally Displaced Person
ISR Implementation Status and Results Report
MIS Management Information System(s)
MPTF Multi-Partner Trust Fund
MRTOT Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine
MTOT, MOT Ministry for Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally Displaced Persons
NGCA Non-Government Controlled Areas
OP/BP Operational Policy/Bank Procedure
PA Programmatic Approach
PDO Project Development Objective
PIU Project Implementation Unit
POM Project Operational Manual
PTSD Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders
RPA Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment
SADR State Agency of Ukraine for Donbas Recovery
SCD Systematic Country Diagnostic
SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation
STP State Target Program for Recovery of the Eastern Regions of Ukraine
SWG Sector Working Group
UN United Nations
WB World Bank
WBG World Bank Group
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DATA SHEET ....................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 4
II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 10
III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 15
IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 17
V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 19
ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 22
ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 31
ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ...... 32
ANNEX 4. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY) ..................................................................... 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
DATA SHEET
BASIC INFORMATION
Product Information
Project ID Project Name
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and
P158091
Capacity Building
Country Financing Instrument
Ukraine Investment Project Financing
Original EA Category Revised EA Category
Organizations
Borrower Implementing Agency
Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied
Government of Ukraine
Territories of Ukraine
Project Development Objective (PDO)
Original PDO
The goal of the project is to build the capacity of the Ministry for Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally
Displaced Persons (MOT) to address the development impacts of the conflict. This will be done through capacity
building, knowledge generation and pilot recovery and peacebuilding activities.
PDO as stated in Legal Agreement (if different from Project Paper)
The objective of the Project is to build the capacity of the Recipient to address the development impacts of the
conflict.
Page 1 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
FINANCING
FINANCE_TBL
Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$)
Donor Financing
TF-A3307 3,200,000 3,200,000 3,146,933
TF-B0149 350,000 350,000 331,079
Total 3,550,000 3,550,000 3,478,012
Total Project Cost 3,550,000 3,550,000 3,478,012
KEY DATES
Approval Effectiveness Original Closing Actual Closing
20-Apr-2016 20-Sep-2016 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING
Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions
20-Apr-2019 1.60 Additional Financing
Change in Results Framework
Change in Components and Cost
Change in Loan Closing Date(s)
Change in Implementation Schedule
28-Apr-2020 2.83 Change in Implementing Agency
Change in Loan Closing Date(s)
Change in Implementation Schedule
KEY RATINGS
Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality
Satisfactory Satisfactory Substantial
Page 2 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs
Actual
No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements
(US$M)
01 03-Oct-2016 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.00
02 23-Oct-2017 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.49
03 19-Dec-2018 Satisfactory Satisfactory 1.04
04 19-Dec-2019 Satisfactory Satisfactory 2.64
ADM STAFF
Role At Approval At ICR
Regional Vice President: Cyril E Muller Anna M. Bjerde
Country Director: Qimiao Fan Arup Banerji
Director: Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez Steven N. Schonberger
Practice Manager: Nina Bhatt Varalakshmi Vemuru
Holly Welborn Benner, Klavdiya Mariia Nikitova, Klavdiya
Task Team Leader(s):
Maksymenko Maksymenko
ICR Contributing Author: Oleksandra Shatyrko
Page 3 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES
Context
1. Ukraine experienced an acute period of political transition, instability and insecurity between 2013 and 2015,
including several momentous events: the “Maidan�? uprising that led to the ousting of the President; the
inauguration of broad political and economic reforms; the outbreak of conflict in the east in 2014 (i.e. in the Donetsk
and Luhansk regions); and a series of presidential, parliamentary and local elections. In March 2014, the
Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and the city of Sevastopol held referenda over whether to join the Russian
Federation. These polls were widely criticized and declared as “having no validity�? by United Nations (UN) General
Assembly resolution 68/262.
2. The conflict was a manifestation of trends and socio-economic factors that had been fragmenting relations between
eastern and western Ukraine for decades. Until the early 1990s, the Donetsk and Luhansk regions―Ukraine’s
eastern industrial heartland―had some of the highest levels of material well-being and education measured by
gross regional product per capita, and household disposable income and purchasing power.1 By 2014, this situation
was reversed due to the combined effects of global economic shocks (e.g. 2008), obsolescence of industrial plants,
reductions in state subsidies, and the loss of favorable trade terms with traditional export clients. While previously
the rest of Ukraine had resented the political power and accrual of wealth in the eastern regions, the rapid decline
in status of the eastern regions by 2014 led to resentment among residents in the east. This, combined with
linguistic differences, the removal of a president partial to eastern interests, the different geopolitical orientations
of eastern and western Ukraine in the post-Soviet space, and eastern Ukraine’s strong connection to Eurasian
markets amplified regional divides, and mistrust between regions while undermining the allegiance of local
authorities and citizens in eastern oblasts to national
authorities in Kyiv. Figure 1: Government and Non-Government Controlled Areas
3. The hostilities began in 2014 and the first two years
imposed the largest numbers of casualties, physical
damages, and forced displacement. The following
period was characterized by low intensity skirmishes,
often in the vicinity of the contact line, and short-lived
ceasefires. With the extension of a fragile ceasefire
agreement (the Minsk Protocol – “Minsk 2�?) in
February 2015, the security situation remains volatile,
with daily hostilities occurring along the contact line
separating Government-Controlled Areas (GCAs) and
Non-Government Controlled areas (NGCAs) in
Eastern Ukraine. The sporadic fighting in Eastern
Ukraine continues; the level of the military threat
remains high near Ukraine’s borders and the number
of ceasefire violations by the armed formations of
NGCAs in Eastern Ukraine has increased, with
Ukrainian troops suffering casualties (Figure 1). Source: UN Humanitarian Response Plan 2019.
1 National Academy of Sciences, Ukraine, 2015.
Page 4 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
4. Although the conflict was not the only source of the problems in the eastern regions, it added to them. The onset
of the political crises and violent conflict compounded the country’s economic challenges and overall development
prospects. Conflict paralyzed economic activity in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, which hitherto accounted for
almost one-quarter of Ukraine’s industrial activity and an equal share of its exports before the conflict began.2
Disruptions in industry, transport and small and medium enterprise activity led to widespread job losses throughout
the country, with the greatest impacts in the east. Investor confidence dropped to record lows. Forced displacement
and conscription created significant labor market distortions. Exports declined as hostilities continued in the east
and trade with Russia plummeted (with a 13 percent decline in exports and a 28 percent decline in imports).3 In
GCAs of Donetsk, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is estimated to have declined by 29 percent between 2013 and
2018. In NGCAs of Donetsk, estimates of GDP decline over the same period are about 35 percent. GCAs of Luhansk
lost about 12 percent of GDP, while NGCAs lost an estimated 45 percent in the same period.4
5. The impacts of the conflict were particularly acute for the poor and vulnerable living in Eastern Ukraine. An
estimated 2.9 million people living in areas impacted by conflict faced difficulties in accessing quality medical care,
accommodation, social services and benefits, as well as compensation for damaged, seized or looted property.5
Donetsk had one of the highest shares of the population nationally in the bottom 40 percent of income distribution
in absolute terms;6 the conflict and loss of employment pushed these households further into poverty and created
additional pressures on Ukraine’s already overstretched social protection systems. By 2016, over 2.7 million people
(six percent of the country’s population) had been displaced because of the conflict, with 1.6 million persons
remaining in the country as Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs).7 More than half of IDPs stayed close to their homes
of origin in conflict-affected regions in eastern and southern Ukraine.
6. Former combatants returning home from military service since 2015 also faced challenges in reintegrating into their
communities. They frequently experienced post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD) and other health challenges,
endured inconsistent support services and benefit payments, and experienced difficulty in accessing employment
and livelihood opportunities. The government’s response was often insufficient to address the difficult
socioeconomic aspects of transition to civilian life for former combatants, including the need for adequate
psychosocial and rehabilitation support, the effects of the long absences from farming and assets for those who
wanted to reengage in farming and entrepreneurial activities, and limited access to (and information about) former
combatants’ benefits provided by law,8 such as access to land grants, free medical care, and specialized employment
preferences.
7. At the request of the Government of Ukraine (GoU), UN agencies,9 the World Bank (WB), and the European Union
(EU) conducted a Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment (RPA) for Eastern Ukraine in 2015.10 The RPA assessed
recovery and peacebuilding needs for addressing three broad goals: (i) restoring critical infrastructure and social
2 United Nations, European Union, World Bank Group, Ukraine: Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment; March 2015.
3 Economic Connectivity of Trade in Ukraine, Swiss Confederation, 2016.
4 State Statistics Service of Ukraine and World Bank estimates as of 2018.
5 UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 August to
15 November 2015 , https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/12thOHCHRreportUkraine.pdf
6 World Bank Group, Shared Prosperity Note, June 2015.
7 Ukraine Ministry of Social Policy.
8 The Law # 3552-XII �?About the status of war veterans, guarantees of their social protection,�? was promulga ted in October 22,
1993 with revisions as of January 1, 2021
9 UNDP, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO, UNEP, UN Women, UNHCR, UNOCHA, IOM, ILO, and OHCHR.
10 Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment for Eastern Ukraine, World Bank, 2015.
