Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Report No. PID8323
Project Name India-Andhra Pradesh District Poverty (@)
Initiatives Project
Region South Asia Regional Office
Sector Social Funds & Social Assistance
Project ID INPE45049
Borrower(s) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Implementing Agency GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (GOAP),
APSERP (AP Society for Elimination ofRural Poverty),
SWREIS (Social Welfare Residential Education
Institutions Society)
Environment Category B
Date PID Prepared February 22, 2000
Projected Appraisal Date November 25, 1999
Projected Board Date April 18, 2000
1. Country and Sector Background
The main sector issue throughout India, and including Andhra Pradesh, is the
failure over many years of public anti-poverty programs (APPs) to reduce the
number of the poor, particular in rural areas. India continues to display
some of the poorest social indicators in the world.
Since the early 1950s, the Government of India and most state governments
have implemented direct APPs providing wage-employment, productive assets
(such as land or animals), skills, credit and food security to the poor. For
the most part, these programs have been poorly targeted, inefficiently
managed and highly fragmented. In AP itself, despite strong recent efforts at
reform, the last fifteen years have seen a progressive crowding out of
development expenditures by costly and poorly targeted subsidies, by a
rapidly expanding civil service and by interest payments. As a result,
public spending on social development (education, health and maintenance of
essential irrigation and road networks) has been falling as a share of gross
state domestic product (GSDP) and is far short of the state's needs. Many
social indicators in AP are below the national average: 30 percent of the
population still lives below the poverty line; malnutrition among children
aged 0-6 years is about 30 percent; and the female literacy rate (33 percent)
is one of the lowest in India.
Recently, some of the programs of the central government, e.g. self-
employment schemes managed by the Ministry of Rural Employment, as well as
some state governments, including AP, have engaged in social mobilization to
improve their acceptability, utilization and accountability. Some
multilateral aid agencies such as UNICEF and UNDP have also financed small-
scale efforts of this nature. Particularly noteworthy in AP are the women's
self-help group (SHG) movement, non-formal education efforts, and the
Janmabhoomi program (see below), all of which have focus on poverty and
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
heightened peoples' awareness and participation in development.
The thrust of GOAP's current strategy is to support a process of
decentralized decision-making in direct APPs, while continuing to promote a
more general fiscal adjustment. The burden of overall fiscal adjustment and
policy reform in primary education, primary health, nutrition, rural roads
and irrigation is being supported by the APERP, which is providing resources
for priority needs. However, APERP cannot provide effective coverage of all
the poor and vulnerable, especially those in regions dependent on risk-prone
rain-fed agriculture or those who lack productive assets or skills through
ill health, disability or illiteracy. To meet the needs of these extreme
poor, GOAP recognizes that there is a need for new policies, institutions and
processes, linked to direct assistance and designed to empower poor rural
communities in the targeting and use of resources.
2. Objectives
The main objective of the project would be to improve opportunities for the
poor to meet priority social and economic needs in the six poorest districts
of Andhra Pradesh (AP). To achieve this, the project would: (i) help create
self-managed grass-roots institutions; (ii) build the capacity of established
local institutions, especially the Gram Sabha/Panchayats and GOAP's line
departments, to operate in a more inclusive manner in addressing the needs of
the poor; (iii) support investment in sub-projects proposed by grass-root
institutions, aimed at initiating or expanding economic activity among the
poor; and (iv) improve access to education for girls to reduce the incidence
of child labor among the poor.
3. Rationale for Bank's Involvement
Based on wide experience of poverty reduction projects in other regions and
experience with rural projects in India, as noted above, the Bank is well
placed to add value by facilitating transfer of innovative ideas to poverty
reduction work in India. More specifically, the Bank would provide:
a international experience with decentralized participatory approaches
such as demand-driven rural investment funds and social funds;
a related experience from other states in India based on its large
portfolio with a number of successful projects with participatory
approaches;
a the large lending capacity to address the overall policy issues and
investment needs in a comprehensive manner; and
a broad experience of the key sectors to be covered by APDPIP.
