Page 1 INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET CONCEPT STAGE Report No.: AC1225 Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: February 15, 2005 I. BASIC INFORMATION A. Basic Project Data Country: Kenya Project ID: P087479 Project Name: Basic Education Sector Program Task Team Leader: Michael Mills Estimated Appraisal Date: May 11, 2005 Estimated Board Date: September 22, 2005 Managing Unit: AFTH1 Lending Instrument: SIM Sector: Primary education (50%) Secondary education (50%) Theme: Education for All; Decentralization Safeguard Policies Specialists in the task team: Serigne Omar Fye, and Kristine Schwebach (AFTS1) Loan/Credit amount ($m.): IDA: 50.0 Other financing amounts by source: Department for International Development (DIFD) Government of Canada ($m) 65.0 TBD B. Project Objectives [from section 2 of PCN] The project development objective is to assist the Government of Kenya in its implementation of the Kenya Education Sector Strategic Plan. As part of the process of supporting and attaining the goals of the KESSP, the project development objectives from July 2005 to June 2007 are: (i) to raise the net primary enrollment rate to at least 85 percent for boys and girls (baseline of 78 percent in Year 2003), and to raise the net primary enrollment rate in North-Eastern Province to 25 percent (baseline of 18 percent in Year 2003); (ii) to raise the primary completion rate to 65 percent (baseline of 57 percent in Year 2003); (iii) to increase the number of Form 1 secondary school places by 5 percent (baseline of 235,000 places in Year 2003); (iv) to improve the efficiency of spending on education and the opportunity to learn at the basic level (by ensuring that the proportion of the overall education budget allocated to the primary sub-sector does not fall, that there is a sufficient allocation in the budget for non-salary operating costs, and that the unit cost of secondary education is reduced); and (v) to establish an agreed policy framework for the TIVET and higher education sub-sectors. C. Project Description [from section 3 of PCN] Page 2 It is proposed that: (i) in the KESSP, the Government would increase the budgetary allocations for agreed, core, priority programs and activities; (ii) the Basic Education Sector Program (BESP) would support the KESSP through a Sector Investment Credit of $50 million; (iii) the financial support from IDA would be disbursed against actual spending on an agreed part and percentage of the Government’s education program in FY06 and FY07 (based on quarterly financial monitoring reports); and (iv) there would be scope for pooling of funds by other donors in an “education account”, assuming that there is (as expected) interest among other external agencies for supporting this approach. The total annual expenditure for the education core poverty programs is about K.Sh. 8 billion (equivalent to about $100 million, compared to the total education budget of about $800 million). The list of core programs and the budgets for them would be updated and revised in the light of the ongoing MPER for the education sector (due to be completed in January 2005) and the finalization of the design of the KESSP. It is expected that a substantial portion of the funding would be for items such as: · an enhanced program of school construction and rehabilitation (targeted on the poorest parts of the country, including in the ASAL areas); · per capita grants to primary schools for instructional materials; · support for NGO and community schools in slum areas; · expanded school health program (including de-worming of children); · teacher in-service training program for existing primary teachers; · reformed program of special education; · scaling-up of the HIV education program in schools; and · Secondary school bursaries targeted for poor children (and especially orphans). D. Project location (if known) The KESSP is a nation-wide activity. E. Borrower’s Institutional Capacity for Safeguard Policies [from PCN] There has not been a comprehensive environmental assessment of education issues in Kenya. Currently as part of the KESSP preparation, the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MOEST) hired a consultant to assist the Government with a strategic plan for the development of school infrastructure (a draft report is available). A number of key studies has been identified and would be carried out during the program design phase. These key studies include School Water Sanitation Water Sanitation and Hygiene Assessment, Strategic Environmental Assessment and Strategic Social Assessment. It has been recommended that an Environmental and Social Management Framework and a Resettlement Policy Framework be prepared, the Framework will be based on (i) key policy principles for environmental and social risk management; (ii) tools to screen activities for environmental and social impacts and mitigate such impacts; (iii) procedures to ensure that these principles and tools are appropriately applied; and (iv) guidelines for capacity building and monitoring. The Framework assists the Government and its implementing agencies in screening Page 3 activities for likely environmental and social impacts, identifying documentation and preparation requirements through the application of standardized guidelines and codes of practice. II. SAFEGUARD POLICIES THAT MIGHT APPLY Applicable? Safeguard Policy If Applicable, How Might It Apply? [yes] Environmental Assessment ( OP / BP 4.01) The massive influx of children into school has created a wide range of problems for the Government. It is estimated that maybe $6 million could be needed annually for new classrooms and other school infrastructure. However, this estimate is far from being firm (better estimates will be available after a school mapping exercise has been completed). A consultant has been hired to assist the Government with the design of a school infrastructure program, and this work will be reviewing all of the relevant social and environmental considerations. [no] Natural Habitats ( OP / BP 4.04) [no] Pest Management ( OP 4.09 ) [yes] Involuntary Resettlement ( OP / BP 4.12) As noted earlier, the Government is working on a strategy for school infrastructure development. There are constraints on constructing classrooms especially in the urban areas due to lack of land. The new policy on school infrastructure development will need to address the possible issue of involuntary resettlement. [no ] Indigenous Peoples ( OD 4.20 ) [ no] Forests ( OP / BP 4.36) [ no] Safety of Dams ( OP / BP 4.37) [ no] Cultural Property (draft OP 4.11 - OPN 11.03 ) [no ] Projects in Disputed Areas ( OP / BP / GP 7.60) * [ no] Projects on International Waterways ( OP / BP / GP 7.50) Environmental Assessment Category: [ ] A [X ] B [ ] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined) * By supporting the proposed project, the Bank does not intend to prejudice the final determination of the parties' claims on the disputed areas Page 4 III. SAFEGUARD PREPARATION PLAN A. Target date for the Quality Enhancement Review (QER), at which time the PAD-stage ISDS would be prepared. April 13, 2005 B. For simple projects that will not require a QER, the target date for preparing the PAD-stage ISDS: N/A C. Time frame for launching and completing the safeguard-related studies that may be needed. The specific studies and their timing 1 should be specified in the PAD-stage ISDS. Time frame for completing safeguard studies and documents will be completed so that the documents are disclosed in-country and in the InfoShop prior to appraisal. The Sector Manager agrees to accept responsibility for the Transfer B Project. IV. APPROVALS Signed and submitted by: Task Team Leader: Michael Mills Date: 02/15/2005 Approved by: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Name: Thomas Walton Date: 02/16/2005 Comments Sector Manager: Name: Dzingai Mutumbuka Date: 02/16/2005 Comments 1 Reminder: The Bank's Disclosure Policy requires that safeguard-related documents be disclosed before appraisal (i) at the InfoShop and (ii) in-country, at publicly accessible locations and in a form and language that are accessible to potentially affected persons. Page 5