Page 5 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
services; (ii) promoting economic recovery; and (iii) strengthening social resilience, peacebuilding, and community
security. Following the RPA, the GoU established the institutional arrangements for overseeing and coordinating
the recovery and peacebuilding activities, which included the State Agency of Ukraine for Donbas Recovery (SADR),
and the National Council on Recovery and Peacebuilding in Ukraine,11 to set policy and strategic direction for
recovery efforts. SADR was initially tasked with advancing the GoU’s State Target Program for Recovery of the
Eastern Regions of Ukraine (STP), based on RPA findings. However, the agency faced severe budget constraints and
deficits in technical experience and capacity to manage and coordinate the response effort. National and
international stakeholders underscored the potential for a protracted crisis,12 as social and psychological divisions
between NGCAs and Western Ukraine continued to deepen. In April 2016, SADR was elevated to become the new
Ministry for Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally Displaced Persons (MTOT). In light of this development,
the Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building Project – the project – was conceptualized to
support and enable the new MTOT to play a leading role in the country’s conflict and recovery response. Project
activities were designed to fill key knowledge and capacity gaps underpinned by the pilot programming support to
demonstrate the utility and relevance of the new ministry to conflict-affected populations in Eastern Ukraine, line
ministries, local authorities, and the international donor community.
8. This project was part of a wider program of support from the WB to the GoU for peacebuilding and recovery. The
Ukraine: Recovery and Peacebuilding Support Programmatic Approach (PA)13 aimed to support the GoU’s
development priorities for Eastern Ukraine by promoting peacebuilding, conflict sensitivity, and resilience to conflict
in development interventions. It included activities to mainstream conflict and displacement sensitivity in the World
Bank Group’s (WBG) strategy and portfolio, and technical assistance to the GoU to more effectively design,
implement and monitor peacebuilding and recovery activities. The results of PA activities have informed the WBG’s
Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD) and Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for Ukraine for the 2017-2021
period, which identified conflict and its drivers as an underlying constraint to poverty reduction and shared
prosperity.
Project Development Objectives (PDOs)
9. The Project Development Objective (PDO) is to build the capacity of the recipient to address the development
impacts of the conflict.
Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators
10. The key expected outcome of the project is “improved capacity of MTOT to address the development impacts of
the conflict in Eastern Ukraine�?. Achievement of this objective was measured by the following indicators:
PDO indicator 1: MTOT demonstrates improved capacity to lead and coordinate recovery planning and
programming (as measured through adoption/implementation of the STP, establishment of
national/international mechanisms for aid coordination, implementation of MTOT-led pilot activities, and
MTOT’s improved monitoring and communication capacities).
11 Although the National Council on Recovery and Peacebuilding in Ukraine was established, it has not been active.
12 International Crisis Group, ‘Russia and the Separatists in Eastern Ukraine,’ February 2016.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/europe/ukraine/b079-russia-and-the-separatists-in-eastern-ukraine.aspx
13 The PA (P156720) had a total cost of US$624,445.
Page 6 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
PDO indicator 2: Knowledge and pilot activities through project influence larger national and international
development policies and investments in peacebuilding and recovery (as measured through review of design of
national/international policy/development programming in conflict-affected areas in Ukraine).
Components
11. The Project comprised three complementary components designed to build client capacity, generate knowledge,
and pilot activities. Component 1 on capacity building, and Component 3 on pilot activities were executed by MTOT;
while Component 2 on knowledge generation and analytical activities was executed by the WB.14 This report covers
all three components, to provide a comprehensive assessment of all activities. Immediate project beneficiaries
included conflict-affected populations in target communities i.e. displaced persons, former combatants, and host
communities (Component 3) and the leadership and staff of MTOT and its institutional partners (Component 1).
Secondary beneficiaries included a broader range of GoU national and local leadership, non-governmental
organizations, donor community, and other national and local stakeholders active in recovery and peacebuilding
efforts whose activities and strategies would be informed by the knowledge and analytical activities (Component
2).
12. Component 1 – MTOT Capacity building, project management, and monitoring and evaluation (Recipient-
executed, US$900,000). This component aimed to improve the capacity of the newly created MTOT to fulfill its
strategic planning and coordination mandate. As a new ministry, MTOT faced challenges in establishing itself as the
GoU focal point for recovery activities. Capacity-building activities were therefore designed to develop the skills and
capabilities of MTOT’s human resources, its technical infrastructure, and its monitoring and reporting,
communications, and outreach capacities. Capacity building for the implementation of pilot subprojects was also
provided. Specific activities included: 1) training programs/workshops for MTOT, national partners, regional
administration and local partners in Eastern Ukraine, in project planning, design, management and implementation
of subprojects, and a range of sectoral/thematic issues based on demand (e.g. displacement response, gender
sensitivity, former combatant reintegration, monitoring and evaluation); 2) support for the development of a
national and international stakeholder coordination mechanism and donor dialogues; 3) support for the
establishment of fiduciary, procurement and social and environmental management capacity within MTOT,
including training and consultant support; 4) capacity building support for monitoring and evaluation, including a
monitoring system to track conflict and recovery trends, and monitor progress of peacebuilding and recovery
activities; 5) development of a Management Information System (MIS, including software and consulting services)
to integrate diverse databases and to help MTOT manage and communicate project-level data; 6) knowledge
exchanges with other countries/regions to share relevant experiences and approaches on peacebuilding and
recovery; 7) strategic communication support, including development of a communications strategy for MTOT and
enhanced dissemination of MTOT products and information on services; and 8) basic computing, office equipment,
and vehicle purchase to enable MTOT to function at the national level and to establish a field office in Eastern
Ukraine.
13. Component 2 – Building knowledge on the socioeconomic impacts of displacement and combatant return (Bank
executed, US$400,000). This component supported research and analysis of the socioeconomic impacts of
displacement and combatant return, to provide robust data to underpin future planning and programming,
including the design and implementation of pilot activities under Component 3. This component aimed to identify
14 The original grant for recipient-executed activities (US$3.2 million) financed components 1 and 3, while Component 2 was
financed by a S$400,000 Bank-executed grant. Both grants were provided by the State and Peace Building Fund.
Page 7 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
policy and program responses to mitigate the potential negative socioeconomic impacts of the ongoing conflict and
to enhance the socioeconomic benefits of the presence of displaced populations in host communities. The
component was composed of two primary activities: a) a representative survey of IDPs and host communities to
assess the impact of displacement on issues such as labor markets/livelihoods, housing, municipal services,
education, return intentions and pull factors for return, healthcare, welfare, and social cohesion; and b) a baseline
assessment of the population of returning combatants from Eastern Ukraine to identify potential areas for
psychosocial and economic reintegration support.
14. Component 3 – Piloting activities to respond to the development challenges of displacement and combatant
return (Recipient executed, US$2.3 million). This component consisted of the implementation of pilot subprojects
to respond to the developmental needs of IDPs, former combatants and host communities, to complement
humanitarian response efforts. The design of these subprojects was informed by Component 2 data. Component 3
focused on strengthening MTOT capacity through implementation support for pilot subprojects in Eastern Ukraine
that, if successful, could be scaled up through future national and international financing. The component targeted
communities with high concentrations of former combatants and/or IDPs; areas where host communities were
already vulnerable due to conflict impacts, lack of employment and economic opportunities, and social cleavages;
and communities where there was a gap in national/international development support. The following sectors were
eligible for subproject funding: i) restoration of social and cultural infrastructure; ii) skills training and livelihoods
development, including related municipal services and social assistance; iii) health and psychosocial support; and
iv) social cohesion strengthening activities (e.g. youth dialogue, cultural exchanges).
15. Significant changes to the project during implementation included a restructuring with additional financing in May
2019, and a second restructuring in April 2020. The following changes were made:
a. Additional Financing. During the first restructuring, the grant amount for recipient executed activities was
increased by US$350,000, with funding provided by the Multi-Partner Trust Fund (MPTF) on Peacebuilding
and Recovery. The grant for recipient executed activities thus totaled US$3.55 million with the addition of
these funds. This additional funding enabled the expansion of Component 1 activities, and supported MTOT
in further advancing and institutionalizing a coordination platform to support implementation of the STP.
