INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATA SHEET CONCEPT STAGE Report No.: ISDSC419 Public Disclosure Copy Date ISDS Prepared/Updated: 16-Apr-2012 I. BASIC INFORMATION A. Basic Project Data Country: South Sudan Project ID: P127079 Project Name: Local Governance and Service Delivery Program (P127079) Task Team Leader: Zara Inga Sarzin Estimated Appraisal Date: 20-Aug-2012 Estimated Board Date: 13-Dec-2012 Managing Unit: AFTUW Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Sector: Sub-national government administration (50%), Other social services (40%), Central government administration (10%) Theme: Participation and civic engagement (25%), Municipal governance and institution building (25%), Conflict prevention and post-conflict reconstruction (25%), Decentralization (25%) Financing (In USD Million) Financing Source Amount BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.00 International Development Association (IDA) 50.00 DENMARK, Govt. of 10.00 Total 60.00 Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment Is this a Repeater project? No B. Project Objectives To expand access by communities to local services in Southern Sudan through strengthening of systems of local governance and service-delivery at county and sub-county levels. Public Disclosure Copy C. Project Description Core principles for program design. Government has requested that the design of the program be guided by the following overarching principles: 1. “Be nation-wide, to treat all areas of South Sudan fairly; 2. Be executed through state and county governments, so that it (i) creates long term sustainable results by building the capacity of local governments to manage service delivery, and (ii) builds the credibility and legitimacy of the local governments as they will be seen to be delivering services to our people; and 3. Have a community-driven development approach as a central feature of the service delivery component to strengthen community engagement and confidence in local governments.� The program will support the expansion of discretionary resources flowing through a government transfer system designated for the IDA financed grants for development activities at the payam and boma levels. A number of additional instruments are critical to ensure the effective use of resources relative to key project imperatives. These include: (a) strengthening the policy and regulatory environment at central and government levels to support local governance; (b) building administrative capacity in county governments to support participatory local planning, resource allocation, appropriate conflict mediation and service delivery; and (c) strengthening opportunities for citizen engagement with local governments, as well as their capacity to do so. An inclusive and participatory local planning process along with arrangements for social accountability is central to achieve equitable improvements in local governance and service delivery. This planning process will involve establishment of Boma Development Committes for each of the bomas under a particular payam. The plans proposed by the Boma Development Committes will be considered in a Payam Development Committee composed of the payam administrator and representatives from each of the payam committees. The Payam Development Committee will decide on the subprojects to be selected for financing under the annual grant envelope, and on the selection and phasing of subprojects for subsequent years. The planning process is also intended to inform the Strategic County Development Plan, which in turn should provide the framework for activities by non-governmental actors and other donor agencies operating in a particular county, so that their activities support the implementation at the level of both the county and the payams. Arrangements, including facilitation by contracted NGOs, will be put in place to ensure that selection of local citizen representatives involved in the planning process will be inclusive both geographically and across different categories (ethnic / tribal / kinship minority groups, women, youth, returning IDPs and refugees, and ex-combatants) that might otherwise be marginalized. The detailed design of the local planning process will be informed by: (a) a social assessment (currently underway) that considers the diversity of local socio-economic and political organization across South Sudan and proposes arrangements to ensure inclusive representation, voice, and oversight; and (b) an assessment of experiences in participatory planning by different development actors in South Sudan and by other CDD operations in the region. It is intended that the findings from these preparatory assessments will be presented for debate to the government, development partners, academia, and the Bank. The potential project components are: Component 1: Block grants to counties and communities (US$20 million) will comprise two sub-components as follows: Public Disclosure Copy Sub-component 1(a): The County Development Grant (CDG). This sub-component will be fully financed by government through existing CDG mechanism as outlined in annual budget documentation. Current financing amounts to approximately $21.6 million in 2011/12, but may be reduced due to forthcoming austerity measures. Although no IDA financing will be allocated to this component, this grant remains a flagship for overall efforts to strengthen county governments, which in turn are important enablers of payam level development activities. This includes both