INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: 89787 Date prepared/updated: July 28, 2014 I. Basic Information 1. Basic Project Data Country: Cambodia Project ID: P132751 Additional Project ID (if any): Project Name: Cash Transfer Pilot Program Focused on Maternal and Child Health and Nutrition Task Team Leader: Pablo Ariel Acosta Estimated Appraisal Date: August 5 2014 Estimated Board Date: Managing Unit: EASHS Lending Instrument: Small RETF Grant Sector: Public administration- Other social services (50%), Other social services (50%) Theme: Social safety nets (50%), Other social protection and risk management (50%) IBRD Amount (US$m.): IDA Amount (US$m.): GEF Amount (US$m.): PCF Amount (US$m.): Other financing amounts by source (AusAID financed RETF): $850,000 Environmental Category: B Is this a transferred project Yes [ X] No [] Simplified Processing Simple [X] Repeater [ ] Is this project processed under OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises Yes [ ] No [X] and Emergencies) 2. Project Objectives: The Project Development Objective is to help increase the utilization of essential health services by pregnant women and children (0 to 5 years of age) in targeted districts, and enhance the readiness of delivery mechanisms of the social protection system. 3. Project Description: The proposed cash transfer (CT) pilot program aims to support human capital development by providing cash to poor pregnant women and mothers of young children, with co-responsibilities to improve child nutrition and development. The CT pilot (i.e. the Project) intends to reach around 3,000 beneficiaries in two districts in its first phase (proposed until April 2016). Phase II envisages a potential scale-up to provincial level with regional or national coverage after 2016 through a potential follow-up operation. The project would also help develop institutional capacity at various levels of government and will strengthen linkages with existing public health and nutrition services (such as the Health Equity Fund) as well as with existing mechanisms for identifying the poor (Ministry of Planning’s IDPoor). The project comprises the following three components: • Component 1: Support to the National Social Protection Strategy ($100,000): This component will be implemented by CARD. The component's main activities include: 1) updating the National Social Protection Strategy, 2) developing a unique registry of beneficiaries of social programs, 3) undertaking research activities, among them collaboration with the impact evaluation of the CCT Pilot (to be financed through a Bank executed TF), and 4) coordinating actors at the national level, including outreach events to disseminate information about the program and its impact evaluation. • Component 2: Conditional cash transfer and bonuses ($530,000): This component will be implemented by NCDD-S. The component’s main activities include: 1) basic cash transfers to enrolled beneficiaries through a “third party� financial institution, 2) cash bonuses for beneficiaries based on specific co-responsibilities relating to health service utilization and attendance to learning workshops; 3) financial institution fees for cash transfers, and 4) provision of nutrition and sanitation workshops for enrolled beneficiaries. A basic cash transfer of $5 per month will be delivered regularly after enrolment to pregnant women or families with children aged 0-5 years that are categorized as IDPoor 1 or 2. Enrolment of pregnant women will be subject to establishing contact with the health center for antenatal care. Enrolment of children will be subject to presenting a birth certificate or vaccination card. • Component 3: Strengthening of SP implementation systems ($220,000): Activities in this component include: 1) strengthening NCDD-S’ management information system (MIS) to support implementation and monitoring and process evaluation; 2) strengthening the capacity of commune councils and district level staff to interact with service providers, respond to program needs including grievance redress, and monitor program implementation; and 3) other project administration costs. 4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard analysis: The CT pilot project will be implemented in two districts: Srey Snam (Siem Reap province) and Phnom Srok (Banteay Meanchey province). All communes within the selected districts will be covered. The criteria used for district selection include the following: district to be covered by MoP’s IDPoor Program; availability of supply-side health facilities (particularly the Health Equity Funds); capacity and commitment of the district and communes to implement and monitor the CT pilot and to facilitate the provision of supply-side services. The ethnic screening of the two pilot districts included in the project did not find any ethnic minorities present. If this project proves to be successful, a follow-on operation may be implemented to scale-up project activities to additional districts and provinces. In the event that such a follow-on operation is to be supported by the Bank, a safeguard review and ethnic screening will be conducted during the preparation stage and due actions will be carried out to ensure all safeguard policies are complied with. 5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists on the Team: Satoshi Ishihara (Sr. Social Development Specialist) 6. Safeguard Policies Triggered Yes No Environmental Assessment X (OP/BP 4.01) Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) X Forests (OP/BP 4.36) X Pest Management (OP 4.09) X Physical Cultural Resources X (OP/BP 4.11) Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10) X Involuntary Resettlement X (OP/BP 4.12) Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37) X Projects on International X Waterways (OP/BP 7.50) Projects in Disputed Areas X (OP/BP 7.60) II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues 1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project. Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts: This grant triggers OP 4.01 Environment Assessment in order to address the issues related to inclusion of vulnerable groups of people in project activities. OP 4.01 addresses social aspects of environment which among others includes inclusion and vulnerability. Cash transfers, which in fact intend to address vulnerabilities, benefit a wide range of people and should therefore ensure inclusion of all in project activities. Further, this grant triggers OP 4.10 on Indigenous People. This is triggered due to Component 1 that will support a National Social Protection Strategy, even though there are no IPs in the two pilot districts of Srey Snam and Phnom Srok. Because both OP 4.01 and OP4.10 are triggered, the project is categorized as “B�. However, there are no separate instruments required, even if project categorization is “B�. There are no environmental concerns around any component of the operational cycle. No large scale, significant or irreversible social impacts are anticipated. The project would not require any land acquisition since it would not finance any civil works, and it would not have any negative impact on the livelihood of local population. The result of ethnic screening did not find an ethnic minority in project areas. The project promotes social inclusion and human capital development by providing cash to poor pregnant women and mothers of young children, with co- responsibilities to improve child nutrition and development. By providing support to local authorities for implementing the cash transfer and community-level activities to promote health and nutrition, the project envisages direct local participation in communication and case management strategies. Field work will seek to address remaining questions on appropriateness of communication, case management and other implementation strategies. Complaints mechanisms to be developed to ensure marginalized populations are not excluded. There are no ethnic minorities in the two selected districts. 