Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00005759 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT (TF0B0894) ON A SMALL GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF US$0.65 MILLION TO THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY FOR SUPPORT TO HARMONIZATION IN TURKEY PROJECT (P171489) June 20, 2022 Social Sustainability and Inclusion Global Practice Europe and Central Asia Region This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 3RP Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan CC Community Center CPF Country Partnership Framework DGMM Directorate General for Migration Management ESSN Emergency Social Safety Net EU European Union FM Financial Management FRiT Facility for Refugees in Turkey GCR Global Compact on Refugees GM Grievance Mechanism GoT Government of Turkey ICR Implementation Completion and Results Report ISR Implementation Status and Results Report LFIP Law on Foreigners and International Protection MoNE Ministry of National Education M&E Monitoring and Evaluation NGO Nongovernmental Organization PDO Project Development Objective PEC Public Education Center PIM Project Implementation Manual PIU Project Implementation Unit PMM Presidency of Migration Management SEECO Social Entrepreneurship, Empowerment and Cohesion Project SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan SPF State and Peacebuilding Fund STEP Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement SUYE Sosyal Uyum ve Yaşam Eğitimi (Social Harmonization and Life in Turkey Training) TAC Temporary Accommodation Center ToC Theory of Change ToT Training of Trainers TRC Turkish Red Crescent UN United Nations UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Regional Vice President: Anna M. Bjerde Country Director: Auguste Tano Kouame Regional Director: Sameh Naguib Wahba Tadros Practice Manager: Varalakshmi Vemuru Task Team Leader(s): Murat Onur ICR Main Contributor: Ifeta Smajic, Yelda Reis TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET ....................................................................... ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 4 II. OUTCOME ...................................................................................................................... 8 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 17 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 18 V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................. 22 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 24 ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 30 ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ...... 31 ANNEX 4. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS .................................................................................. 33 ANNEX 5. LIST OF ICR INTERVIEWS AND QUESTIONNAIRES .................................................. 34 ANNEX 6. PROJECT’S THEORY OF CHANGE ........................................................................... 40 ANNEX 7. SYRIAN CRISIS AND TURKEY’S REFUGEE RESPONSE ............................................... 41 ANNEX 8. COUNTERPART FINANCING OVERVIEW ................................................................ 45 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name P171489 Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project Country Financing Instrument Turkiye Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Turkish Red Crescent Turkish Red Crescent Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The development objective is to support the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces in Turkey. Page 1 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) FINANCING FINANCE_T BL Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) Donor Financing TF-B0894 650,000 650,000 564,206 Total 650,000 650,000 564,206 Other Financing Non-Government Organization (NGO) of 523,500 523,500 617,155 Borrowing Country Total 523,500 523,500 617,155 Total Project Cost 1,173,500 1,173,500 1,181,361 KEY DATES Approval Effectiveness Original Closing Actual Closing 06-Dec-2019 17-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 31-Mar-2021 0.13 Change in Results Framework Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Change in Implementation Schedule Other Change(s) KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory Modest Page 2 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 29-Mar-2020 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Unsatisfactory 0.00 02 26-Jan-2021 Moderately Satisfactory Moderately Satisfactory 0.13 03 09-Nov-2021 Satisfactory Satisfactory 0.32 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Cyril E Muller Anna M. Bjerde Country Director: Auguste Tano Kouame Auguste Tano Kouame Director: Steven N. Schonberger Sameh Naguib Wahba Tadros Practice Manager: Kevin A Tomlinson Varalakshmi Vemuru Task Team Leader(s): Murat Fatin Onur Murat Fatin Onur ICR Contributing Author: Ifeta Smajic Page 3 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES Context 1. As a result of the Syrian refugee crisis that began in 2011, Turkey has become both a transit and a destination country for migrants and refugees. At the time of project approval, Turkey was hosting the largest refugee population in the world—a total of 3.7 million refugees.1 Syrians in Turkey have the status of persons under temporary and international protection.2 The Government of Turkey (GoT) has adopted a developmental approach to the refugee crisis, pursuing integration policies that have granted Syrians access to basic services and the labor market. As a result of the Government’s ‘out of camp’ policy implemented since 2013/2014, less than two percent of Syrians resided in temporary accommodation centers (TACs) as of May 26, 2022.3 Turkey’s refugee response is considered progressive and provides a model for other countries hosting refugees, but the magnitude of the refugee and migrant influx continues to pose challenges for displaced persons, host communities, and the country at large. 2. In 2018, the GoT introduced the country’s first strategy on refugee inclusion, namely the National Harmonization Strategy and Action Plan (2018–2023).4 The strategy identifies priorities for government and nongovernment agencies to facilitate refugees’ access to key mainstream basic services, including education, health care, and local employment. The strategy is based on six priority areas: social cohesion, information, education, health, labor market, and social services. The strategy also highlights enhancement of counseling capacity and standardization of service information as a necessity to improve the reliability and quality of guidance provided to refugees and migrants. 3. A key challenge at the time of project approval, which partially remains a challenge, was the lack of adequate information and counselling and referral services for refugees. Syrians were not aware of their rights and responsibilities and lacked knowledge about the services they were entitled to. Refugees had limited information about the social, cultural, and economic life in Turkey and lacked first-hand experience with local systems, services, and procedures. Most refugees in TACs have lived in camp settings since 2012 and often lack accurate information and social/life skills to pursue independent living and integration into Turkish society. Furthermore, at the time of project preparation, it was assessed that such gaps in access to key information would hinder Syrians’ smooth inclusion in host communities and could 1 The terms ‘Syrians’ and “refugees� are used interchangeably in this report, reflecting their sociological context and widespread daily use. Turkey retains a geographic limitation to its ratification of the 1951 United Nations (UN) Convention on the Status of Refugees, which means that only those fleeing as a consequence of “events occurring in Europe� are given refuge e status. PMM (Presidency of Migration Management). 2022. Temporary Protection Statistics. Refugee numbers as of May 5, 2022. https://www.goc.gov.tr/gecici-koruma5638#. 2 Syrian nationals, as well as stateless persons and refugees from Syria, who came to Turkey due to events in Syria after April 28, 2011, are provided with temporary protection. Persons with this status have access to key socioeconomic services, such as a residence permit, medical care, and education. For additional information about the Syrian crisis and Turkey’s response to the refugee influx, see annex 7. 3 PMM, Temporary Protection Statistics. 2022. https://www.goc.gov.tr/gecici-koruma5638. 4 Directorate General of Migration Management (DGMM), 2018. https://www.goc.gov.tr/kurumlar/goc.gov.tr/Yayinlar/UYUM- STRATEJI/Uyum-Strateji-Belgesi-ve-Ulusal-Eylem-Plani.pdf. Page 4 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) create negative mutual perceptions and possibly tensions between Syrians and host communities they were in the process of settling into. 4. Project preparation. In 2019, the World Bank received a request from the GoT, through the Presidency of Migration Management (PMM),5 for assistance in providing information, counselling, and referral services to refugees, migrants, and host communities. As requested by the GoT, the Turkish Red Crescent (TRC) was selected as the project implementing agency and the recipient of the grant to implement project activities in coordination with the PMM. At the time of project approval, TRC was operating 16 community centers (CCs) for refugees where it provided protection services, livelihoods support, psychosocial support and health services, and was organizing social cohesion activities for refugees and host communities. TRC is the largest nongovernmental organization (NGO) in Turkey providing services in support of refugee socioeconomic integration. It is considered a high-capacity institution with field presence and a strong track record working with the target populations. In this context, the Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project6 was designed as a pilot initiative to test new approaches for promoting cohesion and interaction between refugee and host communities while providing key information, counseling, and referral services in target provinces. The US$650,000 grant by the World Bank State and Peacebuilding Fund (SPF) was approved on December 6, 2019 and became effective on December 17, 2019. 5. Alignment with World Bank strategies. The project was consistent with the World Bank Group’s twin goals of eliminating extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity. Project beneficiaries include some of the most isolated and vulnerable groups in Turkey, refugees living in provinces that are heavily affected by the Syrian refugee crisis. Within this group, the camp population is considered as the most vulnerable, continuing to be almost entirely dependent on humanitarian support and basic services. The project aimed to enhance their inclusion and readiness for community living in Turkey by providing information, counselling, and referral services. Thus, the project was aligned with the World Bank’s development response to forced displacement, which aims to help refugees and host communities offset the impact of forced displacement through socioeconomic development. Finally, the project supported Focus Area 2: Inclusion of the World Bank Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for Turkey for 2018– 2021, which seeks to support better integration of women, youth, and Syrians under temporary protection. 6. Alignment with government strategies. The project is consistent with the provisions of Turkey’s 11th Development Plan 2019–2023. The plan sets out the longer-term structural reforms required to address Turkey’s development challenges and includes provisions to improve refugees’ socioeconomic inclusion and access to services, particularly focusing on access to economic opportunities, education, social, and harmonization services. The project directly contributed to the six strategic priorities of the 2018 Harmonization Strategy Document and National Action Plan. 5 Previously called DGMM. The status change from directorate to presidency is recorded in the Official Gazette dated October 29, 2021. 6 The project name at approval was ‘Support to Refugees Transitioning from Communities Project’. At the request of TRC, the project name was changed to ‘Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project’ as part of the restructuring that was approved in March 2021. ‘Harmonization’ refers to overall socioeconomic inclusion of refugees in Turkey. Page 5 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) 7. Alignment with SPF objectives. The project is consistent with two SPF focus areas, the Forced Displacement and Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus. It contributed toward the achievement of the following three outcomes in the SPF Results Framework:7 (a) catalyzing financing to leverage potential funding from the European Union (EU) and World Bank; (b) promoting inclusive approaches by directly targeting vulnerable refugees; and (c) establishing partnerships with municipalities and NGOs in fragility, conflict, and violence settings. Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 8. The PDO is to support the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces in Turkey. Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 9. Theory of Change. The project’s Theory of Change (annex 6) identified two key expected outcomes: (a) increased understanding among beneficiaries of social and economic life in Turkey and (b) increased capacity of beneficiaries in navigating Turkey’s social, cultural, and economic life. 10. Key expected outcomes and outcome indicators. The project had the following PDO indicators to track progress toward the achievement of project outcomes: (a) Number of direct project beneficiaries, of which female (50%) (b) Percentage of refugees with improved knowledge of harmonization in Turkey (with a target of 80%) (c) Percentage of beneficiaries referred to socioeconomic empowerment services who register and receive support from TRC Community Centers (with a target of 80%). Components 11. The project consisted of two components: (a) Support to Harmonization of Refugees and Host Communities and (b) Project Management. Component 1 was divided into two subcomponents designed to promote harmonization and social cohesion among beneficiaries. Subcomponent 1a consisted of three complementary and consecutive activities: (a) the delivery of Social Harmonization and Life in Turkey Training (Sosyal Uyum ve Yaşam Eğitimi, SUYE), (b) the profiling of beneficiaries’ needs, and (c) the provision of referrals to socioeconomic services by TRC CCs. All project activities were implemented by TRC exclusively except for SUYE trainings which were implemented by TRC in cooperation with the public education centers (PECs) of the Ministry of National Education (MoNE). Table 1 provides details about the component structure and the activities. 