investments in cross-payam infrastructure (those with positive externalities at payam level) as well as an existing basic capacity to administer development programs. The CDG Government will outline measures to enhance the performance of the CDG programme in the 2012/13 budget, including revisions to allocation methods, grant conditions, reporting requirements and fund flow arrangements that will seek to strengthen complementarity with the Payam Development Grant. These measures will be reviewed during pre-appraisal to evaluate opportunities to include measures of CDG performance in the overall results framework for the program. Sub-component 1(b): Payam Development Grant to Counties. This sub-component will directly provide IDA financing of an annual earmarked transfer for payams in participating counties. The total annual transfer is projected to rise from $1.8 million in year one (or 8 percent of the current CDG allocation) to $8.8 million in year 4. The transfer will be made directly to county governments, but with the full amount earmarked for the individual payams within their jurisdiction at predetermined levels. Payams will utilize the funds for small scale community infrastructure investments that are determined through a community-driven, participatory process. This transfer provides the critical input for community level planning and oversight (on the basis of actual resource availability) and capacity development activities at state and county levels (learning by doing). It also provides meaningful resources to trigger community interest in exercising oversight of counties and payams. Counties will remain the formal budgeting, procurement and accounting authority for these expenditures for fiduciary purposes, due to very weak administrative systems and capabilities at payam level and the relative efficiency of strengthening these systems at county level. Payam Development Committees will, however, retain full control over the selection of sub-projects and oversight of on the use of funds. This will be enforced through requirements for mandatory, regular disclosure by counties on available resources and fiduciary safeguards on the release of funds. Both counties and payams will be supported to plan for, implement and oversee expenditure programs related to the grant through other program components. The use of funds by payams will be restricted to capital investments (sub-projects) on a pre-defined investment menu that will include both creation and capital refurbishment of public infrastructure ( e.g. water, sanitation, refuse, footpaths, roads, culverts, flood protection, health and education infrastructure) as well as club goods (small scale irrigation schemes, tube-wells with handpumps, and some types of livelihood assistance). Both county and payam level allocations will be determined at a national level and communicated to state and county governments, payams, and directly to communities. No discretionary adjustments to either set of allocations will be permitted to prevent the diversion of funds and protect the predictability of resource envelopes for the purposes of sub-project planning and implementation. Component 2: Community Engagement (US$ -- million). This component would support a simple and flexible approach to engage citizens at the payam and boma level which will include the following key features: (a) an information campaign using radio and local meetings to disseminate the Public Disclosure Copy key features of the program and the processes to ensure citizen voice and oversight as well as government accountability; (b) a facilitated inclusive local planning process involving citizens (chiefs, elders, women youth, returnees, ex-combatants, and ethnic / tribal / kinship minority groups) and government representatives in the identification and prioritization of needs at boma and payam levels along with a mapping of conflict drivers and possible conflict mitigation measures; (c) technical assistance (engineering, financial management, procurement, implementation monitoring) to design and implement projects addressing agreed priorities at boma, payam, and county levels; (d) accountability mechanisms that establish citizens oversight over the use of public resources to ensure that funds are used in accordance with agreed plans, that infrastructure and service delivery meet established standards, and that access to benefits corresponds to the agreed development plan; and (e) a complaints mechanism that provides an independent avenue to address grievances. Component 3: Strengthening intergovernmental systems and county capacity (Estimated cost: US$-- million). The objective of this component would be to: (a) support central and state governments to create an enabling policy, regulatory and oversight environment for local governance; (b) support program management and oversight at the central level, (c) provide targeted capacity support to county governments and their sub-units to assist them towards achieving minimum access and performance criteria; and (d) facilitate the strengthening of citizen participation and oversight mechanisms and the rapid delivery of infrastructure, services and other support at the sub-county level. The considerable opportunities that exist to partner with existing development programs in providing capacity support and social accountability mechanisms (including the Joint Donor Team’s planned fund for civil society and demand-side governance) will be explored during project preparation. Component 4: Project