This support was in line with the PDO, which remained unchanged.
b. Extensions of closing dates. During the second restructuring, the closing date was extended to December
31, 2020. The establishment of MTOT in April 2016, through the merger of SADR with the State
Administration for the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City of Sevastopol, caused delays in the
signing of the initial Grant Agreement. This resulted in subsequent deferral of project effectiveness for the
recipient executed activities. Implementation of Component 3 was also delayed due to requirements from
the Ministry of Finance that a flow of funds mechanism be established and approved for MTOT to partner
with local councils in Eastern Ukraine to implement pilot subprojects. Extensions of closing dates were
therefore needed to enable completion of recipient-executed activities. During the first restructuring, the
project closing date was extended from June 3, 201915 to June 3, 2020 to enable the successful completion
15The original closing date of the initial grant provided by the State and Peace Building Fund was June 3, 2019. The closing date
of the additional financing from the MPTF was initially set for June 3, 2020. The original closing date shown in ICR’s datasheet
Page 8 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
of planned pilot activities under Component 3 and to complete the expanded capacity building activities
under Component 1. Quarantine measures imposed in March 2020 following the outbreak of COVID-19 in
the country necessitated yet another extension of the closing date to December 31, 2020 due to delayed
completion of ongoing activities under both recipient-executed components.
c. Changes to components and costs. With the additional financing of US$350,000, the total grant financing to
the GoU was US$3.55 million. The breakdown by components is summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Planned and Actual Component Costs under the Project
% of Total
Amount at Amount after Actual amount
Project Components Component
appraisal AF approval disbursed
share
Component 1 - MTOT/MRTOT Capacity
building, project management, and monitoring US$900,000 US$1,250,000 US$1,224,483 32%
and evaluation (Recipient Executed)
Component 2 - Building knowledge on the
socioeconomic impacts of displacement and US$400,000 US$400,000 US$400,000 10%
combatant return (Bank Executed)
Component 3 - Piloting activities to respond to
the development challenges of displacement US$2,300,000 US$2,300,000 US$2,249,850.11 58%
and combatant return (Recipient Executed)
TOTAL US$3,600,000 US$3,950,000 US$3,874,333.11 100%
d. Change in implementing agency. In April 2016, as the project was being approved, the implementing agency
(SADR) was subsumed under the new Ministry for Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally Displaced
Persons (MTOT). MTOT was, in turn, reorganized during project implementation. In 2020, it was renamed
Ministry for Reintegration of Temporarily Occupied Territories of Ukraine (MRTOT), under Resolution No.
212 of the Cabinet of Ministers of March 11, 2020. This change was reflected in the second restructuring in
April 2020. The Minister of MRTOT was also elevated to Vice-Prime Minister rank, underscoring the higher
strategic and political emphasis given to the reintegration agenda by the GoU.
e. Changes to the results framework. During the first project restructuring, several changes were made to the
results framework: (i) the end target dates of indicators were revised to reflect the new closing date of the
project, (ii) the intermediate results indicator on the number of conflict affected people receiving benefits in
first year of project effectiveness was revised as number of conflict affected people receiving benefits through
pilot activities, to capture beneficiary impacts over the course of the project, and (iii) one new intermediate
results indicator was added: MRTOT leads coordination platform and leadership series on peacebuilding and
recovering. No changes were made to the results framework during the second restructuring.16
(June 3, 2020) reflects the closing date of the MPTF grant, following the Project’s first restructuring.
16 Although the name of the implementing agency changed during project implementation, from MTOT to MRTOT, during the
second restructuring the Results Framework was not updated to reflect this change. Despite the fact that the second
restructuring extended the project closing date to enable the completion of activities, the end target dates for the relevant
indicators were not revised either.
Page 9 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
II. OUTCOME
Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome
16. Relevance of PDO. The PDO of building the capacity of the MRTOT to address the development impacts of the
conflict was, and remains, highly relevant to Ukraine’s current development priorities and strategic direction for
responding to the needs of conflict-affected populations in Eastern Ukraine. The Action Program issued by the
Cabinet of Ministers in October 2019 includes a focus on enhanced services, employment opportunities, and support
to conflict-affected populations. In October 2019, the Presidential Administration also held an investment forum in
Mariupol City, with the private sector, international financial institutions, and development partners to call for
investment in infrastructure development and economic opportunity in conflict-affected regions. Such investments
will require strong strategic planning and implementation capacity in MRTOT. The PDO also remains relevant to, and
consistent with, the CPF for the 2017-2021 period,17 which focuses on supporting Ukraine’s ambitious reform for
economic recovery, development, and growth. The project pursued an area-based approach that supported the
CPF’s Focus Area 3: Effective Services and Targeted Assistance/targeted support to conflict -affected populations.
The project also contributed to achievement of CPF cross-cutting issues such as public administration reform and
citizen engagement.
17. Achievement of PDO (efficacy). The Project succeeded in building the capacity of the MRTOT to address the
development impacts of the conflict, as evidenced by the following description of the achievements.
18. MRTOT has demonstrated improved capacity to lead and coordinate recovery planning and programming. As part
of the implementation of the STP―which guides the national and international response effort―MRTOT now is
leading the GoU’s development and implementation of policy and strategic engagement on peacebuilding and
recovery in Eastern Ukraine. Prior to the current MRTOT leadership, progress on the STP languished. MRTOT is now
an active proponent and coordinator of STP policy and investment activity for economic recovery, improved
infrastructure and services, and social resilience and peacebuilding programming for conflict-affected populations.
MRTOT led the development of GOU’s Strategy of Integration of Internally Displaced Persons and Implementation of
Long-Term Solutions to Internal Displacement (i.e. the IDP Strategy), approved in November 2017, which focuses on
durable solutions and long-term social and economic integration of IDPs, as well as support to host communities.
MRTOT is responsible for the implementation and monitoring of the strategy, in collaboration with line ministries,
and other central and local executive bodies. MRTOT developed the Concept of Economic Development of Donetsk
and Luhansk Regions approved in December 2020 by the Cabinet of Ministers, which provides the framework for the
development and implementation of the Strategy for Economic Development of the region. The Vice-Prime Minister
of Ukraine, Minister of MRTOT also chairs the Executive Board of the MPTF established between the GoU, UN, and
WB in 2016. The MPTF secretariat, which provides administrative, coordination and monitoring support to MPTF-
financed activities, is also housed within MRTOT.
19. MRTOT now attracts the support of other donors, given its demonstrated effectiveness in developing policy,
community outreach, and coordination functions. Development partners such as the Swiss Agency for Development
17International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, and Multilateral Investment
Guarantee Agency. Country Partnership Framework for Ukraine for the Period FY17-FY21. June 20, 2017. Report No. 114516-UA.
Page 10 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
and Cooperation (SDC), the EU, the British Embassy in Ukraine, the United States Agency for International
Development, the Danish Refugee Council, and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) were
initially reluctant to invest resources or time into developing relationships with the new untested ministry when it
was created. Several of these development partners provided support directly at the local level, which made
coordination more difficult. By project closure, however, these entities have concluded memoranda of cooperation
with the MRTOT, and they contribute to the ministry’s Data Portal, take part in MRTOT coordination sessions, fund
capacity building activities for the ministry, and coordinate their parallel financing of recovery and peacebuilding
activities in Eastern Ukraine with MRTOT. Having a strong MRTOT that now plays a strong role in coordination, has
made it easier for development partners to support activities in the East working closely with local authorities and
in full coordination at the national level. MRTOT now coordinates approximately US$250 million18 in development
programs financed by international donors.
20. MRTOT has also designed other mechanisms for aid coordination. Based on Harvard University’s Adaptive
Leadership methodology and the WB’s Collaborative Leadership for Resilience and Development (CL4RD)
approach, MRTOT designed a Leadership Series and Coordination Platform in 2019 to support GoU-led
peacebuilding and recovery efforts by bringing together local, regional and national government counterparts, as
well as international partners. The platform envisaged a series of dialogues and knowledge exchanges among these
stakeholders on recovery strategy, programming, financing, and results, to identify gaps, support the design of
peacebuilding and recovery programming, and track progress over time. The Coordination Platform was launched
on July 5, 2019 and since then has facilitated consultations with local authorities on the impacts of the COVID-19
outbreak. While a follow up event in the Leadership Series could not be held as envisaged due to changes in
government and the COVID-19 pandemic, MRTOT has been able to establish, on January 15, 2021, a Sector Working
Group (SWG) on Recovery and Reintegration in agreement with the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, drawing from
the design and purpose of the Coordination Platform. The SWG is co-chaired by the Deputy Minister of MRTOT.
Another important outcome of MRTOT’s strengthened capacity is that the ministry’s hub in Eastern Ukraine, which
consists of regional offices, now also facilitates coordination at the municipal level with local governments and other
stakeholders.
21. MRTOT has also developed a modern, innovative online platform for monitoring projects in the GCAs that
consolidates humanitarian and development data. The Data Portal on Economic and Social Recovery19 allows the
authorities to respond promptly to the challenges facing people in the east of the country and facilitate the delivery
of assistance from international humanitarian/development organizations. It is a coordination tool to help map and
monitor national and international programming and progress on peacebuilding, recovery, and development. The
portal enables the monitoring of indicators on socioeconomic aspects, peacebuilding and recovery; it also allows
MRTOT to identify and analyze needs and gaps on the ground, assess progress against the STP, and produce reports
for the different management levels that contributed to the design of the WB’s first investment project in the
conflict-affected areas, discussed in paragraph 24. The Data Portal is managed by MRTOT’s Directorate of Digital
Development, Digital Transformations and Digitization, and is updated by MRTOT staff and UN agencies portal focal
points. The portal also includes a function for community-based monitoring (e.g., enabling community members to
provide comments, upload photos, etc.).