7 World Bank. 2020. State and Peacebuilding Fund 2019 Annual Report. p. 50. Page 6 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Table 1. Project Components and Activities Component 1: Support to Harmonization of Refugees and Host Communities (US$568,500) Subcomponent Activities 1a. Information, Counselling and  SUYE trainings: comprehensive training and orientation program about Referral Services for Harmonization cultural, social, and economic life in Turkey (e-learning and in-person)  Profiling and screening beneficiaries for support services  Referral to socioeconomic empowerment activities provided at TRC CCs: livelihoods support, psychosocial support, protection, and social cohesion activities  Production of print and visual material for harmonization 1b. Supporting Social Cohesion  Promoting and strengthening culture of coexistence, belonging, and interaction through activities that bring together host communities and refugees, including (a) technology, intelligence, and coding workshops; (b) role models; (c) mobile theatre to reach rural areas and promote social cohesion through theatre; and (d) sports and cultural activities Component 2: Project Management (US$81,500) This component includes regular project management, monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and communications activities. 12. The original two components were kept throughout the project. Significant Changes During Implementation 13. Project restructuring. The project included one restructuring on March 31, 2021. The restructuring extended the project closing date to December 31, 2021, to allow for the completion of activities on the ground, warranted by the implementation delays caused by COVID-19 restrictions. In addition, the restructuring included slight modifications to the Results Framework and change to the project name. Table 2 summarizes the changes introduced during the restructuring. Table 2. Summary of Changes Extension of the No-cost extension from March 31, 2021, to December 31, 2021, to allow for the completion closing date of field activities and capturing of lessons learned Results Changes included (a) revision of the description of PDO Indicator 3 and (b) cancellation of Framework Intermediate Results Indicator 3. Project name At the request of TRC, the project name was revised from ‘Support to Refugees Transitioning to Communities Project (known in Turkish as Kentsel Hayata Uyumun Desteklenmesi Projesi)’ to ‘Support Harmonization in Turkey Project (Sosyal Hayata Uyumun Desteklenmesi Projesi in Turkish)’. 14. Reallocation of funds. Besides changes introduced during restructuring, the project also included reallocation of funds (US$49,500) from Component 2 to Component 1 (within the same category of expenditure). During implementation, TRC could not hire additional Project Implementation Unit (PIU) staff (that is, project coordinator, communication staff, and so on) as originally planned because the severance pay provision requested by TRC was ineligible for financing according to the World Bank’s fiduciary rules. Thus, all project activities were implemented by TRC’s existing staff, and the funds originally budgeted for recruitment of PIU consultants were instead allocated to training and social Page 7 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) cohesion activities under Component 1. The reallocation was approved by the World Bank shortly after the start of project implementation. Rationale and Scope of Changes 15. Extension of closing date. The rationale for the nine-month no-cost extension presented in the Restructuring Paper was twofold:8 (a) to allow for sufficient time to complete the implementation of SUYE trainings and social cohesion activities, which were delayed due to COVID-19 restrictions and (b) to continue to support the harmonization of refugees and host communities, which remained a priority for the GoT. Further, the project’s harmonization and social cohesion activities were considered relevant for addressing the negative impacts of the pandemic on engagement and access to information among refugees and host communities. 16. Results Framework. The description of PDO Indicator 3 “Beneficiaries referred to socio-economic support services who register and receive support from TRC Community Centers� was revised to ensure disaggregated reporting based on the four types of socioeconomic support activities offered by the project (livelihoods, protection, psychosocial support, and social cohesion). Intermediate indicator 3 “Beneficiaries who receive livelihoods support services provided by TRC Community Centers� was cancelled due to reporting redundancy now that the PDO indicator would capture beneficiary referrals per type of activities, including livelihoods support provided by TRC CCs. 17. Project name. The original project name included reference to “transitioning� which could create a false perception that the project was promoting migration from rural to urban areas. To align with the Government’s terminology for promoting social cohesion among refugees and host communities, this term was replaced with “harmonization,� the official term used in Government policies and narrative. The revised name provided better understanding of the project scope and objectives. 18. The restructuring changes did not have an impact on the PDOs, procurement, financial management (FM), or safeguards management and risks. The project components and costs, institutional arrangements, and disbursement arrangements remained unchanged during the restructuring and project implementation. II. OUTCOME 19. This Implementation Completion and Results Report (ICR) was prepared based on desk review of key project documents and virtual consultations with key stakeholders and project beneficiaries from March 24, 2022, to April 12, 2022. Interviews with project stakeholders included the TRC PIU, project focal points in the PMM, TRC CC trainers based in target provinces (Adana, Hatay, Kahramanmaraş, and Kilis), and trainers from PECs. A series of virtual focus group discussions was conducted with 22 project beneficiaries (8 women and 14 men; ages 25–64). The project trainers and beneficiaries were selected to represent all four project provinces equally. In addition, ICR questionnaires were sent to the World Bank task team, TRC PIU, PMM focal points, and TRC CCs’ staff as preparation for consultations or phone interviews (see annex 5 for the list of ICR interviews conducted and questionnaires used). 8 World Bank. Restructuring Paper, Report no: RES45621, March 2021, pp 6. Page 8 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome Relevance of PDO: High 20. The PDO of supporting the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces remained highly relevant to the needs of beneficiary communities and Turkey’s strategic approach to refugee inclusion. April 2011 marked 10 years of Syrians seeking refuge in Turkey. Although tensions flared up from time to time, this period of co-living between refugees and host communities has been largely peaceful. Stable inflow of foreign aid earmarked for refugees reduced pressures on public resources and contributed to a relatively stable environment. However, the Government’s refugee response has been negatively affected by several factors, including (a) the protracted nature of the crisis due to broader political instabilities in the region, (b) Turkey’s economic volatility and related economic stresses on communities, and (c) the enduring cultural and social distance between refugees and host communities. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has further heightened the socioeconomic needs of refugees and host communities and placed significant pressures on the resources of host communities. A 2021 survey with Turkish respondents indicates overall negative perceptions among the host society about Syrian refugees.9 The Syrians’ Barometer studies have also consistently found that Turkish citizens tend to distance themselves culturally from Syrians.10 Such negative mutual perceptions may undermine the values that constitute social cohesion11 and confirm there is a need to enhance interaction between the two groups to reduce tensions and improve social cohesion in the country. In this context, the provision of information and counselling services to refugees and promotion of interaction and cohesion between the host communities and refuges remained a high priority for the GoT. The project’s alignment with the National Harmonization Strategy and Turkey’s Development Plan, described in paragraph 6, remained relevant when the project closed. 21. The PDO remains relevant for the CPF (2018–2023),12 which aims to assist Turkey to achieve more sustainable and inclusive growth. Specifically, the project activities contributed to the achievement of the following CPF objective, as updated in the 2020 Turkey Performance Learning Review, under the sustainability focus area: Objective 8: Improved sustainability and resilience of cities.13 The project supported refugees’ socioeconomic inclusion and transition to community living through provision of information, counselling, and referrals to basic services and economic opportunities. The project also supported TRC’s readiness to act as an implementing partner for a large World Bank employment support project in Turkey14 financed by the Facility for Refugees in Turkey II (FRiT II), through its exposure to the World Bank’s fiduciary procedures and systems, and Environmental and Social Standards (ESS). 9 SODEV, Suriye Göçünün 10. Yılında Türkiye’de Suriyeli Göçmenler. November 29, 2021. 10 Murat Erdoğan, “Syrians Barometer 2020: A Framework for Achieving Social Cohesion with Syrians in Turkey,� United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (Ankara: Egiten 2022), 102. 11 Mitigating Risks for Syrian Refugee Youth in Turkey’s Şanlıurfa, International Crisis Group, 2019, p.1. 12 The current CPF for Turkey initially covered 2018–2021, was later extended to 2023, and updated during the 2020 Turkey Performance Learning Review. 13 World Bank. 2017. Country Partnership Framework for Turkey FY18 –FY21. p. 12. 14 Support for Transition to Labor Market Project (P171471) is a US$85 million intervention approved on April 11, 2022, by the World Bank. Page 9 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Achievement of PDO (Efficacy): Substantial 22. The assessment of the PDO was conducted by reviewing achievements against the two expected project outcomes: (1) increased understanding among beneficiaries of social and economic life in Turkey and (2) increased capacity of beneficiaries in navigating Turkey’s social, cultural, and economic life. Achievement of outcome 1 was linked to PDO indicator 2 and intermediate indicator 1 and 4. Achievement of outcome 2 was linked to PDO indicator 3 and intermediate indicators 2 and 3. PDO indicator 1 - the number of beneficiaries reached - was assessed in terms of its contribution to the achievement of both outcomes. Table 3 provides a summary of project results against original targets. Table 3. Results Framework Targets and Actual Achieved Results Target Achieved 1. Number of direct project beneficiaries. 3500 6558 Female (percentage) 50% 57% 2. Percentage of refugees with improved knowledge of 80% 81% harmonization in Turkey 3. Percentage of beneficiaries referred to socioeconomic 80% 10% empowerment services who register and receive support from TRC Community Centers Intermediate indicators 1. Beneficiaries successfully completing harmonization 1200 3843 training activities (number) Female (percentage) 50% 66% 2. Percentage of support kits provided to eligible 100% 100% beneficiaries according to the process identified in the PIM 3. Beneficiaries participating social cohesion activities 1300 2715 organized by the project (number) 4. Beneficiaries that feel project investments reflected their 80% 89% needs (percentage) 5. Grievances registered related to delivery of project 100% N/A benefits that are actually addressed (percentage) 23. Project beneficiaries. Primary beneficiary target groups were (a) Syrians under temporary protection who intended to or had recently relocated from TACs to communities and (b) host communities, in four project target provinces: Adana, Hatay, Kahramanmaraş, and Kilis. The refugee beneficiaries were further divided into three subgroups: (a) refugees living in TACs who wanted to relocate, (b) refugees who had recently relocated from TACs to target project provinces, and (c) refugees living outside of TACs who were interested in harmonization activities. During implementation, because of COVID-19-related restrictions on movement to and from TACs, it was decided to host all training activities in TACs to ensure easy access for the most vulnerable refugees. Consequently, all refugees living in TACs irrespective of their relocation status could access project benefits while refugees living outside of TACs could only engage in social cohesion activities, which were organized in city centers. On one hand, the targeting of all TAC residents is considered positive for community integration as the Government’s ‘out-of-camp’ policy means that all refugees will eventually move into community living. On the other hand, recently relocated refugees and those already living outside of TACs (subgroups b and c above) were Page 10 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) excluded from receiving valuable SUYE training. Notwithstanding this reorientation in beneficiary targeting, the project reached a total number of 6,558 direct beneficiaries, exceeding the original target by 87 percent. This substantive increase in results is mainly due to two factors: (a) high demand for SUYE training among TAC residents, majority of whom aspire to leave TACs and become integrated into community life, and (b) TRC operating trainings based on demand without limiting participation to a predetermined number of beneficiaries. About 57 percent of project beneficiaries were female, which is 7 percentage points above target. It is worth noting that the project was the first intervention implemented in TACs which supported the integration of refugees to socioeconomic life in Turkey. Outcome 1: Increased understanding of social and economic life in Turkey 24. The project succeeded in increasing beneficiary refugees’ understanding of social and economic life in Turkey. As a result of SUYE trainings, 81 percent of beneficiary refugees have improved knowledge about Turkish society and way of living (1 percentage point above the target). To measure the increase in refugees’ understanding of social and economic life in Turkey, all SUYE training participants completed a test before and after the training. There was a substantial increase in the average number of correct answers after the training (13.41 out of 17) compared to the average pre-training score (9.98 out of 17).15 25. The project functioned as a partner of the Government in operationalizing the SUYE training designed by the PMM based on its ‘Guide to Living in Turkey.’ The PMM trained 117 trainers from TRC CCs and PECs16 to conduct the training. The SUYE training comprised 11 modules: 1. Turkey's historical and geographical structure 2. Turkey's cultural structure, traditions, and customs 3. The rules of public morality and life 4. Rights and obligations (status, rights, and obligations of foreigners in Turkey) 5. Information on social/public life 6. Opportunities for education 7. Health systems 8. Civil law and legal issues 9. Privacy education for children 10. Access to livelihood services 11. Useful information. 26. The one-day SUYE trainings were attended by 3,843 refugees, exceeding the project target of 1,200 by three times.17 Among training participants, 66 percent were women, exceeding the project target by 16 percentage points. The trainings were provided in Turkish with simultaneous translation in Arabic. The trainings were conducted both online—during the pilot phase—and face to face at the primary schools of TACs (refugee camps). In addition, 3,500 printed materials, including cloth bags, Guide to Living in Turkey, pens, notebooks, coloring pencils and books (for children), and a city guide with QR code were delivered to participants during the training.18 15 Turkish Red Crescent. Support to Harmonization in Turkey: Project Completion Report, May 2022 16PECs, affiliated with MoNE, provide vocational and technical trainings to various target groups throughout the country. 17 Turkish Red Crescent. Support to Harmonization in Turkey: Project Completion Report, May 2022. 18 Turkish Red Crescent. Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project: Quarterly Progress Report (April –June 2021). Page 11 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) 27. The information provided during the training directly contributed to participants’ readiness for independent living in host communities by enhancing their knowledge and awareness about life in Turkey. During the ICR consultations, both training participants and trainers reported that the SUYE training provided helpful information that refugees living at TACs did not have before the project, due to a lack of first-hand experience with local systems, such as education, health, and legal services. Training participants confirmed the relevance of the information provided during the trainings, including emergency numbers and online services (e-government) and added that earlier they were not aware of their rights and responsibilities as foreigners living in Turkey. Female participants also stated that the lack of childcare services at TACs during the trainings was a challenge—childcare was provided only at Hatay- Boynuyogun TAC. While considering the training topics relevant, participants found a whole-day training too long and too demanding. 28. To increase the refugees’ sense of belonging, the project also implemented activities to promote social cohesion between refugees and host communities. These activities were grouped into four categories: (a) role models, (b) sports and recreation, (c) mobile theater, and (d) coding and technology workshops. The fifth category, which was “promoting a sense of belonging through neighborhood activities,� was cancelled due to COVID-19 restrictions. In total, 2,715 refugees and host community members attended the social cohesion activities, exceeding the project target of 1,300 by more than two times. Among the participants, 2182 were refugees and 533 were host community members. 29. (a) Role model activities were used to enhance refugees’ morale and increase empathy among host communities towards refugees. The activities consisted of identifying 12 role models (including at least 3 women) and preparing autobiographical short videos about them. Role models were selected among the refugees who had established socioeconomic and cultural lives in Turkey, to share their journeys and experiences with other refugees. The short videos introduced success stories of both young and elderly refugees who had one of these trajectories: (a) developed their talents through opportunities introduced in host communities or TACs; or (b) established their own businesses; or (c) were working in different sectors such as sports, arts, academia, the private sector, or NGOs. The videos were published on social media accounts of TRC after project closure (March–April 2022). The average number of views was 540 per video, with up to 124 retweets, likes, and reactions for the most popular video. This suggests that the videos were well received. It is expected that in addition to enhancing refugees’ morale and awareness of opportunities in Turkey, the success stories would have contributed to reducing prejudices against refugees and in building empathy among Turkish viewers. 30. (b) Joint sports and recreational activities were introduced to increase social contact between refugees and host communities. The project organized 12 sports and recreation activities, including cultural trips, cycling, table tennis, wheelchair basketball, and football. Out of 923 participants, 41 percent were from host communities, and 39 percent were female. TRC progress reports suggest that the sports and recreational activities contributed to social cohesion by bringing refugees and host community members together, increasing their social interaction, strengthening intergroup communication, and decreasing prejudices against refugees among Turks. 31. (c) Mobile theater activities were designed to strengthen the interaction between refugees and host communities though shared cultural experiences. Although the shows were originally planned to take place in city centers of target provinces, due to a temporary increase in anti-refugee sentiments, TRC Page 12 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) and PMM decided to organize the theater activities in TACs instead, where access to host communities is prohibited. While mobile theater activities did not bring refugees and host communities together, there are reports of anecdotal evidence in consultations conducted for this ICR suggesting that they enabled refugees to participate in the Turkish cultural sphere, which is an important aspect of their integration. However, the use of Turkish language hindered the transmission of the message, especially among the elderly refugee audience who only speak Arabic. 32. (d) To equip the beneficiaries with twenty-first century, problem-solving skills, coding and technology workshops were offered to both refugees and host communities. A total of 237 participants completed the workshops, of which 29 percent were female and 63 percent were from host communities. The workshops were organized between September 29 and October 17, 2021, at two public schools in Adana and Hatay (17 and 149 participants, respectively), at the TRC CC in Kilis (9 participants), and at the youth center in Kahramanmaraş (62 participants). Facilities with high number of refugee students were prioritized. In anticipation of the workshops, the project equipped the facilities with desks, IT tools, and computers. These investments have remained at the target facilities and continue to be used after project closure. While the number of participants was small, anecdotal evidence suggests that in addition to the skills developed that are likely to have supported trainees’ self-reliance, they have also supported social cohesion and an improvement of mutual perceptions and inter-ethnic friendships between Syrians and host community members, as observed in other similar experiments in Turkey bringing children and youth from both groups together.19 Figure 1. Project Progress Tracking during the Implementation Period ToT Note: Red columns indicate periods of official COVID-19 lockdown in Turkey with significant restrictions on movement. 33. Finally, it is worth noting that both SUYE trainings and social cohesion activities were implemented during the last two quarters of the project, as shown in figure 1. COVID-19 restrictions on education, training facilities, public gatherings, and entry/exit to TACs considerably delayed the implementation of these activities, which relied on face-to-face interaction to be effective. 19Boucher, V, S. Tumen, M. Vlassopoulos,, J. Wahba, and Yves Zenou. 2021. “Ethnic Mixing in Early Childhood: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment and a Structural Model.� IZA Discussion Papers 14260, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA). A randomized controlled trial assessing the impact of an education program bringing Syrian and Turkish children together in Turkey showed that this innovative program had long-term positive effects, including that (a) exposure to children of the other ethnicity leads to an increase in the formation of interethnic friendships, especially for Turkish children, and (b) Turkish language skills of Syrian children were better developed in classes with a larger presence of Turkish children. Page 13 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Outcome 2: Increased capacity of beneficiaries in navigating Turkey’s social, cultural and economic life 34. The project was somewhat successful in increasing the capacity of beneficiaries in navigating Turkey’s social, cultural, and economic life. The results contributing to this outcome were linked to the following indicators: (a) Beneficiaries referred to socioeconomic empowerment services who register and receive support from TRC CCs (percentage) and (b) Percentage of support kits provided to eligible beneficiaries according to the process identified in the Project Implementation Manual (PIM). The target for registration and completion of such services was not met while the target for distribution of support kits was reached exactly. Despite 96 percent of training participants being informed about the support services available in TRC CCs, only 377 refugees registered and received socioeconomic support services. This represents 10 percent of total training participants and is below the target value of 80 percent. Out of 377 CC service recipients, 89 benefitted from protection, 105 from livelihood, 95 from psychosocial support, and 88 from social cohesion services. 35. The challenges faced with referrals can be explained by several factors. In the initial design of the project, the specific needs of the refugee beneficiaries were to be identified and followed up through individual case management and service referrals made based on beneficiary profiling. The CC case worker were to then provide advice and links with relevant services, monitor progress, and evaluate if additional referrals were required to meet the specific needs of beneficiaries. 20 However, the individualized case management could not be carried out as movement in and out of the TACs was restricted and the CCs were operating with limited capacity during the COVID-19 restrictions. Instead, referrals to socioeconomic support services were made by trainers during the SUYE trainings. However, inadequate human resources dedicated to referrals during trainings posed challenges to the revised referral system, especially during the intense training period at the end of the project. Trainings were not evenly distributed over time, due to COVID-19 restrictions: 236 refugees were trained during the training test phase (July–December 2020) and 3,607 were trained in the last two quarters of the project (July–December 2021). During the test phase, the majority (81 percent) of training participants registered and completed CC support services (191 in total) while only 5 percent of those who were trained in 2021 registered and completed CC support services (186 in total) despite being informed about their availability. Because the bulk of the training and referrals took place in the last two quarters of the project, in addition to inadequate human resources, the key factor that influenced low levels of service registration and receipt was the short period between referrals and project closing. As a reflection of high demand, CC support services continue to be provided to refugees independent of this project. It is envisaged that more SUYE training participants would have registered after the project closing and access to CCs improves because of gradual easing of COVID-19 restrictions. 36. ICR consultations identified additional factors that negatively affected refugee registration to CC support services: (a) distance between TACs and CCs and the associated transportation costs and (b) refugees’ fear of losing benefits from various support services provided at TACs if they became formally employed through livelihoods support. 37. To facilitate the beneficiaries’ harmonization process, the project provided support kits to participants of SUYE trainings and social cohesion activities. The kits included key information about life in Turkey and hygiene products (including items for reducing the spread of COVID-19). The kits were 20 World Bank. 2019. Project Paper for the Support to Refugees Transitioning to Communities Project. Report No: PP3524. Page 14 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) distributed to 100 percent of eligible beneficiaries as defined in the PIM (SUYE training participants) and thus, the project met its exact target for this activity. Moreover, an additional 757 support kits were distributed to a subset of social cohesion activities’ participants (both refugees and host community members). Efficiency: Substantial 38. Cost-effectiveness. All activities planned were completed within the approved financing amount for the project. There were no cost overruns. In addition, the project received higher-than-expected in- kind support from TRC for PIU staffing and administration and operating costs during the project implementation (see annex 8).21 Although funds were originally budgeted, none were used for PIU staffing and instead, the project relied exclusively on TRC and PMM human resources for implementation. Staff from relevant departments of TRC were assigned to the PIU to cover FM, procurement, environmental and social (E&S) risk management, and M&E functions during implementation. Public facilities (for example, TAC schools) were used for hosting SUYE trainings and social cohesion activities. The ICR qualitative review of project results, independent external evaluation,22 and the recipient’s completion report showed that the project overall exceeded expectations on financial efficiency. The project required limited resources to start implementation and the PIU used the project funds efficiently. In addition, equipment purchased for the delivery of social cohesion activities continue to be used by hosting facilities (schools, TRC CC, and youth center) for similar activities. 