4. Description
Institutional and human capacity building
Community Investment Fund
Educational support for girl child laborers and school drop-outs
Project Management and Monitoring and Evaluation
5. Financing
Total ( US$m)Government 16.6
IBRD
-2-
IDA 111
COMMUNITIES 7.2
Total Project Cost 134.8
6. Implementation
Institutions The key institutional arrangements agreed with GOAP are:
(i) Andhra Pradesh Society for Elimination of Rural Poverty (APSERP)
The management of the project at the state level would be vested in an
independent Society headed by the Chief Minister as the ex-officio Chairman
of the General Body (GB). This body would have a broad representation from
all the key stakeholders who would predominantly be non-officials. The
management of APSERP would be entrusted to an Executive Committee (EC), of
which an eminent non-governmental person would be President and the State
Project Director (below) would be the Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The
President would also be the Deputy Chairman of the GB. The EC would consist
of about 7 members, with 2 or 3 as ex-officio government officials and others
drawn from the GB representing leading agencies and individuals contributing
to rural development, community mobilization and poverty alleviation.
To expedite implementation, maintain operational flexibility and facilitate
transfer of ultimate control to the participating communities, APSERP would
be registered under the Societies (Telengana) Act. draft The Memorandum of
Association (MOA) of the Society would include a description of regulations,
criteria for selection, membership, powers and functions of the GB, the EC
and the State and District Project Management Units (below). In addition,
duties of the Chairman of the EC and the State Project Director (below) have
also been defined. The rules and regulations of the Society would reflect
the operational guidelines for the project agreed with GOAP.
The organizational structure of the APSERP would include:
a State Project Management Unit (SPMU). The SPMU, headed by the State
Project Director, would be responsible to the EC for project implementation.
The Director would be supported by a management team based at headquarters.
The core skills of the SPMU management team would include finance, training,
monitoring and evaluation, community participation and communications. Other
expertise would be obtained as needed through contractual arrangements and/or
partnerships with other agencies.
a District Project Management Unit (DPMU). In each of the six districts a
DPMU would be headed by a District Project Manager with responsibility for
all project activities within the district, including decisions on investment
proposals under the Community Investment Fund (CIF). The core skills of the
DPMU would include finance, training, community development, rural
engineer/sub-project appraisal and procurement. In addition, depending on
need, the DPMUs would draw on other professional services either from a
roster of experts to be maintained in each district and/or from the line
departments of GOAP working in the district.
a Mandal Community Support Cell. Field activities in each district would
be supported by mandal cells. The key functions of the mandal cells would be
community mobilization and group formation/strengthening. The core staff
would include a Social Organizer (SO), who would lead the work, and a
- 3 -
Community Coordinator (CC). In addition, the DPMUs would engage NGOs, as
necessary, integrating them in the mandal teams. Mandal cells may be
constituted in different ways in different locations depending on available
local resources and the scope of work. Staffing and management of the cells
would either be contracted to local NGOs or to individual contract staff.
The skill mix of the mandal cells would be adjusted in response to the
changing needs of Common Interest Groups.
(ii) Common Interest Groups (CIGs)
The CIGs would the project's key instrument for identifying priority needs at
the habitation/village level. They would be groups of poor people brought
together by a common interest. The project would assist with formation of
new groups as well as with strengthening existing groups (e.g., thrift and
credit self-help groups (SHGs)). The majority of new groups would be
organized on SHG principles. The groups would be helped to develop financial
stability and money management capacity through internal loaning of their own
savings before becoming eligible for assistance under the Community
Investment Fund (CIF) of the project.
a Community Activists, Facilitators and Para-Technicians. An early
activity in the formation of groups would be the identification of community
activists in each project habitation who would become the "founding
members" of new groups. Following appropriate training, activists would work
with district/mandal project staff and NGOs to help mobilize other poor
members of the communities. Based on contributions from all the CIGs
members, in a habitation/village and in response to increasing work load, VOs
would engage a Community Facilitator (CF). The CF, following appropriate
capacity building, would assist all groups with their on-going activities.
His/Her other important function would be to develop close working
relationship with Gram Sabhas/Panchayats in advocating the cause of the poor.