management support (Estimated cost: US$ 5 million). This would support: (a) the management of the project, including technical, financial, procurement, social and environment safeguards, monitoring and evaluation; and (b) county level spot checks and audits on individual subprojects, and program level evaluations at initiation, mid-term and program completion. The specific sub-projects to be financed will be selected through a participatory planning process involving significant local discretion over the use of the grant through a “menu of optional subprojects� within different sectors. Individual sub-projects will be small-scale and may involve the construction or rehabilitation of buildings (e.g. schools, teacher accommodation, and clinics), water facilities such as tubewells with hand pumps and haffir (water reservoirs for cattle), market facilities, rehabilitation of rural roads, and support for livelihoods. The nature of the program is such that any sub-projects to be prepared and implemented under will only be identified when the project is underway. Government will therefore be required to prepare an Environmental and Social Management Framework, which will establish a mechanism to determine and assess the potential environmental and social impacts of sub-project investments under the proposed program, and set out appropriate mitigation, monitoring and institutional measures to be taken during implementation and operation of the sub-projects to eliminate, offset or reduce adverse impacts to acceptable levels. With regard to OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, the negative environmental impacts of such operations are localized, temporary, and easily mitigated through sensible construction management techniques, and diligent management practices. OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement: In the context of South Sudan, where land is predominantly held under customary land tenure arrangements and where population pressure on land is very low (13 persons per sq.km), access to land for new construction of facilities (water points, haffir, schools, clinics, etc) will be obtained either: (a) through documented voluntary community donations of land arrived at through local consultation; or (b) by using available government land that is free of encroachments, squatters or other encumbrances, and has been authorized for project use by the authorities. Any sub-project requiring land acquisition under eminent domain, which would trigger OP 4.12, would be on the Public Disclosure Copy ‘negative list’. Similarly, any sub-project that would impact on physical cultural resources as defined under OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources (e.g. graveyards, sites of religious/ritual significance, known or unknown local structures or sites of historic or cultural importance) would also be excluded. The highly participatory nature of the project coupled with the screening procedures t o be outlined in the ESMF will ensure that communities would be able to identify if any proposed subproject will have an impact on cultural property as defined by the policy, and if so, a different location agreed to by the community should be identified, or the subproject should be excluded. The ESMF would include guidance on preparing chance find procedures for contractors in bidding documents for any construction activities supported by the project. Application of OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous Peoples is to be determined during project preparation. The proposed project is co-financing a national program that will eventually cover the entire country, and its centerpiece is a local participatory planning process that aims at including all vulnerable sub-groups (whether ethnic/tribal/kinship minority groups, women, youth, displaced, and ex-combatants) in consultations to agree on the subprojects to be undertaken with the grant. This process complies with the basic requirement of OP 4.10 of a free, prior, and informed consultation leading to broad community support for the project. Consequently, the design of the proposed program supports the intentions and outcomes of the policy by (a) including as an early activity in the participatory county planning process a mapping of ethnic tribal groups with identification of particularly vulnerable minority groups and the nature of their vulnerabilities, so that measures can be taken to ensure their inclusion in the planning process; (b) applying the principle of “equitable access to benefits� across all vulnerable sub-groups (whether ethnic / tribal / kinship minority groups, women, youth, displaced, and ex-combatants) within the county; (c) monitoring delivery of equitable benefits across ethnic groups with particular emphasis on the vulnerable (e.g. by accountability arrangements that disclose information on budgets and spending and that involve communities in monitoring); and (d) establishing a simple complaints mechanism that is accessible to the different groups. D. Project location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis (if known) The LGSDP will be the first step in a longer term (15 year plus) engagement in GoRSS’s national program by supporting the development objectives of expanded access to services by citizens through strengthened institutions for local governance and service delivery at the County and sub-County levels across all 79 county governments in the ten states of South Sudan. The engagement will be phased and involve (1) the preparation