Page 11 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
22. In addition, MRTOT has demonstrated improved communication capacity, as evidenced by the ministry’s website,
social networks, and communication materials developed and maintained by the ministry’s communication
department. Implementation of the ministry’s strategic communications plan has promoted transparency and
information sharing with communities in Eastern Ukraine on the STP and IDP Strategy, and on the GoU’s ongoing
support to conflict-affected populations. These efforts have given further confidence to citizens and development
partners in the GoU’s efforts toward integration of the conflict-affected areas.
23. The project has contributed to building MRTOT’s capacity through facilitating the participation of MRTOT’s
management and staff in a series of trainings and workshops on conflict-recovery, displacement response, and
peacebuilding, including: i) the Stockholm Forum on Peace and Security (2017); ii) the Annual Peacebuilding
Conference in Washington, D.C. (2017); iii) knowledge exchanges with counterparts in Georgia, Croatia and
Azerbaijan (2017, 2018); iv) the 9th Aspen Security Forum (2018, USA); v) combined online/in-person tailored
training to MRTOT staff and local partners by the U.S. Institute of Peace (2018, 2019); and vi) training workshops on
financial management, procurement, environmental and social management and the Environmental and Social
Framework organized by the WB (2017-2020). These helped build capacity at different levels ranging from high level
policy and strategy discussions to technical training on project preparation and implementation, including the
preparation of the Operations Manual for this project.
24. The knowledge generated and the activities piloted by the project influenced larger national and international
development policies and investments in peacebuilding and recovery. The survey on the socioeconomic impacts of
displacement and the baseline assessment of the psychosocial and economic reintegration needs of returning
combatants20 informed development policy, including: the GoU’s STP and the IDP Strategy. It also influenced the
thematic focus and/or targeting of development programming led by the WB (e.g. the first pilot activity under the
MPTF on Peacebuilding and Recovery, the Piloting Psychosocial Support to Conflict-Affected Populations in Ukraine
ASA that was carried out in 2018-2019 - P167208, as well as programming led by other development partners (e.g.
an SDC grant for the integration of mental health care in primary healthcare services is targeting a high concentration
of conflict-affected populations in Zaporizhzhya region). Both the analytical work carried out under Component 2
and the pilot activities under Component 3 also informed the design of the WB’s first investment project in the
conflict-affected areas. The Eastern Ukraine: Reconnect, Recover, Revitalize (3R) Project (P172348), which became
effective in March 2021, is designed to improve transport connectivity and promote agricultural sector recovery with
the active engagement of conflict-affected communities. It is being implemented by MRTOT in coordination with
Ukravtodor, Ukraine’s national roads agency. The lessons learned from engaging with local governments and
communities during the implementation of pilot subprojects, especially those related to providing equitable impacts
to vulnerable residents, including host communities, improving communications between national and local
counterparts, and providing targeted capacity-building assistance to local councils have informed the design of local
community-level engagement, capacity building, and communication activities under the 3R Project.
18 As of April 2021, MRTOT coordinates the implementation of 20 technical assistance and investment projects financed by
development partners, including by the governments of France, Sweden, Canada, Germany, United States, and Switzerland, as
well as by the Council of Europe, UN, EU, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.
19 The Data Portal on Economic and Social Recovery. URL is https://portal.mtot.gov.ua/
20 A survey of 2,004 IDPs and 2,021 host community members, and 20 focus group discussions with IDPs, veterans, and host
Page 12 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
25. The pilot activities under Component 3 also provided direct and indirect benefits to an estimated 2.4 million
individuals living in nine communities where pilot subprojects were implemented. Direct and indirect beneficiaries
include 44,292 IDPs, 41,390 former combatants and their family members, and 2,362,299 members of host
communities. By project closure, 15,135 individuals affected by the conflict (8,614 men and 6,521 women) had
received services from the pilot activities. Pilot subprojects, ranging in value from US$130,000 to US$400,000,
focused on skills development and livelihood generation (e.g. expansion of job opportunities, trainings for boosting
entrepreneurial potential and business development, trainings for psychologists and psychotherapists,
requalification activities, social and legal aid services, etc.); psychosocial support (e.g. seven centers established to
deliver a combination of medical, physical, and psychological rehabilitation/assistance and counseling); and social
infrastructure and public service delivery (e.g. three social and cultural centers for community engagement activities
and social services, including career guidance and psychosocial support). At project closure, nine of the 10 pilot
subprojects that were selected for financing had been successfully completed. One pilot subproject in Nova Vodolaha
community of Kharkiv region was not successfully delivered due to the low capacity of the local council, despite the
MRTOT’s and the WB’s capacity building efforts; MRTOT therefore decided to reallocate this subproject’s funding to
strengthen the remaining nine subprojects. The details of the subprojects are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Pilot Activities Implemented Under Component 3.
Amount
Region/Council Activities Number of Direct and Indirect Beneficiaries 21
(USD)
Zaporizhzhya 1 Zaporizhzhya Community center 277,800 IDPs: 10,400
city focused on Former combatants and their family members: 5,000
entrepreneurship and Local population: 731,900
job creation.
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
376 (228 men, 148 women)
2 Berdyansk Medical/rehabilitation 234,400 IDPs: 9,694
city center. Former combatants and their family members: 2,916
Local population: 115,414
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
162 (86 men, 76 women)
Mykolayiv 3 Mykolayiv Support center for job 270,400 IDPs: 5,541
city trainings and Former combatants and their family members: 12,825
entrepreneurship, and
Local population: 477,700
psychological and
psychotherapeutic Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
support. 3,592 (1,766 men, 1,826 women)
communities across Ukraine were conducted between the end of 2016 and the beginning of 2017. The survey report, Conflict in
Ukraine: Socioeconomic impacts of internal displacement and veteran return – Summary report, was published in May 2017,
with events in Washington, D.C. and Kyiv, Ukraine, jointly organized between the WB and the MRTOT. The report is available at:
https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/571011497962214803/conflict-in-
ukraine-socio-economic-impacts-of-internal-displacement-and-veteran-return-summary-report-may-2017
21 The results matrix for each pilot subproject provided by MRTOT to the local councils responsible for subproject
implementation requested only the recording of the number of conflict-affected beneficiaries who received services by project
closure. The potential number of individuals who may benefit directly and directly from the pilot activities is much larger,
including all IDPs, veteran combatants, and local populations in the project area.
Page 13 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
4 Pervomaisk Psychosocial and 216,000 IDPs: 400
city rehabilitation support Former combatants and their family members: 862
center.
Local population: 71,200
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
1,086 (651 men, 435 women)
Kharkiv 5 Kupyansk city Social and cultural 206,600 IDPs: 4,212
center (hub) for Former combatants and their family members: 228
provision of a range of
Local population: 55,650
services (e.g. career
guidance, legal Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
guidance, psychological 1,628 (485 men, 1,143 women)
services,
entrepreneurship, etc.
6 Pervomayskyi Center for 252,400 IDPs: 830
city rehabilitation, Former combatants and their family members: 208
adaptation and
Local population: 42,615
psychosocial assistance.
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
954 (371 men,583 women)
Dnipropetrovsk 7 Kryvyi Rih Center for psychological 129,900 IDPs: 7,400
city support and social Former combatants and their family members: 16,200
adaptation for conflict
Local population: 622,500
affected people and
their families, focusing Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
on people with 7,190 (4,900 men, 2,290 women)
disabilities.
8 Sursko- Center of public 247,100 IDPs: 55
Lytovske safety/community- Former combatants and their family members: 182
village based emergency
Local population: 6,520
response.
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure: 1
(1 men)
9 Kamyanske Center for medical 393,900 IDPs: 5,760
city rehabilitation and Former combatants and their family members: 2,969
psychological support.
Local population: 238,800
Beneficiaries that received services by project closure:
146 (126 men, 20 women)
26. Implementation efficiency. Implementation efficiency was reduced by delays in project effectiveness and
implementation that resulted from the implementing agency’s reorganization processes, staff turnovers, and the
need to establish a new mechanism to allow MRTOT funding to be used for payments related to the pilot activities
under Component 3. Such a mechanism was necessary given that MRTOT’s budget allocation only allowed payments
for activities under Component 1. With this, implementation of Component 3 commenced only in April 2018, i.e. two
years after project approval and 1.5 years after signing of the Grant Agreement. While implementation delays had a
bearing on the realization of the project’s benefits, it is reasonable to conclude that the benefits of the project in
terms of capacity strengthening, knowledge generation, and the pilot subprojects, and how these three components
helped inform government and development partners’ policies; far exceed the relatively modest project costs. The
project’s restructuring and closing date extension also accounted for the increase in scope due to the Additional
Financing.