An additional resource to support group activities would be the cadre of
volunteer para-technicians (e.g., primary health care, teacher, veterinary
service provider, para-medic etc.) to be developed under the project.
a Village Organizations (VOs). As the CIGs increase in number and gain
experience, they would be federated to form self-managed VOs. These would be
unregistered informal associations of between 10 and 30 CIGs and would
symbolize the collective strength of the poor. VOs would be formed in
response to demands from members for needs that cannot be satisfied by a few
groups working alone.
a Mandal Samakhyas (MSs). Mandals with about 30 VOs would be encouraged
to federate to form a MS. As with VOs, the main rationale for the formation
of a MS would the demand from members for wider support than can be provided
by individual VOs. The MS would: (a) deal with PRIs and mandal-level staff
of government line departments; (b) enter into agreement with APSERP
eventually to take over many of the functions of project staff at mandal
level; (c) train CIGs and VOs with the help of project staff and outside
specialists; and (d) monitor the work of VOs.
(iii) Coordination with Other Programs/Agencies
The institutional mechanisms adopted to avoid overlap and/or conflict with
other APPs and rural development programs would include:
- 4 -
a State Steering Committee (SSC). This committee would be chaired by the
Chief Secretary, GOAP. Other members would be the senior staff from all
relevant departments of the government. The main functions of the SSC would
be: (a) to facilitate any activity related to the project requiring inter-
departmental collaboration/cooperation; and (b) to promote convergence
between on-going programs by proposing a suitable policy framework and, if
appropriate, issuing Government Orders seeking convergence.
a District Advisory Committees (DAC). These committees would be crucial
to inter-program coordination, which takes place at the district level. They
would be chaired by District Collectors with senior functionaries of line
departments, NGOs and community organizations as members. Participation of
District Collectors at the head of these advisory committees would facilitate
establishment of effective working relationships between DPIP and other APPs
and rural development programs of the government. Wherever appropriate, the
DACs would establish sector working groups to ensure effective linkages
between DPIP and the on-going departmental programs. Such sector linkages
would also facilitate access to technical support for the rural poor from the
line departments.
a Mandal Committees. These committees would provide a forum for close
interaction between Mandal Samakhya, organization of the poor, and the public
officials as well as PRI at the Mandal level. Their main function would be
to monitor implementation of convergence policies and programs. Based on
field observations, they would provide feed-back to the DACs and to DPMU.
They would also play an important role in ensuring that mandal-level line
department staff are responsive to the needs of the poor.
a Village Working Groups. These groups, with the Sarpanch as Chair and
representation from VOs, would coordinate dialogue between the Gram
Sabhas/Panchayats and the poor. Other members would include chairpersons
(Presidents) of other village level committees/associations. These groups
would assemble the development needs of their villages through consensus.
Since other village level committees (Water Users' Associations, Schools
Committees, Mothers' Committees) and the Gram Panchayat also receive funds
from government programs, one important role of the Village Working Groups
would be to identify investment gaps which may be financed under DPIP,
provided they meet the project's selection criteria. This work would be
closely coordinated with the Janmabhoomi process to ensure maximum efficiency
in the allocation and use of the project funds.
a Linkages Between CIGs/SHGs and Lending Institutions. Despite their
relative success, SHGs have not been able to forge effective links with
lending institutions, which are essential if they are to promote micro-
enterprises. The reasons are their weak credit history, their weak business
development capacity (marketing linkages and technical training) and the lack
of resources and incentives in rural bank branches to run micro-finance
programs. As a result of discussion with the banks, NGOs and the State
Government, an agreement has been reached to test a comprehensive rating
instrument, linked to a needs-based training program at village level and in
rural bank branches. The rating system would reduce risks (and transaction
costs) by providing information to potential lenders on the quality and
performance of SHGs. Field-testing of the proposed instrument and its
associated training program would start soon after project launch and
introduced on a pilot basis in each project district.
- 5 -
a Relationship of CIGs, VOs and MSs with the Panchayati Raj Institutions
(PRIs). GOAP has not yet transferred responsibility to PRIs for many of the
rural development activities mandated under the 73rd amendment of the Indian
Constitution. GOAP prefers to give priority to direct empowerment of poor
communities as a means of securing a greater role for the poor in running the
PRIs. Therefore, it will take time for strong relationships to develop
between PRIs and poor communities. The project would adopt a similar,
gradual approach, consistent with GOAP strategy. The main interaction between
CIGs and PRIs would be within habitations/villages, where the project would
promote a better relationship through regular interactions between Gram Sabha
members/Panchayats and CIGs. It would also aim to prepare proposals to
finance investments in small infrastructure sub-projects endorsed by both
CIGs/VOs and Gram Sabhas/Panchayats. Some of the criteria for judging the
inclusiveness of Gram Panchayats and for accepting their participation in the
project's investment program would be: (a) the level of transparency and flow
of information in relation to the budget and development programs to all
residents of Gram Sabha; (b) the frequency of Gram Sabha meetings and the
degree of participation by the poor; (c) the adult literacy rate, especially
amongst women; (d) child labor and school drop-out rates amongst children;
and (v) key elements of the track record of the Sarpanch in promoting
inclusiveness in social and economic activities.