39. Operational efficiency. The TRC PIU did not have experience in implementing World Bank- financed projects and faced some difficulties with learning and adapting to World Bank’s procurement procedures as discussed in section 4. The PIU could not hire project support staff as originally agreed with the World Bank because severance pay provision requested by TRC could not be covered according to the World Bank’s fiduciary rules. Therefore, the existing TRC personnel had to carry out all the work related to the project implementation in addition to their regular assignments and unplanned emergency activities, which caused some implementation delays, reinforced by some instances of coordination challenges between the central and provincial offices of PMM and TRC. Despite such challenges and in the context of COVID-19 and its related restrictions and staffing shortages due to illness and social distancing measures put in place, the project was able to build staff capacity, mobilize staff, and reach most of its targets and creatively adapt to the challenging context (including through adapting the project and timeline to COVID-19 restrictions). In addition, the strong relationships built by TRC with local and national actors who support refugees in Turkey have been an operational asset that supported rapid communication and engagement of necessary resources from partner agencies (for example, helping mobilize youth centers, schools, and sport areas to organize social cohesion activities). 21 TRC’s in-kind project contributions included (a) human resources (staff costs for PIU and communication and interpretation at both TRC headquarters and CCs); (b) administrative and operating costs (office and vehicle rentals, vehicle fuel and maintenance, office supplies and running costs, utilities, communication, office equipment and maintenance and technical services at both TRC headquarters and CCs). For an overview of counterpart financing, see annex 8. 22 Demirbüken, Hakan. 2021. External Evaluation of Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project. Page 15 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Overall Outcome Rating Outcome rating: Moderately Satisfactory 40. The overall outcome is rated Moderately Satisfactory based on the project’s high relevance and substantial efficacy (achievement of the PDO) and efficiency. The project exceeded two out of three PDO indicators and met or exceeded targets for four out of five intermediate indicators. The third PDO indicator was 70 percentage points below the target value and the achievement of the fifth intermediate indicator could not be assessed due to lack of registered grievances. The project was largely effective in supporting the beneficiaries’ readiness for independent living in host communities. The SUYE trainings enhanced the refugees’ knowledge and awareness about life in Turkey and the social cohesion activities created shared experiences and encouraged cooperation between refugees and host communities. Participation in both activities was much higher than originally targeted, demonstrating their value and relevance for the beneficiary groups. The project was somewhat successful in helping beneficiaries in navigating Turkey’s social, cultural, and economic life by providing support kits and referrals to socioeconomic services. However, the referral services were less successful than planned because most training participants did not register and receive socioeconomic support services within the project period. Since the bulk of the training/referrals were conducted in the last two quarters of the project, due to COVID-19-related delays, there is a high likelihood of increased registration and receipt of socioeconomic services post project, especially with the gradual easing of COVID-19 restrictions. The project was implemented in an economically efficient manner by leveraging TRC’s existing staff for project management and implementation of activities and using public facilities to host activities. Despite implementation delays caused by COVID-19 restrictions, TRC was able to quickly mobilize own resources to achieve most project targets in a short period of time. Now that TRC’s capacity to provide harmonization services has been built, TRC can continue to provide these services that remain highly relevant for the target groups. Other Outcomes and Impacts 41. Capacity enhancement of TRC and PMM. Before the project engagement, TRC had no experience with World Bank systems and procedures. The project proved to be a significant learning opportunity for TRC staff, especially in the areas of World Bank FM, procurement, and E&S risk management. The knowledge acquired during the project preparation and implementation has prepared TRC for its role as implementing or supporting partner of other projects executed by the World Bank under FRiT II. 42. SUYE training replication and scale-up. As a result of the SUYE training pilot, the PMM was able to draw lessons from the implementation of trainings and has subsequently adapted the training content based on feedback from participants. The project contributed to exchange of knowledge between TRC, PMM, and MoNE regarding the SUYE trainings, which they are implementing among refugees in other locations in the country. Details about the increased training coverage is available in section IV.D. Page 16 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME Key Factors during Preparation 43. Realism of project objectives and design. The project objectives and design were informed by an in-depth sectoral context analysis, extensive consultations with key stakeholders, and preliminary needs assessments of TAC-based refugees during preparation. The objectives were realistic and scope of activities appropriate because they reflected the target beneficiaries’ identified needs and were designed to operationalize the Government’s strategy and action plan for harmonization of refugees, migrants, and host communities. The project design was simple, consisting of three complementary activities—SUYE trainings, socioeconomic support services, and social cohesion activities—and their sequencing was logical. 44. Government commitment. The project responded directly to the Government’s ambition to standardize information and counselling services and establish face-to-face counselling capacity to ensure provision of reliable information and guidance for refugees. It piloted and disseminated the SUYE training module, which was designed and prepared by the PMM in the same year of the project start. By supporting the operationalization of the Government’s own strategy and priorities for harmonization, the project enjoyed high Government commitment and leadership from the start. Key Factors during Implementation 45. PIU staffing shortages. Risks to project management were identified during preparation, but mitigation measures were not adequately applied. As described in the Project Paper, TRC did not have experience with World Bank-financed projects as grant recipient or implementing partner, and given its status as an emergency organization, TRC personnel were often deployed to emergency and humanitarian activities without adequate anticipation. To mitigate the risk of staffing shortage, the project design included recruitment of consultants for key functions of the PIU (that is, project coordinator, communication officer) and TRC management would assign backup personnel if project staff were required for other TRC assignments. However, no new staff were hired during the implementation of the project because severance pay provision requested by TRC could not be covered according to the World Bank’s fiduciary rules. In addition, ICR consultations confirmed that the project was carried out with an insufficient number of personnel, that the personnel and trainers working in TRC headquarters, CCs, and MoNE PECs had to carry out the project activities in addition to their existing assignments and therefore experienced challenges in conducting project-related tasks. 46. TRC status and strong relationship with local/national stakeholders. TRC has been the leading organization providing protection, psychosocial support, livelihoods, and social cohesion services to refugees and host communities in Turkey with high operational capacity. The implementation of project activities required close collaboration with public authorities and partners which supported the project by providing human and technical resources. Through its status as a national society—a volunteer-based social service institution—TRC has built strong relationships with local and national actors, which support its delivery of humanitarian assistance and refugee supporting services throughout the country. These relationships facilitated rapid communication and engagement of necessary resources from partner agencies that significantly facilitated implementation of project activities on the ground. For example, Page 17 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) youth centers, schools, and sport areas were used to organize social cohesion activities without any costs for the project. 47. Lack of clear institutional arrangements between implementing partners. Project implementation was dependent on close collaboration between several public institutions operating at the national and provincial level (PMM, Directorates of Migration, and TRC). At the community level, the project required close collaboration between TRC CCs and Provincial Directorates of Migration. Lack of understanding and agreement regarding their roles and responsibilities sometimes created coordination problems between the central- and provincial-level PMMs and TRC CCs in the planning and implementation of project activities. These issues were eventually resolved although causing slight implementation delays. 48. Social tensions between refugees and host communities. Some social cohesion activities could not be implemented as planned due to security risks to the participants. For example, mobile theaters, which aimed to increase the interaction between refugees and host communities, performed in TACs, targeting the refugee audience only rather than in city centers due to increased social tensions between the two groups. In addition, some sport tournaments (table tennis, trekking, and football) in the sixth quarter of the project implementation were cancelled due to the perceived rise in anti-refugee sentiments in the society. Factors outside the Control of Government and/or Implementing Entities 49. COVID-19-related disruptions. As part of COVID-19 prevention measures in Turkey, the suspension of entry and exit to TACs and the restrictions on services provided by TRC CCs led to a change in the target beneficiary group for SUYE trainings. While the original target group was refugees who wanted to relocate or had recently relocated to project provinces, it changed to refugees living only in project TACs regardless of whether they wanted to relocate or not. In addition, due to the face-to-face nature of the project activities, COVID-19 restrictions on education, training facilities, public gatherings, and group-based activities caused delays in the launch of these activities. Moreover, during the hardest COVID-19 restrictions in 2020, TRC staff at the headquarter and provinces worked remotely, limiting their access to accounting and procurement systems, which affected the day-to-day management of the project. While CCs remained open during COVID-19 lockdowns, the number of visitors was visibly lower. Delays caused by COVID-19 restrictions triggered the nine-month no-cost extension, which was processed through the 2021 restructuring. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. Quality of M&E: Modest 50. M&E design. The project’s Theory of Change documented a clear relationship between key activities, and the Results Framework adequately showed the contribution of outputs toward the achievement of the project outcomes. The indicators selected to monitor progress toward achievement of the PDO correctly reflected key areas of action and included relevant quantitative and measurable targets. The protocols for data collection, frequency, and reporting for all PDO and intermediate-level indicators were established and included in the PIM. The project provided gender-disaggregated data for SUYE trainings and social cohesion activities and age disaggregation for social cohesion activities. Refugee Page 18 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) and host community participation (percent) was reported for all social cohesion activities. The ICR review found some discrepancies in the final calculations of project results, which have been revised during the preparation of the ICR to the extent possible. For example, training of trainers (ToT) trainers were removed from the final count of direct beneficiaries (PDO Indicator 1) because they did not fit the definition of direct project beneficiaries provided in the PIM, and direct beneficiary categorization was revised in line with project activities (see PDO Indicator 1 comment, annex 1). 51. M&E implementation and utilization. The project utilized existing M&E systems and procedures implemented at TRC CCs and the TRC headquarters. These consisted of two interoperable systems: (a) Community Center Management System, which was utilized for monitoring and reporting at the provincial level, and (b) a Management Information System used at the TRC headquarters. The project M&E tasks were performed by the M&E officer assigned by TRC. The project external evaluation study was conducted by an independent consultant in December 2021 after the project closure, to assess the overall project’s relevance and achievement of the desired outcomes, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability. 