Page 14 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
Overall Outcome Rating
27. Achievement of the overall outcome is rated satisfactory. The project was highly relevant to the GoU’s strategy, and
the PDO is relevant to, and consistent with, the CPF. The project was largely effective in building the capacity of
MRTOT to address the development impacts of the conflict through the three project components as discussed in
paragraphs 18 -26. The Coordination Platform and Leadership Series were successfully leveraged to consult with
local authorities on the needs and impacts related to the COVID-19 outbreak, and also led to the establishment of
the SWG, as discussed in paragraph 21. The utilization of these mechanisms, however, can be further enhanced going
forward. As a result, it is reasonable to state that the intermediate results indicator: MTOT/MRTOT leads
coordination platform and leadership series on peacebuilding and recovering was not optimally achieved. Given that
the first restructuring increased the scope of the project without changing the PDO, a split rating of the project is not
required.22
Other Outcomes and Impacts
28. Strengthened capacity of local councils. To enable the implementation of the subprojects under Component 3,
MRTOT jointly with the WB facilitated information sessions with local communities on a range of aspects, including
development of subproject proposals, procurement, financial management, environmental and social management,
and subproject management and monitoring; as well as on ways of strengthening social cohesion. Of the ten local
councils selected for subproject financing, three local councils have since been able to use the strengthened
knowledge and capacity to engage with international financial organizations who are providing additional funding
for the continuation of the subprojects.
III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME
29. Project implementation was affected by several factors, including the following:
30. Realistic objectives and adequate project design. The focus of the project on building client capacity
effectively responded to the need to strengthen the capacity and establish the credibility of MRTOT among
governmental and non-governmental stakeholders in Ukraine as well as among development partners. The
fact that MRTOT is currently recognized by all development partners as the leader of the recovery effort, and
the ministry’s coordination of various development operations financed by development partners, speaks to
the adequacy of the project’s focus and accomplishments. The complementarity of the project’s components
- building client capacity in a range of technical and project management areas; generating data and
knowledge; and piloting activities aimed at supporting communities in conflict-affected areas, including IDPs,
former combatants, and host communities - was an important factor in constructively engaging stakeholders
at all levels, including central government stakeholders, development partners, local administrations in
conflict-affected areas, and communities.
31. Reorganization of the implementing agency. The project’s implementing agency went through several
22According to Bank Guidance on Implementation Completion and Results Reports for Investment Project Financing, a split
rating is required when a project’s PDO or outcome targets have been formally revised, which is not the case.
Page 15 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
reorganizations. At the time of project approval, SADR was elevated to ministerial level and became MTOT.
This delayed the signing of the Legal Agreement, project effectiveness and the initial implementation of
activities, while new staff populated the nascent ministry. In addition, MTOT initiated a personnel
reorganization, during the early phases of project implementation, including changes in the Project
Coordinator. This led to additional delays in implementation of activities under components 1 and 3, as well
as an interruption in the processing of payments. Extensive staff turnover at the ministry and within the
Project Implementation Unit (PIU) (e.g. there were six different procurement consultants throughout the
project implementation) further contributed to delays in implementation. To address these challenges, the
WB team provided extensive support to the MTOT/MRTOT and the PIU through continuous technical
assistance and capacity building activities. The WB also processed two restructurings to extend the project’s
closing date and enable the completion of activities, and provided additional financing to strengthen capacity
building activities under Component 1.
32. Financial management requirements for the pilot subprojects. The Ministry of Finance required the
establishment of a new mechanism to enable MRTOT funding to be used for payments related to the pilot
activities under Component 3. This requirement necessitated negotiations between the WB, the MRTOT, and
the Ministries of Finance, and Economic Development and Trade. The funding mechanism was approved by a
Cabinet of Ministers Decree (#221) on March 28, 2018, more than two years after project approval. To
accommodate the delays caused by this issue, the WB processed the first restructuring to extend the closing
date of the project and enable completion of Component 3.
33. Low capacity of MRTOT and local partners. The introduction of the WB’s Procurement Regulations for IPF
Borrowers of July 2016 (revised in November 2017 and August 2018), and of the Systematic Tracking of
Exchanges in Procurement (STEP) system required extensive training of MRTOT staff. This was further
impacted by the high turnover in MRTOT procurement personnel. In addition, the low capacity of local
councils to substantively participate in planning and procurement of pilot subprojects also caused delays in
subproject launch and implementation in the early stages of the project. To address this issue, the WB and
MRTOT provided capacity building for local councils on fiduciary arrangements, project management,
environmental and social management, and monitoring and supervision. This capacity building of local
counterparts had a cumulative positive effect, eventually expediting implementation of Component 3 in the
last 18 months of the project, and also helping to prepare municipal counterparts for implementation of the
GoU’s national procurement system, Prozorro. Technical limitations in MRTOT’s website and server also
prevented the creation of the online MIS envisaged in project design.
34. The GoU’s new procurement system, Prozorro, was introduced midstream. Prozorro represented an
important advancement in the transparency of the GoU’s procurement processes. Nevertheless, its roll out
during the implementation of Component 3 activities introduced setbacks for local municipalities that
remained uncertain how to access the online system and to monitor compliance. This led to delays in
implementation as municipal counterparts feared being found negligent of not adhering to, or properly
utilizing, Prozorro principles and systems. The WB sought to address this challenge by providing capacity
building support to municipal-level authorities on procurement actions to smooth the transition to Prozorro.
35. Sustained commitment from both the GoU and the WB. Throughout project implementation and the
challenges outlined above, the GoU remained committed to the project, and to the recovery effort. The WB
also remained committed to supporting the GoU’s efforts, by providing close implementation support and
Page 16 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
technical assistance. The WB responded to the emerging needs of the client in a way that was consistent with
the project’s development objectives. For example, the WB provided continuous capacity building in a range
of areas, including in technical aspects and project management, to address the loss of capacity that resulted
from staff turnover at MRTOT.
36. COVID-19 related disruptions. The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 caused further delays in
project implementation as quarantine measures restricted the fulfillment of consultancy services, supervision
and monitoring. To address this issue and enable completion of project activities, the WB extended the closing
date of the project for a second time.
IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME
37. Bank Performance. Bank performance is rated satisfactory. Throughout the duration of the project and the
challenges encountered during implementation, the WB team remained intensively engaged with the GoU
counterparts. At the outset, the newly established SADR had no previous experience with policy formulation,
coordination mechanisms, or in preparing and implementing investment projects. WB support was directed
toward building SADR’s capacity to prepare and influence project documentation during each step of project
preparation. The composition of the WB team working on the project―which included expertise on financial
management, procurement, and environmental and social management, forced displacement, fragility,
conflict and violence, and psychosocial support―ensured that the support provided was technically sound
and aligned with the country’s strategic priorities. WB support to the project was complemented by the
parallel PA on Recovery and Peacebuilding Support (P156720), designed to support the GoU’s development
priorities by promoting peacebuilding, mainstreaming conflict sensitivity in diagnostics and strategies, and
promoting resilience to conflict in development interventions.
38. The analytical products prepared under Component 2 contributed to a larger body of knowledge created by
the WB in Ukraine, including the Mental Health Assessment (2017),23 the Skills for a Modern Ukraine Report
(2017),24 and the Ukraine Growth Study (2019).25 The WB team ensured that the MTOT/MRTOT was familiar
with and operationalized the survey and assessment conducted under Component 2 as well as these
additional WB analytical works. The WB team also closely supervised the implementation of pilot subprojects,
in close coordination with MRTOT and local authorities, to minimize implementation risks and strengthen the
capacity of country counterparts in subproject implementation and monitoring.
39. Quality of M&E. The quality of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) arrangements is rated substantial. The
results framework was appropriate for monitoring progress toward achieving the PDO. There were moderate
shortcomings in the design and implementation of a few aspects. While project design envisaged the
23 Mental Health in Transition: Assessment and guidance for strengthening integration of mental health into primary health care
and community-based service platforms in Ukraine. Global Mental Health Initiative, Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. 2017.
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/310711509516280173/Mental-health-in-transition-assessment-and-guidance-for-
strengthening-integration-of-mental-health-into-primary-health-care-and-community-based-service-platforms-in-Ukraine
24 Skills for a Modern Ukraine. Ximena Del Carpio, Olga Kupets, Noël Muller, and Anna Olefir. Washington, D.C.: World Bank
Group. 2017. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/213551473856022449/Ukraine-Urbanization-rev.
25 Ukraine Growth Study Final Document: Faster, Lasting and Kinder. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. 2019.
https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/543041554211825812/ukraine-growth-
study-final-document-faster-lasting-and-kinder
Page 17 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
development of an MIS, this system was not developed, resulting in monitoring activities not being
automated, but data collected through correspondence, telephone communication, and supervision visits.
Nevertheless, detailed monitoring data was regularly collected and documented in semi-annual and annual
progress reports; and interim results indicators, as well as the pilot subprojects information were integrated
into the Data Portal, thus allowing transparent monitoring of project implementation. Project activities also
was directed on providing technical support and on Data Portal institutionalization within the Ministry’s
department. The measurement of beneficiaries of pilot subprojects was based on a narrow definition of
beneficiaries (i.e. the conflict-affected persons who received services from the pilot activities during the life
of the project), which underestimates the impact of the pilot activities in the target communities. By project
closure, nine of the ten subprojects selected were functional and expected to continue providing services to
the communities. The estimated number of potential direct and indirect beneficiaries from these services is
thus much greater than the number of individuals who received services in the short period between
completion of the pilots and project closure. The results framework was proactively modified during the first
restructuring to account for delays in implementation and capture beneficiary impacts over the course of the
project, as well as to capture MRTOT’s improved capacity in greater detail.