Implementation. Detailed implementation arrangements are as follows:
(i) CIF Component: Preparation, Appraisal and Approval of Sub-Projects
The project would allow CIGs to submit proposals to DPMUs for financing from
funds allocated to the district from the community investment fund (CIF),
either on their own or together with other local organizations, including
Gram Panchayats. Funds would be allocated in response to demand generated
and the effectiveness of utilization by the participating groups. It is
expected that this approach would encourage competition between districts for
additional funds. The sub-project would be evaluated using agreed criteria.
This information would be widely publicized by DPMUs.
It is expected that the demand for sub-projects would cluster in three broad
areas: (a) vocational training for social needs, e.g., para-health workers,
para-veterinarians, para-teachers, child care services etc. and strengthening
of publicly provided social services; (b) training for on-farm and non-farm
income generating activities, e.g., agricultural extension, processing and
marketing activities, development of small enterprises etc. as well as
provision of common supporting facilities; and (c) small infrastructure
(multi-purpose community halls, expansion/rehabilitation of local schools,
rehabilitation of irrigation tanks, community drainage system, inter-
habitation roads). Proposals for infrastructure facilities would be
discussed and agreed with Gram Sabhas/Gram Panchayats and CIGs and
coordinated with Janmabhoomi before submission to the DPMU to ensure funding
of only those activities not funded by others.
Potential participants would have a range of investment options from which to
choose and would be expected to show their commitment through up-front cash
or in-kind contributions. The level of contribution would be sector specific
and included in the eligibility criteria. These contributions would be
consistent with other schemes being implemented in the same villages, e.g.,
Janmabhoomi. The full cost of operation and maintenance would be the
responsibility of the group members or Panchayats initiating the investment
- 6 -
proposals, who would be encouraged to keep these contributions in a separate
account.
(ii) Capacity Building Component
Training strategy and annual implementation plans would be prepared by the AP
Academy for Rural Development (APARD). Overall supervision would be the
responsibility of the SPMU supported by DPMUs. A number of different
agencies would be employed to conduct the training activities. In the
initial stages regular training courses would be run to prepare project
staff, NGO staff and community facilitators/activists to support group
formation and development and to prepare simple sub-project proposals. For
the community level training, resource persons from the mature groups and/or
federations would be identified and trained as trainers.
Training programs for groups would aim to enhance the capability of CIGs to
identify and analyze problems, to apply skills and resources to solve them
and to work towards making these activities self-sustaining. Since thrift
and credit management would be promoted as an entry point activity with all
groups, training modules would emphasize group formation, group management,
financial management and federation building.
Existing groups (mostly thrift and credit SHGs formed by women) would require
a flexible approach. Members of SHGs may demand training support under the
project only for the specific economic activity in which they are already
engaged in order to access investment funds from the lending institutions.
In other cases, SHGs may already be operating as CIGs through common economic
activities or may form new CIGs to start common activities. In all cases it
is expected that groups would demand support both for skill enhancement and
for creation of common assets/services. The process of classification and
ranking of existing groups (maturity, functionality, effectiveness) to decide
on the nature of support to be provided under the project would be
facilitated by the proposed rating system mentioned above.
Other district level activities would include: awareness building campaigns
and demonstrations relating to social or economic activities; training of
Gram Sabhas/Panchayats; and skill enhancement and reorientation/sensitization
of participating line departments.
(iii) Educational Component: Support for Girl Child Laborers and School
Drop-outs
Implementation of this component would be coordinated by the Social Welfare
Residential Educational Institutions Society (SWREIS). However, DPMUs would
play an important role in selecting girls to be assisted under the project,
focusing in mandals with the highest concentration of child labor and school
drop-outs. Although project interventions would be implemented through
existing institutions, the project would strengthen leadership and
educational modules. In addition, funds would also be used to improve
educational facilities, raise the number of teachers and provide management
support to SWREIS.