52. Quarterly progress reports were mostly received on time and included the required details on implementation progress and the status of project management, including FM and procurement. Furthermore, the World Bank task team provided M&E technical support to the PIU throughout implementation, including for the development of indicator protocols, and provided templates for quarterly progress reports and the annual work plan. B. Environmental, Social and Fiduciary Compliance 53. E&S compliance. The project’s environmental risks were rated as Low because project activities did not have any direct or indirect environmental impacts. The social risks were rated as Moderate due to the sensitivity associated with targeting refugees who were being resettled from camps into communities and considering the country’s fragile socioeconomic context. The project’s Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) and Labour Management Procedures were developed through consultations with beneficiary communities and international, national, and provincial stakeholders during the preparation stage and updated in light of COVID-19-induced changes to project activities. These documents were approved by the World Bank and disclosed in English and Turkish on TRC’s website in December 2019. An easy-to-read brochure covering key information presented in the SEP, including project contacts and procedures for grievance redress, was also prepared in Arabic for the use of project beneficiaries. The project’s E&S issues were managed by a social cohesion officer and safeguards officer assigned by TRC and a harmonization officer assigned by the PMM. During the outbreak of COVID-19, TRC regularly monitored the emergency health situation and introduced preventative measures to limit the spread of the virus in TRC CCs and TACs. The project was implemented in accordance with the relevant World Bank Environmental and Social Standards (ESS): (a) ESS1: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts, (b) ESS2: Labor and Working Conditions, and (c) ESS10: Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure. 54. For outreach and mobilization, TRC utilized its existing on-site and online communication channels, including its official TRC CCs website and social media pages. The communication material was carefully designed to reflect the project scope and purpose. For example, for sports activities, the motto was ‘strike your tennis racket for brotherhood’ and ‘cycling for brotherhood’—to indicate that the project activities were meant to serve as positive catalysts for promoting closer ties and engagement between Page 19 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) refugees and host communities. All communication and visibility activities were consulted with and approved by the PMM in advance. 55. During project preparation, TRC’s existing grievance mechanism (GM) was assessed as adequate for management of project grievances. The system allowed complaints and grievances to be submitted verbally or in writing using multiple channels—email, digital kiosks, feedback boxes at CCs, TRC hotline, or through TRC’s website. However, during implementation, no complaints or feedback from the target communities were recorded in the GM, which raised questions about its effectiveness. The World Bank team advised the PIU to explore proactive approaches to obtain feedback from beneficiaries or solicit concerns that they might have in relation to the project activities.23 Outside of the project GM, some complaints were reported in TRC’s quarterly progress reports. Overall, TRC had adequate capacity to manage the World Bank’s E&S requirements, although some shortcomings regarding grievance management were noted. E&S compliance was rated Satisfactory in the last Implementation Status and Results Report (November 9, 2021). 56. FM. During implementation, FM was rated Satisfactory. The first three months of implementation in early 2020 focused extensively on the PIU staff becoming familiar with World Bank fiduciary requirements and systems. The PIU was staffed with an FM specialist from within TRC. The project prepared a detailed Financial Management Manual with the support of a World Bank FM consultant. In addition, the PIM included a dedicated section on FM. The project accounting and reporting was done through TRC’s Systems Applications and Products (SAP) system which allowed the extraction of revenue and expenditures and matching of transactions with World Bank-executed payments. The interim unaudited financial reports were prepared manually based on SAP accounting records. This system contained the entire project finance and procurement-related database and enabled generation of real- time progress and disbursement status.24 Given the small number of transactions and no expenditures until December 2020, the World Bank provided an exception for TRC to submit the audited 2020 accounts together with the 2021 audit report.25 The audit report was submitted for December 17, 2019, to January 31, 2022. The auditors issued an unmodified opinion on the project financial statements. 57. Procurement. The procurement rating remained Moderately Satisfactory during implementation. This is primarily because of the standstill period the project went through when all activities were either suspended or delayed due to COVID-19 restrictions. The Procurement Plan was then revised to include redesigned social cohesion activities that could be implemented outdoors and support kits to be distributed to project beneficiaries during SUYE trainings, and the project gained the required momentum. Despite the staff turnovers in TRC’s Procurement Unit, all staff assigned satisfactorily managed the relevant procurement processes with intensive hands-on implementation support provided by the World Bank. This support included, but was not limited to, (a) accessing and using the Systematic Tracking of Exchanges in Procurement (STEP), (b) updating/completing the Project Procurement Strategy for Development, and (c) completing procurement-related sections of the PIM. The World Bank Procurement Post Review conducted in November 2021 did not identify any inconsistencies with the World Bank procurement procedures. The procurement documentation and processes were of generally good quality, 23 World Bank. Aide Memoire, Implementation Support Mission, December 21–24, 2020. 24 World Bank. Aide Memoire, Implementation Support Mission, December 21–24, 2020. 25 World Bank. Aide Memoire, Implementation Support Mission, January 26–February 4, 2020. Page 20 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) noting appropriate measures to be taken for expanding the participation and responding to queries by prospective bidders. The review noted that the relevant functions in the procurement processes were distributed among TRC staff with adequate internal control mechanisms. The PIU staff reported that they faced difficulties in implementing procurement procedures through STEP due to lack of experience with the system.26 C. Bank performance: Moderately Satisfactory 58. Quality at entry. The World Bank conducted two project preparation missions, in July 2019 and September 2019, in addition to numerous virtual meetings and discussions, to inform the project design. The missions held consultations with international/national/local stakeholders and focus groups discussions with refugee representatives and TRC CCs in target provinces. The consultations helped identify the information and counselling needs of refugees in Turkey, which were confirmed as being aligned with country-level strategies and priority development areas. The project preparation adequately reflected lessons learned from similar World Bank-financed operations on refugee inclusion and facilitated the dialogue with TRC, PMM, and other stakeholders during the project design and identification of target locations. However, one weakness was noted during project preparation, detailed institutional arrangements with clear roles and responsibilities between PMM and TRC were not prepared, which could have facilitated their collaboration during implementation especially at the provincial level. 59. Quality at supervision. The World Bank conducted one in-country mission in January 2020 and the remaining missions were conducted virtually due to COVID-19 restrictions with the participation of the PIU, PMM, and TRC CCs’ representatives from target provinces, in addition to regular follow-up meetings and workshops throughout implementation. The first mission included technical meetings and field visits to some project target provinces and included consultations with beneficiary communities, local stakeholders, and TRC CCs. Besides official missions, the task team continued to closely monitor and supervise the project implementation virtually through emails, phone calls, video conferences, and so on. In addition, there were monthly virtual coordination meetings where the task team and the PIU reviewed the implementation progress and the project’s work plan and budget; discussed challenges; and identified mitigation measures, such as the need for a no-cost extension to allow for completion of project activities. D. Risk to Development Outcome 60. The project successfully delivered a comprehensive harmonization orientation program to targeted refugees living in TACs despite COVID-19 restrictions which were in effect nearly throughout the implementation period. By encouraging ownership of project activities among the implementing agency and partners, the project enabled sustainability of such activities. Hence, project partners continue to devote time and resources to activities introduced by the project. Since project closure, the PMM has scaled up SUYE trainings in other provinces in cooperation with MoNE PECs and is planning to introduce the following improvements to the training program, which are consistent with the feedback received during ICR consultations: (a) add a Turkish language course, (b) prepare an online SUYE training module for distance learning, and (c) offer SUYE trainings outside TACs to extended audiences - not only Syrian refugees under temporary protection but also to asylum seekers and refugees of other nationalities. Thus, 26 Turkish Red Crescent. Support to Harmonization in Turkey: Project Completion Report, May 2022. Page 21 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) the project has demonstrated that the low-cost training activities have value for target communities and can be replicated and scaled up. 61. ICR consultations revealed that besides SUYE trainings, refugees living in TACs need assistance and access to services, such as vocational and technical trainings, Turkish language courses, and livelihoods support. The referral system introduced by the project can be improved and expanded to provide a bridge between TAC residents and the socioeconomic support services available in TRC CCs and other public service entities. However, this would require addressing persistent coordination challenges between ministries, municipalities, and TRC CCs. The volatile economic situation in the country may also negatively affect and limit pathways to employment for refugees departing from TACs. Additional efforts are needed to strengthen the coordination across government institutions and with communities and stakeholders’ ownership of the referral system to sustain project activities beyond the project closure. The subsequently approved World Bank projects, including the Social Entrepreneurship, Empowerment and Cohesion Project (SEECO, P171456), which became effective in April 2021, draws on lessons learned in this pilot project (see details in section V), will provide much needed livelihoods and employment services for refugees and host communities in Turkey, and will thereby build on and help sustain the harmonization efforts piloted by this grant. . V. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 62. Simplified beneficiary targeting can create consistency and transparency in beneficiary selection, especially in situations of emergency and fragility. The project’s harmonization activities have demonstrated that community transition support can facilitate socioeconomic integration and should be offered to a wide range of refugees and asylum seekers, irrespective of their housing status. Because of COVID-19 restrictions on movement to/from TACs, the beneficiary targeting for SUYE trainings was simplified to include all TAC residents and not only refugees who were planning or had recently relocated from TACs. This targeting simplification avoided preferential treatment of refugees who were in the process of relocation, which could have caused tensions between them and other refugees who did not have concrete relocation options. Targeting that is based on one simple verifiable parameter (for example, refugee status) and is not subject to frequent changes (for example, relocation status) created transparency and consistency in the beneficiary selection process. Moreover, the value and use of the SUYE training for broader populations was demonstrated through the PMM replication and scale-up of training activities among extended groups of refugees and asylum seekers outside of TACs. 63. Increasing the efficacy of the referral system for socioeconomic support services requires planning, knowledgeable staff, and dedicated resources. The individualized referral services designed at project preparation, with case managers profiling, identifying, and following up on service referrals for each beneficiary, was not implemented. Due to COVID-19-related delays in implementation, the referral system established as an addition to the training program was generic and relied on trainers for referrals. This did not allow to sufficiently identify the refugee needs and barriers to accessing the socioeconomic support services provided at TRC CCs. Despite the need for socioeconomic support services identified during project preparation and confirmed during ICR consultations, the refugees’ registration and completion of such services was minimal during the project period. If it was not for Covid-19 related implementation delays and restrictions on staffing, the project could have course corrected and dedicated more resources to referrals. For future registrations, the reported barrier to accessing support services Page 22 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) due to the distance between TACs and CCs can be addressed by organizing transportation to/from CCs and providing mobile services in TACs. The key to effective referral services is dedicated human and financial resources that can be mobilized to identify the exact service needs, create links with service providers, and address the target population’s barriers to access, as needed. Individualize support can play an important role in enhancing the refugees’ confidence in the referral system. 