40. Compliance Issues.
41. Safeguards. The project triggered OP/BP 4.01: Environmental Assessment. The PIU’s safeguards specialist
regularly monitored social and environmental risks under the supervision of the WB safeguards specialists.
An Environmental Impact Assessment, and site-specific Environmental and Social Management
Plans/Checklists were prepared, monitored where necessary, and incorporated as annexes to contracts for
subproject implementation. MRTOT established a grievance redress mechanism (GRM) and provided
guidance to local councils on public consultation processes and the design of GRMs for the subprojects.
Stakeholders’ and public consultation were held for all ten subprojects to inform communities about proposed
activities and planned civil works (as applicable); representatives of all interested parties were also informed
of the decision to cancel one subproject in Nova Vodolaha community in May 2020. The PIU’s safeguards
specialist, as required, collected and recorded grievances and feedback in a log submitted to the WB regularly.
The PIU’s safeguards specialist visited all subprojects to explain the nature of the GRM and provide a log
template to be filled on a quarterly basis. Throughout the implementation period, the GRM recorded only two
informational requests and three proposals for extending outreach activities. The safeguards rating was
satisfactory through project implementation.
42. Financial Management (FM). During project implementation, adequate FM arrangements were consistently
in place, and qualified FM staff was available to execute FM functions and disbursements. The project
complied with the reporting requirements, including semiannual reports and audit reports, each of which
were submitted on time and considered satisfactory. All audit reports on the project’s financial statements
were issued with a clean opinion. The PIU’s FM staff also benefited from capacity building over the tenure of
the project. However, a virtual monitoring visit conducted in March 2021 found that staff turnover during the
COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns regarding the full and timely closure of books, including the completion
of the final audit and the refund of unused funds from the Designated Account. Settlement of this issue is
ongoing at the time of ICR writing. The FM rating was therefore downgraded to moderately satisfactory, and
the FM risk was raised to substantial.
43. Procurement Management. The PIU experienced high turnover of procurement staff over project
Page 18 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
implementation (four specialists and two assistants in total) and the WB’s regular procurement post reviews
revealed that the qualifications and abilities of procurement staff was inconsistent. This led to multiple delays
in procurements and selections, and requests for WB approval of exceptions when processes did not strictly
follow WB procurement requirements. Only at the final stage of project implementation, MRTOT was able to
attract and retain a highly qualified procurement professional capable of handling procurements according to
the WB’s Procurement Regulations and the new national procurement system Prozorro. Since 2017, the WB
has considered Prozorro acceptable for the procurements of goods and works of small value under Bank-
financed investments. Procurement plans and notices were updated and published regularly. Due to the
procurement staff turnover and its impact on project implementation, the procurement risk was rated high.
44. Risks to development outcomes. Important risks during implementation included possible social conflict
around who would benefit from the project, and the potential for conflict escalation. The project sought to
mitigate these risks by targeting activities at IDPs, former combatants and host communities, and by
maximizing learning opportunities for national and local stakeholders. It is uncertain whether these efforts
will have been sufficient to offset the risks related to ongoing political volatility in the region. By project
closure, there is a risk that the GoU may not be able to continue devoting sufficient attention and resources
to advancing recovery efforts, in light of its many competing demands, further staff changes and the
subsequent loss of the capacity built through the project, and as the conflict in Eastern Ukraine continues and
becomes more protracted. At the national level, there is a risk of inadequate coordination between ministries,
national services, and the international donor community, as personnel changes over time and GoU
administrations define new priorities and respond to new demands. By project closure, MRTOT has clearly
consolidated its central role in coordinating peacebuilding and recovery efforts in Eastern Ukraine.
Participation of all stakeholders involved in the recovery effort in the Coordination Platform and the quality
of the inputs they have provided to the Data Portal, have thus far been satisfactory. Maintaining this
engagement will require sustained leadership from MRTOT and management of these resources. MRTOT’s
continued engagement with development partners through the coordination of development operations
financed by those partners (including the WB-financed 3R Project) minimizes the risk that recovery efforts will
not be sustained. The continued capacity building that MRTOT will receive through the 3R Project and the
expectations from development partners that development operations be implemented in a timely manner
will help mitigate the risks outlined above.
V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS
45. Institution building is a long-term investment that requires a sustained focus on central and local
government institutions, including through building their capacity in a range of interrelated areas. While
other international partners present in Ukraine started working directly with regional and local
administrations in Eastern Ukraine to circumvent the slow pace of the central government institutions, the
WB has continued to highlight the importance of working at all levels of government, and to support a national
strategy of outreach and support to Eastern Ukraine. While the response at the local level is all-important,
national-level policies have the potential to strengthen the basic functioning of local governments in the east
and facilitate reconstruction of the social and economic fabric.26 The needs on the ground are multi-sectoral
26The World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development also underscores the long-term effort needed to
build and consolidate institutions, particularly in contexts of fragility, conflict and violence. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2011.
Link: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/4389
Page 19 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
and therefore coordination at the national level allows for better targeting and integration of
investments/programs, to ensure inclusion of all areas and social groups, and prevent duplication or gaps to
the extent possible. The role of local governments is especially important for the implementation of activities
at the local level. Coordination was not easy to begin with. Early in the conflict, most development partners
did not appreciate the value of coordinating with the GoU. MRTOT leadership and the WB therefore engaged
in repeated outreach efforts to demonstrate the value of MRTOT and the project. The elevation of MRTOT
and the Minister in charge to the rank of Vice-Prime Minister signals the commitment of the GoU to recovery
and peacebuilding in the conflict-affected regions, and validates the WB’s sustained focus on building the
capacity of central government institutions and ensuring a strong partnership between national and local
governments. The fact that other development partners now also rely on the MRTOT for policy guidance and
coordination of peacebuilding and recovery priorities is further evidence of the importance of sustaining a
long-term and multi-faceted engagement to build the capacity and credibility of central government
institutions.
46. The combination of diagnostic work, coordination mechanisms, and investments at the local level is an
effective way of addressing needs and challenges, particularly in a context of fragility and conflict. The
analysis carried out under Component 2 ensured that investments at the local level were balanced and
responded to the needs of the affected groups. This is especially important in contexts of fragility and conflict.
The analytical work also helped inform the policy approach, and the consultative process through which
research findings were shared and validated, helped ensure the buy-in and ownership of the various
governmental and non-governmental stakeholders involved. Coordination platforms can also play an
important role in developing a shared understanding of the issues and in building consensus about the
solutions. Establishing a coordination platform among donors, humanitarian and development actors, central
government ministries and agencies, regional and local authorities, and civil society organizations can play an
important role in the recovery process, given the cross-cutting nature of recovery needs and response
strategies. The fact that the Coordination Platform developed under the project, for instance, became the
model for the SWG on Recovery and Reintegration speaks to the effectiveness of this mechanism to bring
together the various stakeholders to coordinate responses to the conflict and recovery. Learning lessons is an
ongoing process, and the Coordination Platform that the project helped establish has facilitated that process.
The Data Platform was an important element of this coordination platform, as it enabled a transparent
monitoring and mapping of programs/activities using a shared results framework to collect, share and analyze
data.
47. Focusing equally on the needs of IDPs, former combatants and host communities helps mitigate social risks.
Recovery efforts must be careful to demonstrate benefits to the general population, not just IDPs and former
combatants. Preferential resource allocation to IDPs and former combatants could risk further deteriorating
already weak social cohesion. Interestingly, the survey and assessment conducted under Component 2
revealed a convergence of the economic well-being of IDPs and host communities. For example, hosts cited a
rise in prices and communal tariffs, while IDPs referenced rent, utilities, and an inability to find permanent,
well-paying employment as causes for anxiety and economic concern. While IDPs have endured chronic and
consistent fragility since their displacement, and faced more uncertainty in securing permanent employment,
housing, and accessing services, host populations lost more ground as a result of the conflict, essentially
bringing them closer to the socio-economic level of IDPs. As the conflict becomes protracted and forced
displacement becomes static, fewer IDPs intend to return home. This underscored the need for policies that
benefit all populations groups. The project’s approach of establishing and strengthening services to IDPs and
Page 20 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
former combatants within the context of facilities and institutions that also provide benefits to host
populations thus proved effective.
48. Flexibility and adaptation are essential to build trust among institutions, especially in situations of conflict,
fragility, and historical polarization. Despite the fact that project design accurately identified the country’s
political risks, it did not anticipate the difficulties that the new ministry would encounter in staffing, or with
intra-governmental relations. While there were no systemic failures, delays in project implementation
required extensions of closing dates. Significant investments in outreach to local governments and
populations was also required to develop the relationships necessary for national/subnational government
collaboration for the pilot subprojects to be implemented. In Ukraine, as in other countries in the post-Soviet
space, historical animosities, local manifestations of geo-political polarization, and stalled economic
transitions can play a stronger than anticipated role in delaying operations. As the survey revealed, neither
government authorities, both at the national and local levels, nor the services that they provide (particularly
health) are well perceived by either host populations or IDPs, which underscores the opportunity for building
a relationship of trust and coordination among the various levels of government.