For the "bridge" school course, the focus would be on older girls from the
existing pool of child laborers/school drop-outs. The "bridge" school would
provide 12- to 15-month non-formal remedial education for girls aged 11 to 14
-7 -
who have been out of the formal education system for a long time and at
present are largely neglected. After completing this course, students would
sit an exam for entrance to a regular residential school, or go to a day
state school for secondary education. To ensure effective coordination with
on-going programs of the Department of Education, District Primary Education
Project (DPEP) and Integrated Child Development Services Project (ICDS), and
also to benefit from the pioneering work being undertaken by an NGO, MV
Foundation, in educating child laborers in the state, SWREIS would establish
a coordination committee with representation from all the relevant agencies.
(iv) Information Education and Communication (IEC)
IEC activity would ensure continuous dissemination of information based on
implementation experience across the range of stakeholders. Implementation
would be coordinated by a professional in the SPMU and all workers coming in
direct contact with communities would be trained to meet IEC needs. Initial
activities would emphasize the project's philosophy, objectives, norms,
methodology, procedures and processes to ensure participation by the poor
communities in the project. The project would use the full range of IEC
tools, including print as well as electronic media, local folk drama and
face-to-face interactions, including workshops.
(v) Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E)
A three-part monitoring and evaluation system has been proposed, with
emphasis on learning from implementation experience. This will go on across
the three DPIPs being prepared simultaneously (the two other states where
similar projects are being prepared include Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh).
The three parts are: (a) input and output monitoring; (b) monitoring of the
processes by which poverty alleviation and other development outcomes are to
be achieved; and (c) impact evaluation. The first two would be conducted
continuously throughout the project.
a The SPMU/DPMUs would be responsible for input/output monitoring at all
levels through a computerized MIS. Activities to be monitored would include:
allocation and use of project funds for various inputs; delivery of other
targeted inputs (training of staff and potential clients, construction of
residential schools and other organizational inputs); use of the CIF costs of
different types of sub-projects; progress of community institution building;
number and type of workshops and training modules implemented; number of girl
children enrolled in schools; and reduction in child labor.
a Process monitoring is crucial for rapid adjustment to project
design/approach based on implementation experience. This would be undertaken
by an independent agency with access to data gathered by the MIS. It would
use this information and its own assessments to judge the quality of project
implementation, particularly in the areas of institutional development at the
village level, client satisfaction with project inputs and mechanisms to
ensure inclusiveness. It would assess the extent to which the poor have been
included in the process of project selection, design, and implementation at
the individual and community levels, focusing on the dynamics of CIGs, VOs
and MSs. The approach to process monitoring would encourage self-assessment
by CIGs (i.e. identification of DPIP processes that community members
themselves regard as important, analysis by them of the extent to which these
processes are operating according to plan, and the development by them of an
- 8 -
action plan).
a Impact evaluation would be carried out in three stages using an
independent agency. The first stage would establish the baseline. The
baseline survey would seek feedback on characteristics of sustainable groups
and federations and their impact in two project districts which are already
part of the UNDP-financed SAPAP and have seen quite extensive group
formation. The second stage would coincide with the mid-term review of the
project. By this time it would be possible to evaluate the project's success
in building appropriate and sustainable local institutions, including the
strength and quality of linkages with PRIs and banks. The third stage,
coinciding with the end of the project, would evaluate sustainability of the
institutions and the sub-projects supported by the project, its impact in
reducing poverty as well as inequality and degree of participation by the
poor and vulnerable in decision making bodies.
(vi) Reporting and Mid-term Review (MTR)
The SPMU would submit to IDA a six-monthly progress report and a
comprehensive annual report. The annual report would cover all quantitative
and qualitative aspects of implementation progress, including implementation
plans for the following year.