64. Small grants provide opportunities to test and improve new activities before scaling them up through larger interventions. The US$48 million SEECO project (P171456) and the US$85 million Support for Transition to Labor Market Project (P171471), both financed by the EU’s FRiT II and executed by the World Bank, started preparation around the same time as the SPF grant.27 SEECO aims to improve livelihoods opportunities for women and youth in refugee and host communities in target areas in Turkey through provision of social enterprise financial and technical support. The second project aims to improve employability of refugees under temporary and international protection and Turkish citizens through provision of counselling services and employment support. All three interventions target the same beneficiaries and have complementary activities aimed at improving refugees’ and host communities’ livelihoods and employment prospects. The SPF grant presented an opportunity to test, validate, and improve some of the livelihoods and employment support activities and key lessons, which were then introduced in SEECO and the Labor Market Project currently being implemented. 65. Provision of childcare support can facilitate successful participation of women in training activities. The project’s gender-sensitive approach was successful in mobilizing a high number of female refugees for participation in SUYE trainings (66 percent). However, the lack of childcare services at TACs (except for one TAC) forced mothers to attend trainings with their children. To facilitate focused participation of women in training activities, alternative childcare support needs to be arranged during such training, in particular for projects supporting women. 66. Implementation of social cohesion activities in fragile settings requires deep local knowledge and understanding of rapidly changing social contexts. Being the leading organization that provides support to refugees in Turkey and operating through a highly decentralized model allowed TRC to effectively mobilize the target beneficiaries and identify potential social risks as they emerged in the field. One example is the decision to cancel some social cohesion activities during periods of increased social tensions between refugees and host communities, which could have otherwise posed a security threat to the participants. To reduce social tensions, it would have been beneficial if all social cohesion activities were accompanied by awareness raising campaigns aimed at countering misinformation about the support provided to refugees vis-à-vis host communities and reducing negative prejudices against refugees. . 27 The SEECO project was approved by the World Bank Board on February 18, 2021. Page 23 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: The objective of the project is to support the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces in Turkey. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Direct project beneficiaries Number 0.00 3500.00 3500.00 6558.00 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Female Percentage 0.00 50.00 50.00 57.00 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Comments (achievements against targets): The Project Implementation Manual (PIM) definition of direct beneficiaries includes the following three categories: i. Category 1 - refugees who successfully complete harmonization training activities (3,843), ii. Category 2 - host community members who receive benefits from the project, and iii. Category 3 - participants of project’s social cohesion activities (2715). The project benefits for host community members were participation in social cohesion activities (beneficiary category 3), and receipt of support kits during these activities (covered by beneficiary category 3). Therefore, beneficiary category 2 has been excluded from the direct project beneficiary count. The actual achieved results exceed the original target by 87 percent. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Page 24 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Beneficiaries with improved Percentage 0.00 80.00 80.00 81.00 knowledge of harmonization 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator measures the percentage of refugees who have improved knowledge of harmonization as a result of participation in SUYE training. Improved knowledge was measured as a factor of the difference between pre- and post- training test scores. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Beneficiaries referred to socio- Percentage 0.00 80.00 80.00 10.00 economic support services who register and receive support 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 from TRC Community Centers Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator measures the effectiveness of the TRC’ referral services. Numerator is total number of refugees who have registered and received support from TRC CCs (377). Denominator is all refugees who participated in SUYE trainings (3,843). Out of 377 CC service recipients, 89 benefitted from protection, 105 from livelihood, 95 from psychosocial support, and 88 from social cohesion services. A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Component 1: Support to Harmonization of Refugees and Host Communities Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Page 25 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Beneficiaries successfully Number 0.00 0.00 1200.00 3843.00 completing harmonization training activities 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Female Percentage 0.00 50.00 50.00 66.00 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Comments (achievements against targets): The actual achieved results are 320 percent higher than original target. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Percentage of support kits Percentage 0.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 provided to eligible beneficiaries according to the 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 process identified in the PIM Comments (achievements against targets): According to PIM, participants of face-to-face SUYE trainings were eligible to receive support kits by the project. All 3843 SUYE training participants signed a document confirming their receipt of the kits thus reaching the 100% target for eligible beneficiaries. Additional 757 support kits were distributed to participants of social cohesion activities (both refugees and host community members). Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Beneficiaries participating Number 0.00 1300.00 1300.00 2715.00 social cohesion activities organized by the project 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Page 26 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Comments (achievements against targets): Participants of social cohesion activities were 2182 refugees and 533 host community members. Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Beneficiaries that feel project Percentage 0.00 80.00 80.00 89.00 investments reflected their needs 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Comments (achievements against targets): As per PIM, the original denominator for this indicator was beneficiaries of all project activities and the numerator was all beneficiaries that felt project investments reflected their needs. However, beneficiary satisfaction surveys were conducted only for harmonization trainings and not for social cohesion activities and for socio-economic support services. Thus, the revised numerator is all SUYE training participants that felt that the SUYE training reflected their needs. The revised denominator is all SUYE training participants. Component: Component 2: Project Management Unit of Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Baseline Original Target Measure Target Completion Grievances registered related Percentage 0.00 100.00 100.00 0.00 to delivery of project benefits that are actually addressed 06-Dec-2019 31-Mar-2021 31-Dec-2021 31-Dec-2021 Comments (achievements against targets): This indicator measures the utilization of TRC complaint mechanism. Since no grievances were formally registered in TRC’s complaint mechanism, the actual achieved result for this indicator is Not Applicable. Page 27 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Page 28 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) B. ORGANIZATION OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE PDO Objective/Outcome 1: Increased understanding of social and economic life in Turkey Outcome Indicators 1. Beneficiaries with improved knowledge of harmonization (percentage) 1. Beneficiaries successfully completing SUYE training activities (number) 2. Beneficiaries participating social cohesion activities organized by the project (number) Intermediate Results Indicators 3. Beneficiaries that feel project investments reflected their needs 4. Grievances registered related to delivery of project benefits that are actually addressed 1. 81% of the refugees improved their knowledge of harmonization in Turkey. 2. 3,843 refugees completed harmonization trainings. 3. 3,500 print and visual material produced. Key Outputs by Component 4. 2,715 beneficiaries participated in social cohesion activities. (linked to the achievement of the 5. 12 role model videos produced, 12 sports and recreational events organized, 3 mobile Objective/Outcome 1) theater shows performed, 4 coding and technology workshops conducted. 6. 89% of beneficiaries felt that the project investments reflected their needs. 7. Not applicable since 0 grievances were registered in the project’s grievance mechanism. Objective/Outcome 2: Increased capacity of beneficiaries in navigating in Turkey’s social, cultural and economic life 1. Beneficiaries referred to socio-economic support services who register and receive Outcome Indicators support from TRC Community Centers (percentage) 1. Support kits provided to eligible beneficiaries according to the process identified in the Intermediate Results Indicators PIM (percentage) Key Outputs by Component 1. 10% of the beneficiaries registered and received support from TRC Community Centers. (linked to the achievement of the 2. 100% (4,600) support kits provided to eligible beneficiaries Objective/Outcome 2) Page 29 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) . ANNEX 2. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Amount at Approval Actual at Project Closing Percentage of Components (US$, millions) (US$, millions) Approval Support to Harmonization of 0.57 0.54 95 Refugees and Host Communities Project Management 0.08 0.02 25 Total 0.65 0.56 86 Page 30 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 3. RECIPIENT, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS Comments by the Turkish Red Crescent The Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project generally progressed as planned. The beneficiaries were highly motivated to attend the activities designed to enable peaceful co-existence within the society. This led to an increase in social cohesion between refugees and host community. The recommendations of the project implementer Turkish Red Crescent (TRC) may be important for similar future projects, especially projects focused on social cohesion. Lessons learned through the project are focused on four main areas: human resources, partner relations, organizational/activity-based processes and procurement/financial processes. Human Resources: Situation: TRC contribution had a major role in project implementation. Although additional human resources were not recruited within the scope of the project, TRC social cohesion personnel made a great effort and provided support for the implementation of project activities as well as their ongoing projects. Accordingly, TRC needed additional human resources to share working tasks. Recommendation: When creating a project team, the correct composition of the team and distribution of tasks is needed. In line with humanitarian aid principles, TRC provided human resources support to the project, in parallel with other TRC projects, and the project was successfully carried out. In terms of future projects, details about human resources and institutional contributions should be decided during the project design phase. Partner Relations: Situation. The coordination between TRC and Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) was critical to organize project activities effectively. The complex organization scheme of the Presidency of Migration Management caused difficulties/ambiguities in some processes. During implementation phase of the activities, social cohesion personnel in TRC Community Centers under Community-based Migration Programs had the role of implementing activities in a most efficient way with their objective-driven motivation. Recommendation. To improve coordination and cooperation among the project partners an institutional analysis should be made at the project design stage and their internal functioning should be taken into account. Roles and responsibilities should be clearly defined for similar projects in the future Organizational/Activity-based Processes: Situation: In the beginning, working hours restricted participation of some in project activities. Therefore, the project’s common approach became to organize activities outside of working hours to increase their participation. Page 31 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Recommendation: During the design phase of the project, it is important to collect information about the daily lives of the beneficiaries to make sure any activities are organized with participation restrictions in mind. Procurement and Financial Processes: Situation. Since this was TRC’s first experience with World Bank project implementation, TRC (including project management team, procurement team) had to become familiar with the funding mechanism, paperwork, World Bank procurement system (e.g., STEP) and procurement rules. During the project implementation, no major problems were encountered, but TRC did experience some difficulty in using World Bank systems at the field level, which slowed down implementation. With the use of TRC’s Institutional Procurement Regulation, procurement and supply of goods and services could have been accelerated. However, the use of World Bank procurement procedures has allowed TRC to gain experience with both country legislation and donor requirements. Recommendation. To minimize disruptions, a mutual agreement should be reached at the design stage for a more practical procurement plan/designation. Generally, the project was effective in contributing to social cohesion and enhancing refugees’ understanding of Turkey’s socio-economic life. The project activities are useful and relevant and therefore, we recommend implementing similar activities in the future. In addition, there is still a need of social cohesion activities, expanding to other provinces. Page 32 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 4. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS  Aide Memoires of implementation support missions and preparation missions, 2019–2021.  Demirbüken, Hakan. 