49. Supporting community-based infrastructure and services that provide psychosocial support is an effective
way to help communities cope with recurrent adversity and conflict. Mental health issues are common in
Ukraine due to the increasingly protracted conflict that has disproportionally impacted the eastern region.
The mental health system in Ukraine is generally centralized, and most staff and services are concentrated in
psychiatric and narcological hospitals and inpatient units. Only 2.5 percent of the country’s health budget is
dedicated to mental health, the majority of which (89 percent) is provided to psychiatric hospitals. The
project’s approach of establishing community-based centers to provide psychosocial support services and
counseling sought to address this gap in the country’s mental health system by bringing these services closer
to the communities that need them. Replication of this effort at scale would require improved engagement
with regional and local governments. It would also require strengthening referral pathways among different
formal and informal service providers in the health and social systems, and to foster communication,
information sharing, and multidisciplinary teamwork while protecting patient confidentiality; supporting the
creation of a pool of counsellors—preferably individuals who are former combatants themselves and with
whom those seeking psychosocial support services can more easily establish a rapport—trainers, and
supervisors; and an awareness-raising program targeting both care givers and potential beneficiaries.
50. The impacts of fragility, conflict and violence in middle-income countries may be similar to those seen in
low-income countries. It is often assumed that middle-income countries facing fragility, conflict and violence
have sufficient institutional capacity to address such challenges in a qualitatively different way than low-
income countries. Many of the experiences in this project challenge that assumption, with events and
developments in Ukraine resembling those in other contexts of fragility, conflict and violence in low-income
countries. The RPA proved to be effective in this regard, by offering both technical and implementation-
related analysis to the GoU. The detailed implementation recommendations of the RPA helped guide the
development of the MRTOT and the design of this project. This highlights the utility of RPAs that attempt to
establish a government-led architecture for integrating findings into government policy, strategies and
. programs.
Page 21 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS
A. RESULTS INDICATORS
A.1 PDO Indicators
Objective/Outcome: The objective of the project is to build the capacity of the Recipient to address the development impacts of the conflict.
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
MTOT demonstrates improved Yes/No N Y Y Y
capacity to lead and coordinate
recovery planning and 04-Apr-2016 06-May-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
programming.
Comments (achievements against targets):
The second restructuring of the project did not update the Results Framework, therefore the name of this indicator does not reflect the current name of
the implementing agency, i.e. MRTOT instead of MTOT. This indicator is measured by the observation of MRTOT’s ability to implement the State Target
Program, by leading and/or coordinating on the following: (1) development of two strategy documents approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in
2017 (State Target Program for Recovery and Peacebuilding in the Eastern Regions of Ukraine, and Strategy of Integration of Internally Displaced Persons
and Implementation of Long-Term Solutions to Internal Displacement, i.e. the IDP Strategy), and development of the framework document approved by the
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in 2020 for the conflict-affected areas (Concept of Economic Development of Donetsk and Luhansk Regions); (2)
establishment of the Coordination Platform that brings together local, regional and national government counterparts, and international partners, and
chairmanship of the Sector Working Group on Recovery and Reintegration; (3) monitoring the conflict and recovery efforts through managing the Data
Portal on Economic and Social Recovery; and (4) improved capacity of MRTOT’s Communication Department.
Page 22 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Knowledge and pilot activities Number 0.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
through SPF project influence
larger national and 04-Apr-2016 06-May-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
international development
policies and investments in
peacebuilding and recovery.
Comments (achievements against targets):
The following development programming was informed by the surveys and the pilots carried out under this project:
1. State Target Program for Recovery and Peacebuilding in the Eastern Regions of Ukraine, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers in December 2017.
2. Strategy of Integration of Internally Displaced Persons and Implementation of Long-Term Solutions to Internal Displacement, i.e. the IDP Strategy
developed by MRTOT and approved by the Cabinet of Ministers in November 2017.
3. Piloting Psychosocial Support to Conflict-Affected Populations in Ukraine ASA, financed by the MPTF on Peacebuilding and Recovery (2018-2019).
4. Integration of Mental Health on Primary Healthcare Level, US$50,000 grant from the SDC (implemented from 2019-2020 in the Zaporizhzhya region
to complement the WB-financed Serving People, Improving Health Project, P144893).
5. Eastern Ukraine: Reconnect, Recover, Revitalize (3R) Project (P172348), US$100 million loan financed by the WB (approved in November 2020).
A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators
Component: Component 1
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
MOT Operations Manual Yes/No N Y Y Y
Page 23 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
developed and implemented 16-Mar-2016 07-May-2019 07-May-2018 30-Aug-2018
(demonstrating fiduciary
oversight, procurement,
safeguards and M&E capacity).
Comments (achievements against targets):
The Operational Manual was approved on August 30, 2018 and amended in September 2020. The second restructuring of the project did not update the
Results Framework, therefore the name of this indicator does not reflect the current name of the implementing agency, i.e. MRTOT.
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Number of Number 0.00 6.00 18.00 30.00
workshops/knowledge
exchanges held to build MTOT 16-Mar-2016 01-Apr-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
and broader GoU capacity for
recovery and peacebuilding
planning, project design and
implementation.
Comments (achievements against targets):
The second restructuring of the project did not update the Results Framework, therefore the name of this indicator does not reflect the current name of
the implementing agency, i.e. MRTOT. Knowledge exchange and learning events to build MRTOT and broader GoU capacity included the following: 1. Ten
workshops/trainings on: financial management and procurement, safeguards procedures, approaches and mechanisms for citizen engagement, business
outreach, integrity, and Environmental and Social Framework. 2. Knowledge exchanges with counterparts in Georgia, Croatia and Azerbaijan on solutions to
address the socioeconomic needs of IDPs (2017-2018). 3. Participation at international conferences, e.g. Stockholm Forum on Peace and Development
(2017), Annual Peacebuilding Conference in Washington, D.C. (2017), 9th Aspen Security Forum, USA (2018). 4. Consultations and trainings for the
implementation of the pilot subprojects: consultation on the selection of pilot subprojects in Dnipro (June, 2017); workshops on project management,
finance, procurement, safeguards, communication and knowledge exchange between subprojects implementors (February 2018); round table with
subprojects implementors and local authorities for presenting interim results of subprojects implementation (December 2019); and presentation of final
Page 24 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
results and outcomes of pilot subprojects to local authorities and development partners (December 22, 2020) 5. Weeklong training seminar of the
International Training Center on “Advanced Contract Management�? (April 23-27, 2018); 6. Combined online/in-person tailored trainings to MRTOT staff
and local partners by the U.S. Institute of Peace on conflict management and peacebuilding (2018-2019) 7. Series of outreach and
informational/testing/learning sessions on Data Portal with regional and local officials in Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhya, Kharkiv, Donetsk, and Luhansk
regions (November 2018); 8. Consultation workshop with national ministries, regional authorities, non-governmental organizations, and international
agencies on the design of the Coordination Platform and associated Data Portal in Kyiv (July 5, 2019); 9. MRTOT, World Bank and United Nations/OCHA
hosted a booth at the International Investment Forum at the Initiative of the President of Ukraine in Mariupol city, Donetsk Oblast (October 2019); 10.
Launch event of the leadership series of dialogues, which brought together state secretaries and senior officials from diverse ministries, mayors from
Eastern Ukraine, and the former Prime Minister of Greece, George Papandreou, in Kyiv (February 14, 2019); 11. Two-day workshop on “Community-Based
Development and Conflict Prevention�? in Washington, D.C. (June 13-14, 2019).
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
MTOT leads coordination Text No GoU-led MTOT has established MTOT has established Yes
platform and leadership series coordination platform well-functioning well-functioning
on peacebuilding and or leadership series in coordination platform
recovering. place coordination platform and leadership series
and leadership series among GoU officials
on peacebuilding and
among GoU officials
recovery
on peacebuilding and
recovery
01-Apr-2019 03-Jun-2020 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
Comments (achievements against targets):
The second restructuring of the project did not update the Results Framework, therefore the name of this indicator does not reflect the current name of
the implementing agency, i.e. MRTOT. The MRTOT established a Coordination Platform and initiated a leadership series (i.e. a series of dialogue and
Page 25 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
knowledge exchanges) that brings together local, regional and national government counterparts, and international partners. In 2020, a Sector Working
Group on Recovery and Reintegration was established by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, drawing from the design and purpose of the Coordination
Platform; the Sector Working Group on Recovery and Reintegration is chaired by the Deputy Minister of MRTOT.
Component: Component 2
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Design/implementation of a Yes/No N Y Y Y
comprehensive assessment of
the socio-economic impacts of 16-Mar-2016 31-Jan-2018 31-Jan-2018 20-Jun-2017
displacement on IDPs and host
communities is completed and
disseminated.
Comments (achievements against targets):
The Summary Report – Survey on Socio-Economic Impacts of Displacement and Veteran Return presents the findings and recommendations of the
comprehensive assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of displacement on IDPs and host communities, and the psychosocial and socioeconomic
reintegration needs of former combatants. The report was launched in Kyiv on March 30, 2017 and in Washington D.C. on May 8, 2017.