The MTR would be an in-depth assessment of progress and an opportunity to
change course where appropriate. As an input to the MTR, APSERP would
commission specific studies on: (a) effectiveness and efficiency of the
institutional and implementation arrangements; (b) impact of the project's
training program, including the pilot program on credit rating, on the
quality and performance CIGs/SHGs and their access to credit from the lending
institutions; (c) fiscal impact on the state budget and effectiveness of DPIP
as well as other anti-poverty programs, in the context of AP Vision; and (d)
overall impact assessment of the project as a part of the M&E work. The TORs
for the proposed studies would be developed by APSERP and amended as
necessary based on comments provided by IDA.
(vii) Financial Management
The project's financial management system is currently under development. The
system would be documented in a Project Financial Management Manual. The
Manual would be adopted by the GOAP, APSERP and SWREIS as the document
governing all financial management aspects of the project. At the APSERP
(SPMU and 6 DPMUs), the Head Office of the SWREIS, and the State Finance
Department, the financial management system would be computerized. Each
CIG/GP would maintain simple accounts for sub-projects implemented by them,
and the main focus at the village level would be local-level transparency and
social audit by the community.
Flow of Funds: GOAP would provide funds for the project to the APSERP (SPMU)
and to the SWREIS. SPMU would retain a part to finance its own activities
(costs associated with M&E, special studies) and pass on the balance to the 6
DPMUs for project implementation. They would use the funds for activities
directly under their control, including sub-projects being implemented by
CIGs or GPs. Beneficiary cash contributions would be deposited in the
project accounts of the relevant local organizations (CIGs/GPs). Wherever
possible, maintenance accounts would be opened by CIGs or GPs to receive
-9-
contributions from participants or other sources to cover O&M needs of assets
created by CIGs or GPs. Similarly, SWREIS, which would utilize the funds for
its activities and pass on funds to its constituent educational institutions.
Audit: The Project Auditors would be a firm of Chartered Accountants,
appointed by the APSERP. Their TOR would be included in the Project
Financial Management Manual. In addition to these TOR, the qualifications of
the firm of accountants would be reviewed by IDA. The auditors would be
selected in accordance with the World Bank's Guidelines for selection of
consultants.
Disbursements Mechanism: The computerized system would be operated and
Project Management Reports (PMRs) would be prepared from the beginning of the
project. Disbursement from the IDA Credit would initially be made according
to the Bank's current transaction-based disbursement procedures
(reimbursements with full documentation or against SOEs and direct payments).
This arrangement is necessary to provide time for staff to be trained in the
operation of the financial management system, and for the system to be fully
operational. The disbursement mechanism would be converted to the new
procedures (based on PMRs), after an adequate period of implementation
experience and after the satisfactory operation of the financial management
system has been demonstrated (including timely generation of satisfactory
quality PMRs). The target date for this conversion would be no later than 24
months from the start of the project.
7. Sustainability
AP has been in the forefront of the CIG/SHG movement since early 1960s and
has the largest number of such groups in the country. The experience with
such groups has shown that, with adequate support, CIGs can manage both
social and economic activities and develop self-reliant federations capable
of establishing productive links with civil society, development agencies and
government line departments. As such, they have shown themselves to be
remarkably sustainable. To ensure a similar outcome under the project,
extensive provision would be made for capacity building within CIGs/SHGs and
their federations and for overcoming credit constraints with the lending
institutions. At the same time, the emphasis on demand (priority needs
backed up by willingness to share costs) rather than on externally identified
needs would ensure community commitment to DPIP investments and improve their
chances of sustainability. In addition, to ensure that the public goods
created are properly maintained, the project is requiring development of
such proposals in collaboration with PRIs, with up-front agreements on
operation and maintenance arrangements.
Linkages between the project and PRIs/line departments at the local level
would contribute to the transfer of experience and learning and enhance
sustainability in the long run. More specifically, by adopting participatory
and transparent procedures under the CIF, and involving the Gram Panchayats
in this process, the project would have a significant demonstration effect.
At the same time, empowerment of the communities to demand a critical minimum
base of governance and accountability for the delivery of basic services
would go a long way to establishing a more equitable relationship with
government. Though the project would be implemented initially by an
autonomous Society, it would still depend for much of its operations on
existing institutions. As presently conceived, not all the proposed DPIP
- 10 -
structures would necessarily survive in the long run. They should disappear,
or become institutionalized, once alternative service delivery models have
been absorbed into the PRIs, GOAP line departments and the district
administration.