2021. The External Evaluation of Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project. December 2021.  Legal documents, including the Grant Agreement, approved proposal, government letter, Disbursement Letter.  Rehber Bağımsız Denetim Ltd. Şti., Audit Report, Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project, December 2021.  Project Implementation Manual, March 2020.  Quarterly Progress Reports, 2020–2021.  Project Labor Management Procedures, March 2021.  Project Stakeholder Engagement Plan, January 2021.  Project Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey and Pre- and Post-Test Surveys, PMM, 2019.  TRC Project Procurement Strategy for Development, December 2019.  TRC Financial Management Manual, September 2019.  TRC Social Media report for Role Model Short Videos, April 2022.  Recipient’s Project Completion Report, April 2022.  PowerPoint presentations and information notes prepared by TRC during implementation support missions, 2019–2021.  Directorate General of Migration Management, Turkey National Harmonization Strategy Document and Action Plan (2018–2023).  Training of Trainers Program and TACs’ Visiting Report, June 2021.  World Bank Implementation Status and Results Reports (ISRs), 2020–2021.  World Bank (March 2021). Restructuring Paper of Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Report No: RES45621.  World Bank SPF Grant Agreement No. TF0B0894, December 2019.  World Bank Project Paper for Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project, December 2019.  World Bank Procurement Post Review Report, November 2021. Page 33 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 5. LIST OF ICR INTERVIEWS AND QUESTIONNAIRES Overview of ICR Interviews World Bank Task Team Murat Onur Team Leader April 7, 2022 Tomris Okşar Procurement Specialist April 22, 2022 Zeynep Lalik Finance Management Specialist April 25, 2022 TRC HQ Semra Karaboğa Taşkıran Project Manager March 24, 2022 Ongu Oruç Parla Project Officer March 24, 2022 Huriye Nurcan Elsıkma M&E Officer March 24, 2022 Deniz Aygül Taşkıran Budget and Reporting Officer March 24, 2022 Presidency of Migration Management Esranur Arıkanoğlu Migration Expert April 12, 2022 TRC CCs Aysu Tekin Adana-Beneficiary Relations and March 29, 2022 Communication Officer Cesur Dervişoğlu Adana-Translator March 29, 2022 Songül Yıldız Karanfiloğlu Hatay-Translator March 29, 2022 Muhammet Beşer Kilis- Social Cohesion Assistant March 29, 2022 Kahramanmaraş-Beneficiary Relations and March 29, 2022 Muhammet Salih Teber Communication Officer Public Education Centers Ebru Elmas Kilis PEC Trainer March 31, 2022 Hazal Hasan Kilis PEC Trainer March 31, 2022 Emel Şahin Hatay PEC Trainer March 31, 2022 Emine Bakar Adana PEC Trainer March 31, 2022 Nurten Turgut Adana PEC Trainer March 31, 2022 Project Beneficiaries 5 beneficiaries Kilis TAC April 5, 2022 6 beneficiaries Adana TAC April 6, 2022 5 beneficiaries Kahramanmaraş TAC April 6, 2022 6 beneficiaries Hatay TAC April 8, 2022 Page 34 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Questionnaire for TRC PIU and PMM Name: Email: Name of organization: Date: To what extent did the project achieve its objective “To support the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces in Turkey�? To your knowledge, what were the main factors (positive or negative) affecting the project implementation? How did the SUYE trainings promote harmonization of refugees and host communities in target provinces? How did the social cohesion activities (sports, technology/coding workshops, mobile theater) provided by the project help promote social cohesion among refugees and host communities in target provinces? How could the project beneficiaries have been more engaged to register to social and economic empowerment services provided by TRC community centers? How could the referrals to those services have been more effective during the project implementation? In your opinion, what was the greatest impact that the project brought? In your opinion, what was the least impact that the project brought? Were there any unintended outcomes and impacts of the project? Was there adequate coordination with your organization, and/or with other organizations? What, in your opinion. are the most important lessons learned from the project? What worked? What did not work? What difficulties or challenges did you and your team face during the project implementation? Which of the project activities can be replicated? How? Which goods or services financed by the project can support to the sustainability of project activities? Is there anything you’d suggest the project to have done differently? What could the World Bank do to improve the project outcomes in similar operations in the future? Thank you for your kind feedback. Please send your responses to yreis@worldbank.org; monur@worldbank.org; and ismajic@worldbank.org Page 35 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Questionnaire for World Bank Task team Name: Date: The order of this questionnaire is as below; 1. Overall project (12 questions) - p. 1 2. Social and Environmental Safeguards (5 questions) - p. 3 3. Procurement (4 questions) - p. 4 4. Financial Management (2 question) - p. 5 5. M&E (3 questions) - p. 5 *Technical specialists can skip “overall project� questions if desired, to only answer items relevant to their areas of expertise. 1. Overall project To what extent did the project achieve its objective “To support the transition of refugees to community living in target provinces in Turkey�? In your opinion, what were the greatest and least impacts that the project brought? Any unintended outcomes and impacts? What were the main factors (positive or negative) affecting the project implementation? How would you evaluate the project’s activities (trainings and social cohesion activities) in promoting social cohesion between refugees and host community members? What kind of obstacles did you experience in ensuring their integration and improving the readiness of refugees relocating from TACs, and how did the team overcome these (if any)? How would you rate the Kızılay’s ownership and commitment to achieving development objectives? What were the key factors that helped strengthen their ownership? Were there any obstacles experienced in their internal and external institutional coordination? To what extent was the project understood by the project beneficiaries? Did you notice any misinformation/misunderstanding during the project implementation and if so, what measurements were placed to overcome these? How would you evaluate the overall performance of the PIU? How would you self-evaluate the overall performance of the Task Team? What, in your opinion, were the main lessons learned from the project? Which of the project activities can be replicated? Considering the project activities, are there any risks to the sustainability of the activities financed by the project? What could the World Bank Group do to improve the project outcomes in similar operations in the future? Page 36 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) 2. Social and Environmental Safeguards The project experienced many external challenges that impacted project implementation, such as working restrictions due to COVID-19. Was the project’s GRM sufficient for the scope and scale of the project? Is there any area for improvements? Did the project ensure the public dissemination of grievance mechanisms to all beneficiaries? What were the effects of trainings and social cohesion activities? How and to what extent were these programs sustained and institutionalized? Did they helped to enhance the integration of refugees into the communities? What were the obstacles experienced in achieving this? How would you evaluate the project’s engagements and adequate levels of consultations with beneficiary refugees to get proper feedback about harmonization activities? How would you evaluate the performance of the Safeguards focal points at PIU? 3. Procurement The project experienced many external challenges and delays that impacted the project implementation, such as working restrictions due to COVID-19. How would you evaluate the project’s effectiveness in continuing procurement activities during these situations, and what lessons would you draw? How did you work with the PIU to ensure that the WB procurement was fully understood, and their staff were fully equipped to transfer/share the knowledge with TRC CCs? What do you think about the project implementation in terms of procurement activities of various goods and services? How would you evaluate the performance of the procurement focal point in the PIU? 4. Financial Management The project experienced many external challenges and delays that impacted the project implementation, such as working restrictions due to COVID-19. How did you ensure the FM activities continued during such circumstances, and what lessons would you draw from it? How would you evaluate the performance of the FM focal point in the PIU? 5.M&E The project experienced many external challenges and delays that impacted the project implementation, such as working restrictions due to COVID-19. What lessons would you draw about operating in difficult conditions? Looking back, is there anything you would have done differently to strengthen the overall M&E framework (beyond the project restructuring)? How would you evaluate the performance of the M&E focal point in the PIU? Page 37 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Focus Group Questions for Project Beneficiaries (participants of SUYE trainings and/or social cohesion activities)  What do you think of the SUYE training you attended? Which contributions did they provide to you? In your experience, what are the positive and negative impacts?  What do you think of the project’s social cohesion activities (sports, technology/coding workshops, mobile theatre, etc.) you attended? Which contributions did they provide to you? In your experience, what are the positive and negative impacts?  Could you please evaluate how the project activities you attended can be improved? (e.g., in terms of training content, trainers, information disseminated, training materials and logistics)  Have you registered to social and economic empowerment services provided by Kızılay Community Centres after attending the SUYE training? If yes, which courses? If not, why not? Any obstacles?  What can be done further to promote harmonization of refugees in your community? Can you give examples or recommendations?  What were you least happy about the project activities (training, social cohesion activities) implemented? Interview questions for TRC field staff/trainers who provided SUYE trainings and/or implemented social cohesion activities  What is the most important change in terms of harmonization of refugees and host communities you notice as a result of the project?  The project aimed to promote harmonization of refugees and social cohesion between refugees and host community in target provinces. How would you evaluate the SUYE trainings in promoting social cohesion between refugees and host community members? What kind of obstacles did you experience in implementing those activities?  How would you evaluate the curriculum, training materials and organization of training activities in the target provinces? What do you think of pre-test and post-test applied during the trainings?  How would you evaluate the project’s social cohesion activities (sports, coding/technology workshops, mobile theatre, role model videos) in promoting social cohesion between refugees and host community members? What kind of obstacles did you experience in implementing these activities (as relevant)?  To what extent was the project understood by the refugees and host community members? Did you notice any misinformation/misunderstanding during the project implementation?  Can you give me examples of how harmonization and social cohesion activities can be improved?  What were you least happy about the project activities implemented? Questions for trainers who attended SUYE ToT (non-TRC staff)  The project aimed to promote harmonization of refugees and social cohesion between refugees and host community in target provinces. How would you evaluate the SUYE ToT and SUYE trainings in Page 38 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) promoting social cohesion between refugees and host community members? What kind of obstacles did you experience during training implementation?  How would you evaluate the curriculum, training materials and organization of training activities in the target provinces? What do you think of pre-test and post-test applied during the trainings?  To what extent was the project understood by the refugees and host community members? Did you notice any misinformation/misunderstanding during the project implementation?  Can you give me examples of how SUYE trainings can be improved?  What were you least happy about the project activities implemented? Page 39 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 6. PROJECT’S THEORY OF CHANGE Page 40 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 7. Syrian Crisis and Turkey’s Refugee Response Syrian Crisis 1. March 2021 marked 10 years since the start of anti-government protests in Syria. Soon after, in April 2011, the first group of 252 Syrians arrived at Turkey’s Cilvegözü border crossing in Hatay Province. The 2011 protests later turned into a civil war encompassing the entire country, forcing millions of Syrians to seek refuge, mostly in neighboring countries. As of March 2022, the number of Syrian refugees has surpassed 5.6 million.28 More than 80 percent of Syrians currently live in neighboring countries, with Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan hosting the majority. 2. Turkey has been hosting the largest population of persons under temporary and international protection in the world in the last six years. The country has become both a transit and a destination country for migrants and refugees. With Syrians making up the world’s largest refugee population, Turkey is now hosting more than 3.7 million Syrians29 who are under temporary protection.30 In addition, there are an estimated 320,000 asylum seekers and refugees of other nationalities living in Turkey.31 More than 98 percent of Syrian refugees live in urban and rural areas across Turkey’s 81 provinces, with less than two percent residing in the TACs (refugee camps). The majority live in the southeast of Turkey, as well as metropolitan cities such as Istanbul, Bursa, Izmir, and Konya. International protection applicants and status holders include various nationalities, with the largest populations coming from Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran. Turkey’s Response 3. While Turkey’s refugee response has been progressive and provides a model for other countries hosting refugees, the magnitude of the refugee and migrant inflow pose substantial challenges to the people displaced and the host communities. The challenges include increased demands on urban services, such as water supply, sanitation, and solid waste services, and increased competition for employment, housing, and basic services. These stresses stretch the capacity of local authorities, municipalities, and national service providers. Apart from the large cities such as Ankara, Istanbul, and Izmir, many of the cities hosting high numbers of Syrians are located in the more vulnerable or disadvantaged provinces in Turkey, which exacerbates the development challenges. 