of the proposed operation (with an anticipated board date of December 2012), during which ongoing and planned development partner programs to fast track and pilot program modalities for inclusive participatory planning will be leveraged even before project effectiveness; (2) gradual implementation of the project in collaboration with relevant development partners (both involving co-financing and implementation synergies) that will involve a careful expansion of project activities to cover approximately half of the counties in South Sudan by the end of the project period; and (3) successor project(s) that would support the scaling up of the project to cover all counties and increasingly focus on mainstreaming governance, investment management, and service delivery through the local government system. E. Borrowers Institutional Capacity for Safeguard Policies The Borrower currently has no institutional capacity to manage environmental and social safeguards. To strengthen the capacity of the Public Disclosure Copy implementing agency and ensure that the project is implemented in a socially responsible and environmentally sound manner using the program’s Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), Component 4 of the program will include assistance to identify the staffing and capacity building needs as well as the procedural and oversight framework at central and state levels to manage application of standards for environmental and social safeguards appropriate to limited safeguards risks posed by the small-scale sub-projects financed under the project. F. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team Asger Christensen (OPCFC) Bedilu Amare Reta (AFTEN) II. SAFEGUARD POLICIES THAT MIGHT APPLY Safeguard Policies Triggered? Explanation (Optional) Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 Yes Subprojects to be financed under Component 1 could potentially result in adverse impacts on the environment. However, given the anticipated small scale of the subprojects, the negative environmental impacts are likely to be localized, temporary, and easily mitigated through sensible construction management techniques, and diligent management practices. In order to ensure compliance with the OP 4.01, an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) for the program will be prepared, consulted upon, and disclosed before appraisal. A basic environmental and social screening (using a simple form/ checklist) will be prepared and used for identification of the subprojects by counties, payams/bomas. During the appraisal and detailed design of the program, the Bank’s safeguards team will work closely with government to identify the technical assistance and capacity building required at central, state and local government levels to ensure the effective implementation of the ESMF through the preparation of Environmental and Social Management Plans, once civil works and sites are identified. Basic environmental and social screening checklists for different types of subprojects will be included in the ESMF and Operations Manual. Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 No The project will not affect natural habitats. Forests OP/BP 4.36 No The project does not involve forest management or reforestation/afforestation activities on a large scale. Public Disclosure Copy Pest Management OP 4.09 No The project does not involve the use of pesticides. Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 No Any project activity that would affect physical cultural resources (graves, sites of religious/spiritual significance, known or unknown sites of cultural significance, etc.) will be excluded from the project. Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 TBD The project area may include Indigenous Peoples. Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 No Subprojects requiring land acquisition under eminent domain will not be financed. Requirements for voluntary community donations and use of available government land will be included in the ESMF and Operations Manual. Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 No N/A Projects on International Waterways OP/BP No N/A 7.50 Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 No N/A III. SAFEGUARD PREPARATION PLAN A. Tentative target date for preparing the PAD Stage ISDS: 01-Aug-2012 B. Time frame for launching and completing the safeguard-related studies that may be needed. The specific studies and their timing1 should be specified in the PAD-stage ISDS: While no specific safeguards related studies are planned (other than the ESMF and, possibly, other safeguards instruments, as required), the social assessment that is currently being undertaken will examine the diversity of socio-political organization across South Sudan and the existing customary land tenure regimes to describe and make practical operational recommendations based on existing knowledge on the opportunities, constraints, and risks regarding arrangements to ensure inclusion in participatory decision making across socio-economic, political, gender, and other differentiating features (e.g. returning IDPs and refugees, ex-combatants, youth, pastoralist/sedentary, tribal/ethnic minority position, religious affiliation). IV. APPROVALS Public Disclosure Copy Task Team Leader: Name: Zara Inga Sarzin Approved By: Regional Safeguards Coordinator: Name: Alexandra C. Bezeredi (RSA) Date: 16-Apr-2012 Sector Manager: Name: Alexander E. Bakalian (SM) Date: 13-Apr-2012 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.