8. Lessons learned from past operations in the country/sector
The project design reflects lessons learned from several on-going and
completed Bank-financed rural development projects in India. These have
shown the importance of community participation and ownership in achieving
efficiency and sustainability. They have also demonstrated how communities
can contribute towards investment and operational costs if they are assured
of good service. The UP Sodic Lands Project has shown how the poor can
establish their own organizations and engage in multiple activities in order
to mitigate risks and participate more fully in the development process.
Similarly, the Integrated Watershed Development Projects, the Karnataka and
UP Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Projects and the AP Forestry Project
have all demonstrated the viability of user groups and their potential to
manage project activities as well as to mobilize community contributions.
These projects have also demonstrated the potential value of successful
partnerships between community organizations, NGOs and the Government.
An important lesson from the UNDP-assisted SAPAP, which includes AP, is that
it is not enough to mobilize communities for social action - they need also
to have investment opportunities alongside social mobilization. Hence, DPIP
seeks not only to mobilize communities but also includes support to
facilitate linkages with the credit institutions to open investment
opportunities for the rural poor in economic activities. Another lesson of
the UNDP Project, which is relevant to this project, is that NGO involvement
must be selective and focused.
At the operational level the main lessons incorporated in to the project
design are: (a) creation of a decentralized project management structure with
full control over the sub-project approval process to expedite decisions and
to minimize political interference; (b) development of streamlined
procurement and disbursement rules and regulations to ensure speedy
implementation; (c) inclusion of competitive employment conditions for the
project management staff to attract and retain competent and motivated
individuals; (d) inclusion of detailed operational manuals, computerized MIS,
standardized financial management procedures, regular and rigorous auditing,
and quantitative and qualitative monitoring and evaluation; and (e)
incorporation of physical and financial sustainability conditions in the sub-
project eligibility criteria to ensure a continued flow of benefits.
9. Program of Targeted Intervention (PTI) Y
10. Environment Aspects (including any public consultation)
Issues : From an environmental perspective, the two components
that are of concern are the Community Investment Fund (CIF) and the
construction of residential schools. To address these concerns, an
Environmental Management Framework (EMF) has been developed for the CIF, and
Guidelines for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of Residential
Schools have been drafted.
The CIF would encompass income-generating and small-scale infrastructure
- 11 -
investments. In most cases the small size of these interventions would not
lead to environmental impacts of any significance. All sub-project proposals
would, however, be subject to an environmental screening exercise in order
to:
a prevent execution of sub-projects with potentially significant negative
environmental impacts;
a decrease potential minor negative impacts through modifications in sub-
project design, location or execution;
a prevent or mitigate cumulative negative impacts as the result of
multiple small-scale investments;
a enhance the positive impacts of sub-projects; and
a prevent additional stress on environmentally sensitive areas.
To meet these objectives, the Environmental Assessment Report (EAR) provides
for: (a) a methodology and administrative structure for environmental
management; b) an environmental capacity building and awareness raising
program ; and (c) an environmental supervision and monitoring plan.
An EIA of residential school construction aims to ensure that a number of
environmental principles are incorporated into the school's design,
construction and management. These principles are intended to protect human
health, promote environmental sustainability, and safeguard the welfare of
affected communities. The EIA process would include: (a) screening in
consultation with communities in the immediate areas to identify possible
issues; (b) incorporation of environmental considerations in the engineering
design of the schools with a particular attention to issues identified during
screening; and (c) supervision to ensure that environmental mitigation
measures have been effectively implemented.
11. Contact Points:
The InfoShop
The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20433
Telephone: (202) 458-5454Fax: (202) 522-1500
Task Manager
Ashok Kumar Seth
The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington D.C. 20433
Telephone: (202) 458-1438Fax: (202) 522-2420
Note: This is information on an involving project. Certain components may not
be necessarily included in the final project.
Processed by the InfoShop week ending Fabruary 25, 2000.
- 12 -
Annex
Because this is a Category B project, it may be required that the borrowerprepare a separate EA report. If a separate EA report is required, once itis prepared and submitted to the Bank, in accordance with OP 4.01,Environmental Assessment, it will be filed as an annex to the PublicInformation Document (PID) .
If no separate EA report is required, the PID will not contain an EA annex;the findings and recommendations of the EA will be reflected in the body ofthe PID.
- 13 -