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Design/implementation of a Yes/No N Y Y Y
comprehensive assessment of
psychosocial and 04-Apr-2016 29-Dec-2017 29-Dec-2017 20-Jun-2017
socioeconomic integration
needs of former combatants is
Page 26 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
completed and disseminated.
Comments (achievements against targets):
The Summary Report – Survey on Socio-Economic Impacts of Displacement and Veteran Return presents the findings and recommendations of the
comprehensive assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of displacement on IDPs and host communities, and the psychosocial and socioeconomic
reintegration needs of former combatants. The report was launched in Kyiv on March 30, 2017 and in Washington D.C. on May 8, 2017.
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Number of trainings/capacity Number 0.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
building opportunities for
GoU/other stakeholders in 04-Apr-2016 05-Jan-2018 05-Jan-2018 29-Mar-2017
design/implementation of
survey approaches for conflict-
affected populations.
Comments (achievements against targets):
In 2017, three working sessions were organized between the WB, MRTOT, PwC, GoU stakeholders, development partners (e.g. UNHCR, UNOCHA, IOM and
REACH), civil society organizations and former combatants to: (i) present the results of the quantitative research and discuss the design and contents of
the qualitative research; (ii) present the preliminary research findings and discuss suggestions for specific interventions and recommendations; and (iii)
launch the final survey findings.
Component: Component 3
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Page 27 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
At least 75% of pilot project Yes/No N Y Y Y
investments achieve their
stated objectives. 16-Mar-2016 06-May-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
Comments (achievements against targets):
97% of pilot subprojects (US$2.2 million in project investments) reached the objectives set in the specific results indicators stipulated in the respective
Cooperation Agreements.
Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at
Indicator Name Baseline Original Target
Measure Target Completion
Conflict affected people Number 0.00 250.00 10000.00 15135.00
receiving benefits through pilot
activities. 22-May-2017 06-May-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
Conflict affected ppl receiving Number 0.00 125.00 5000.00 6521.00
benefits through pilot
activities–female. 22-May-2017 06-May-2019 03-Jun-2020 31-Dec-2020
Comments (achievements against targets):
The number of beneficiaries reported by the local councils responsible for subproject implementation reflects only the beneficiaries who received services
by project closure. It is estimated that the total number of potential direct and indirect beneficiaries of the pilot activities is much higher, as the
communities where pilot activities were implemented host a total of 44,292 IDPs, 41,390 ATO/JFOs (i.e. veterans and their family members), and
2,362,299 local population. The pilot activities thus have the potential to benefit close to 2.4 million people.
Page 28 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
B. ORGANIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PDO
Objective/Outcome 1 Build the capacity of the MRTOT to address the development impacts of the conflict
1. MTOT/MRTOT demonstrates improved capacity to lead and coordinate recovery planning and
programming;
Outcome Indicators
2. Knowledge and pilot activities through project influence larger national and international development
policies and investments in peacebuilding and recovery.
1. MTOT/MRTOT Operations Manual developed and implemented (demonstrating fiduciary oversight,
procurement, safeguards and M&E capacity).
2. Number of workshops/knowledge exchanges held to build MTOT/MRTOT and broader GoU capacity for
recovery and peacebuilding planning, project design and implementation.
3. MTOT/MRTOT leads coordination platform and leadership series on peacebuilding and recovering.
4. Design/implementation of a comprehensive assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of displacement on IDPs
and host communities is completed and disseminated.
Intermediate Results
5. Design/implementation of a comprehensive assessment of psychosocial and socioeconomic integration needs
Indicators
of former combatants is completed and disseminated.
6. Number of trainings/capacity building opportunities for GoU/other stakeholders in design/implementation of
survey approaches for conflict-affected populations.
7. At least 75% of pilot project investments achieve their stated objectives.
8. Conflict affected people receiving benefits through pilot activities.
9. Conflict affected population receiving benefits through pilot activities–female.
10. MTOT/MRTOT leads coordination platform and leadership series on peacebuilding and recovering.
1. One Operational Manual developed and updated to guide project implementation.
Key Outputs by 2. One comprehensive assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of displacement on IDPs and host communities,
Component and assessment of the psychosocial and socioeconomic reintegration needs of former combatants, Summary
(linked to the Report – Survey on Socioeconomic Impacts of Displacement and Veteran Return.
achievement of the 3. One Coordination Platform established (which later transformed into the current SWG on Recovery and
Objective/Outcome 1) Reintegration).
4. Two regional MRTOT offices established in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
Page 29 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
5. Nine centers established in nine communities to provide support services in various areas (e.g. psychosocial
support, employment and entrepreneurship, medical and rehabilitation services, community safety and
emergency response, etc.).
6. Eight workshops/trainings/seminars on conflict-recovery, displacement response, and peacebuilding in which
MRTOT management and staff participated.
7. Fourteen workshops/trainings on project design and implementation in which MRTOT staff and consultants
participated.
8. Eight trainings/seminars for GoU stakeholders (local authorities from Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhya, Kharkiv,
Donetsk, and Luhansk regions, and representatives of national ministries), non-governmental organizations, and
international agencies on various topics (e.g. design and implementation of subprojects, design and
implmeentation of the coordination platform/data portal, and the leadership series).
9. Three knowledge exchanges between MRTOT and government counterparts in Croatia, Georgia, and
Azerbaijan.
Page 30 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
.
ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT
Amount at Approval Actual at Project Percentage of Approval
Components
(US$M) Closing (US$M) (US$M)
Component 1 (RE): MRTOT
capacity building, project
900,000.00 1,224,483.00 136%
management, and
monitoring and evaluation
Component 2 (BE): Building
knowledge on the socio-
economic impacts of 400,000.00 400,000.00 100%
displacement and combatant
return
Component 3: Piloting
activities to respond to the
development challenges of 2,300,000.00 2,249,850.11 98%
displacement and combatant
return
Total 3,600,000.00 3,874,333.11 108%
Page 31 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS
The Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building Project supported the GoU’s development
priorities for Eastern Ukraine by promoting peacebuilding, conflict sensitivity and resilience to conflict. The
project supported reform for economic recovery, development and growth and helped to move quicker in further
reform.
The goal of the Project to build capacity of MRTOT to address the development impacts of the conflict through
capacity building, knowledge generation and pilot recovery and peacebuilding activities is reached.
The Project effected many people in eastern regions including IDPs, Anti-Terrorist Operation (ATO) veterans and
their family members and this is the main valuable result. Creation of institutions in regions like modern
comprehensive rehabilitation center and center for studying, re-qualification, primary legal and psychological aid
will help the regions to have further sustainable result even after the project completion. Training were not less
important during the Project implementation as re-qualification, psychotherapeutic sessions and psychosocial
trainings helps IDPs, ATO veterans and their family members to improve the quality of their lives and to be
employed. More than 15 thousand beneficiaries had received services by the project closure and potentially
more than 2.3 million people of local population now has access to these services.
The Project helped MRTOT in attracting other investors and to strengthen its institutional capacity becoming
more efficient in further collaboration with International Financial Institutions. The Data Portal on Economic and
Social Recovery created under the Project will help MRTOT in control and efficient implementation of projects.
Page 32 of 33
The World Bank
Ukraine: Conflict Response and Recovery Pilot and Capacity Building (P158091)
ANNEX 4. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY)
Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Action Program, October 2019.
Concept of Economic Development of Donetsk and Luhansk Regions, 2020.
Conflict in Ukraine: Socioeconomic impacts of internal displacement and veteran return – Summary report,
World Bank, May 2017.
Country Partnership Framework for Ukraine for the Period FY17-FY21, World Bank Group, June 20, 2017.
Economic Connectivity of Trade in Ukraine, Swiss Confederation, 2016.
Mental Health in Transition: Assessment and guidance for strengthening integration of mental health into
primary health care and community-based service platforms in Ukraine. Global Mental Health Initiative
Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group, 2017.
Number of Existing Population of Ukraine as of January 1, 2020, State Statistics Service of Ukraine, 2020
Project Appraisal Document for Eastern Ukraine: Reconnect, Recover, Revitalize Project, World Bank, 2020.
Report on the human rights situation in Ukraine 16 August to 15 November 2015, UN Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights, 2015.
Skills for a Modern Ukraine, Ximena Del Carpio, Olga Kupets, Noël Muller, and Anna Olefir, World Bank, 2017.
State Target Program for Recovery and Peacebuilding in the Eastern Regions of Ukraine, Government of
Ukraine, 2017.
Strategy of Integration of Internally Displaced Persons and Implementation of Long-Term Solutions to Internal
Displacement, Government of Ukraine, 2017.
The World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security, and Development. World Bank, Washington, D.C., 2011
Ukraine Economic Update, World Bank, October 2015.
Ukraine Growth Study Final Document: Faster, Lasting and Kinder, World Bank, 2019.
Ukraine: Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment, United Nations, European Union, World Bank Group, March
2015.
Page 33 of 33