4. Turkey has a strong legal framework for international and temporary protection. The Law on Foreigners and International Protection (LFIP, 2013) and the Temporary Protection Regulation (2014) 28 Presidency of Migration Management. Total number of registered Syrian Refugees. As of March 24, 2022: https://en.goc.gov.tr/temporary-protection27. 29 Presidency of Migration Management. Temporary Protection Statistics. As of April 14, 2022: https://www.goc.gov.tr/gecici- koruma5638#. 30 The terms ‘Syrians’ and ‘refugees’ are used in terms of sociological context and widespread daily use and independent of the legal context in Turkey and Turkish law. Turkey is a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol. It retains a geographic limitation to its ratification of the 1951 UN Convention on the Status of Refugees, which means that only those fleeing as a consequence of “events occurring in Europe� can be given refugee status. Syrian nationals, as well as stateless persons and refugees from Syria, who came to Turkey due to events in Syria after April 28, 2011, are provided with temporary protection. 31 UNHCR. Turkey Operational Update, April 2021. https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/details/86939. Page 41 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) provide the basis for the refugees’ legal status, registration and protection procedures, and access to rights and services. In 2013, the Government established the Directorate-General of Migration Management (now known as PMM) under the Ministry of Interior as the central government agency in charge of implementation of policies and processes related to foreigners in Turkey. The agency is also the designated entity that leads coordination across public institutions, local authorities, civil society, international organizations, and other relevant stakeholders, on migration management. This coordination function extends to the provincial level, carried out by Provincial Directorates of Migration Management on behalf of the Governor of the province. The PMM is also in charge of management of the TACs (refugee camps) and removal centers. 5. The LFIP provides the key concepts related to international protection currently applied in the Turkish context. In brief, refugees are those who arrive in Turkey due to events occurring in Europe, conditional refugees are those who arrive in Turkey due to events occurring outside of Europe, subsidiary protection is provided to those who fulfil the requirements for international protection but do not fit within the definitions of refugees or conditional refugees, and finally temporary protection status is provided to those refugees coming from Syria as a result of the conflict. 6. The GoT has provided refugees with access to health, education, social services, and work permits. On the basis of the Regulation on Work Permits of Refugees under Temporary Protection and the Regulation on the Work of International Protection Applicants and International Protection Status Holders, the Ministry of Labor and Social Security provides foreigners seeking asylum in Turkey with access to formal employment opportunities through work permits. The legal and policy framework in Turkey provides for an overall inclusive refugee response. Each responsible ministry has established dedicated directorates and/or teams that is in charge of migration affairs, including refugee response. Such an approach was later the foundation for the Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) adopted in December 2018.32 7. The Government has shouldered most of the financial costs associated with the refugee response in Turkey. The Government’s estimated cost of hosting refugees since 2011 is US$40 billion. This includes access to health care, education, and social services, as well as legal access to the labor market. In line with the Global Compact on Refugees and the principle of ‘Leaving No One Behind’ under the Sustainable Development Goals, Turkey calls for increased international responsibility sharing to address the needs of the refugees and host communities. Overall, the international community has provided over EUR 12 billion since 2016. The main funding source for the refugee response is the EU. 33 This includes the first and second tranche of the EU FRiT totaling EUR 6 billion fund. The first EUR 3 billion tranche was launched in 2016 and the second in 2019. An additional EUR 600 million was disbursed, and discussions are ongoing for a third tranche to be allocated to Turkey. The funding from the facility has been channeled in part directly to the GoT or to international finance institutions and other partners. Moreover, the UN and NGOs have mobilized an additional EUR 2 billion for the refugee response since 32 The four key objectives of the GCR are to (a) ease the pressures on host countries, (b) enhance refugee self-reliance, (c) expand access to third-country solutions, and (d) support conditions in countries of origin for return in safety and dignity. See https://www.unhcr.org/the-global-compact-on-refugees.html/. 33 EU FRiT Fact Sheet. Accessed on June 21, 2021. https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood- enlargement/sites/default/files/fritfactsheet.pdf. Page 42 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) 2016 from other bilateral donors.34 Donors, as well as international financial institutions, are playing an important role in Turkey’s refugee response, implementing a diverse range of programs and projects, accounting to an estimated EUR 2.9 billion mobilized, including EUR 2 billion in loans.35 These efforts have been geared primarily toward facilitating refugee access to existing public services while strengthening the capacity and responsiveness of state institutions at the national and local levels. 8. Turkey has demonstrated resilience and innovation in the way it has integrated the refugees. The Government has progressively adopted a developmental approach to forced displacement, pursuing policies that have granted displaced Syrian’s access to services and to the labor market. The LFIP also introduced the concept of harmonization in an effort to promote social inclusion and self-reliance and create conditions for the host communities and refugees to live in harmony. In 2019, the Government adopted the National Harmonization Strategy Document and National Action Plan with the aim of facilitating harmonization between refugees (and other foreigners) and the host society, including provision of support to equip the newcomers with the knowledge and skills needed for them to pursue independent social and economic lives in Turkey. The strategy presents the roles of ministries, central government agencies, local authorities, and civil society on the inclusion of Syrians in municipal services, education, health care, social services, and local economic development. In the same year, the Government also launched the Emergency Social Safety Net (ESSN) program to address the basic needs of the refugee population, with financial support from the FRiT. The program supports more than 1.8 million vulnerable Syrian refugees with monthly cash assistance in Turkey.36 While the ESSN program has supported Syrians through a critical transitional stage, a major constraint of the program has been its sustainability. For that, the Government has developed an Exit Strategy to encourage the self-reliance of ESSN beneficiaries by gradually phasing out support to those that can pursue an independent socioeconomic life in Turkey. The European Commission funds the program until early 2023. 9. The above approaches have been largely effective in avoiding the marginalization and spatial segregation of refugees so often seen in other host countries. The 10 years of refugees and host communities living together has been overall peaceful although tensions flare up once in a while. Stable inflow of foreign aid earmarked for refugees also contributes to a relatively stable environment. However, the effectiveness of the Government’s response has been affected by many factors, including (a) the protracted nature of the crisis due to broader regional political volatility, (b) economic volatility and related economic stresses on communities, and (c) the enduring cultural and social distance between refugees and host communities. Most recently, the COVID-19 pandemic has further heightened the needs of refugees and host communities and placed significant pressure on the resources of host communities. 10. The operational environment of refugee response in Turkey is rich with international and national partners including UN agencies, bilateral partners, and international and local NGOs. The refugee response in Turkey is to be understood in the wider context of the EU migrant crisis, as well as relations between Turkey and Syria. The main mechanism for coordination of the international support is 34 Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP) financial tracking. 35 3RP international financial institutions mapping 36 The program is financed by the EU Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations and implemented in partnership with the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, the Turkish Red Crescent, and the Government. Page 43 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) through the 3RP.37 The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) also coordinates a task team on referral and transition to livelihoods opportunities to facilitate exchange between key partners at the technical level with the participation of technical partners from 3RP, TRC, and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and other key stakeholders of the refugee response in Turkey (World Bank, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit [GIZ]). The World Bank has become an important partner to the Government in its refugee response in recent years. Consistent with Government policy and the World Bank’s development approach to forced displacement, the World Bank support focuses on promotion of economic self-reliance; urban and semi urban services for both the host communities and refugees; and mainstreaming of basic needs such as health, education, access to employment, and financial services into the national systems. As of January 2022, the World Bank’s refugee support includes 10 projects that are financed by the World Bank and/or trust funds, primarily through financing coming from the EU’s FRiT. 373RP is a strategic coordination, planning, advocacy, fundraising, and programming platform for humanitarian and development partners to respond to the Syria crisis. It comprises one regional plan, with stand-alone country chapters covering Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt. Page 44 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) ANNEX 8. Counterpart Financing Overview Time Unit Cost Total Cost Description/Name of Items Quantity Unit Label Allocation (US$)b (US$) Component 1: Support to Harmonization of Refugees and Host Communities 336,282.75 CC Human Resources 241,784.11 4 CC Managers 50% 48a months 2,326.12 55,826.94 4 CC Beneficiary Relations and 100% 48 months 1,736.71 83,362.03 Communication Officers 4 CC Interpreters 100% 48 months 1,322.39 63,474.79 4 CC Finance and Administration Officers 50% 48 months 1,630.01 39,120.35 CC Operating Costs 94,498.65 4 CC Office rentals 100% 48 months 461.12 22,133.71 4 CC Vehicle rentals 100% 48 months 563.59 27,052.31 CC Vehicle fuel and other costs 100% 12 months 56.36 676.31 CC Office supplies and running costs (stationery-cafeteria-cleaning etc.) (4 100% 48 months 225.44 10,820.92 offices) CC Utilities (electricity, water, natural gas, 100% 48 months 225.44 10,820.92 security alarm system etc.) (4 offices) CC Communication (telecommunication 100% 48 months 56.36 2,705.23 costs, phone bills, internet etc.) (4 offices) CC Equipment and furniture (4 offices) 100% 4 lumpsum 2,817.95 11,271.80 CC Building maintenance and technical 100% 4 lumpsum 2,254.36 9,017.44 service (4 offices) Component 2: Project Management 280,872.23 HQ Human Resources 223,836.93 HQ Project Manager 100% 12 months 2,226.94 26,723.33 HQ Project Officer 100% 12 months 1,736.71 20,840.51 HQ Finance Officer 100% 12 months 1,736.71 20,840.51 HQ M&E Officer 100% 12 months 1,736.71 20,840.51 HQ Accounting Manager 50% 12 months 2,226.94 13,361.66 HQ Accounting Officer 100% 12 months 1,736.71 20,840.51 HQ Logistics Manager 50% 12 months 2,226.94 13,361.66 HQ Logistics Officer 100% 12 months 1,630.10 19,561.20 HQ Communication Manager 50% 12 months 2,226.94 13,361.66 HQ Communication Officer 100% 12 months 1,630.10 19,561.20 HQ Deputy Coordinator - Support Services 50% 12 months 2,878.68 17,272.09 HQ Program Deputy Coordinator 50% 12 months 2,878.68 17,272.09 HQ Operating Costs 57,035.29 HQ-Office rental 100% 12 months 1,127.18 13,526.16 HQ-Vehicle rental 100% 12 months 563.59 6,763.08 HQ-Vehicle fuel and other cost 100% 12 months 56.36 676.31 HQ Office supplies and running costs 100% 12 months 563.59 6,763.08 Page 45 of 46 The World Bank Support to Harmonization in Turkey Project (P171489) Time Unit Cost Total Cost Description/Name of Items Quantity Unit Label Allocation (US$)b (US$) (stationery-cafeteria-cleaning etc.) HQ Utilities (electricity, water, natural gas, 100% 12 months 1,127.18 13,526.16 security alarm system etc.) HQ Communication (telecommunication 100% 12 months 140.90 1,690.77 costs, phone bills, internet etc.) HQ Equipment and furniture 100% 1 lumpsum 8,453.85 8,453.85 HQ Building maintenance and technical 100% 1 lumpsum 5,635.90 5,635.90 service 617,154.97 Note: a. Due to several COVID-19 lockdowns affecting the initiation of field activities, only 12 months of active implementation are considered in the calculation of TRC’s in-kind contribution. b. In consideration of fluctuating currency rates, the average exchange rate for 2021 (TL 1= US$8.8717) has been used for the calculation of above costs (Source: Turkey’s Central Bank; https://www.muhasebenews.com/ortalama- doviz-kuru-programi/). Page 46 of 46