2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future activities in the project area: By improving access to public health services and strengthening the local capacity, the project is likely to have a positive social impact. However, the following indirect social impact of the cash transfer pilot can emerge: (i) The project would rely on the Ministry of Planning’s ID Poor to target beneficiaries (the ID poor procedure involved local community in providing feedback and making decision on the final list of poor families). In the absence of clear communication about the eligibility criteria for the cash transfer, there may be a perception of unfairness in cash transfers. (ii) There is a concern about cash transfers leading to dependency on public assistance. (iii) The role of private transfers, including community support and remittances, has been very important for managing risk. The cash transfer from the government may to some extent crowd out non-public transfers, even though the cash transfer amount is not large. However, these impacts are not large scale, significant or irreversible. 3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize adverse impacts: No large scale, significant or irreversible social or environmental impacts are anticipated. 4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described: A comprehensive communications campaign would be developed and a complaints handling mechanism will be established in order to ensure that local people in project areas in particular vulnerable population who are potentially eligible for the program are well aware of the project and can express concerns that they may have. The National Social Protection Strategy to be updated under the project will integrate basic elements of an IPP. The terms of reference of the consultant who will carry out activities related to the updating of the Strategy will include free, prior and informed consultation with indigenous peoples organizations and the provision of culturally appropriate benefits to IP communities. 5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people: The key stakeholders are NCDD-S (in charge of pilot implementation and coordination), SPCU (in charge of overall coordination and monitoring of NSPS implementation), line ministries (in line with their mandate and strategic direction), local authorities and residents in the pilot districts, and development partners. B. Disclosure Requirements Date By Appraisal Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive N/A Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A Pest Management Plan: Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal? N/A Date of receipt by the Bank N/A Date of "in-country" disclosure N/A Date of submission to InfoShop N/A * If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources policies, the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental Assessment/Audit/or EMP. If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please explain why: There are no separate safeguard instruments required to be prepared and/or disclosed for this RETF even though the categorization is “B�. C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting) OP/BP 4.01 - Environment Assessment Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including Yes [ ] No [ X] N/A [ ] EMP) report? If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Practice Manager (PM) review and approve the EA report? Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the credit/loan? OP/BP 4.04 - Natural Habitats Would the project result in any significant conversion or Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] degradation of critical natural habitats? If the project would result in significant conversion or degradation of other (non-critical) natural habitats, does the project include mitigation measures acceptable to the Bank? OP 4.09 - Pest Management Does the EA adequately address the pest management Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] issues? Is a separate PMP required? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] If yes, has the PMP been reviewed and approved by a safeguards specialist or Practice Manager? Are PMP requirements included in project design? If yes, does the project team include a Pest Management Specialist? OP/BP 4.11 – Physical Cultural Resources Does the EA include adequate measures related to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] cultural property? Does the credit/loan incorporate mechanisms to mitigate the potential adverse impacts on physical cultural resources? OP/BP 4.10 - Indigenous Peoples Has a separate Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Yes [ ] No [ X] N/A [ ] Framework (as appropriate) been prepared in consultation with affected Indigenous Peoples? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Practice Manager review the plan? If the whole project is designed to benefit IP, has the design been reviewed and approved by the Regional Social Development Unit? OP/BP 4.12 - Involuntary Resettlement Has a resettlement plan/abbreviated plan/policy Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] framework/process framework (as appropriate) been prepared? If yes, then did the Regional unit responsible for safeguards or Practice Manager review and approve the plan/policy framework/process framework? OP/BP 4.36 – Forests Has the sector-wide analysis of policy and institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] issues and constraints been carried out? Does the project design include satisfactory measures to overcome these constraints? Does the project finance commercial harvesting, and if so, does it include provisions for certification system? OP/BP 4.37 - Safety of Dams Have dam safety plans been prepared? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] Have the TORs as well as composition for the independent Panel of Experts (POE) been reviewed and approved by the Bank? Has an Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP) been prepared and arrangements been made for public awareness and training? OP/BP 7.50 - Projects on International Waterways Have the other riparians been notified of the project? Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] If the project falls under one of the exceptions to the notification requirement, has this been cleared with the Legal Department, and the memo to the RVP prepared and sent? What are the reasons for the exception? Please explain: Has the RVP approved such an exception? OP/BP 7.60 - Projects in Disputed Areas Has the memo conveying all pertinent information on the Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] international aspects of the project, including the procedures to be followed, and the recommendations for dealing with the issue, been prepared Does the PAD/MOP include the standard disclaimer referred to in the OP? The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X ] the World Bank's Infoshop? Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected groups and local NGOs? All Safeguard Policies Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional Yes [ ] No [ ] N/A [X] responsibilities been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard policies? Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project cost? Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies? Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal documents? D. Approvals Signed and submitted by: Name Date Task Team Leader: Pablo Ariel Acosta July 23, 2014 Environmental Specialist: Ruxandra Floroiu July 23, 2014 Social Development Specialist Satoshi Ishihara July 23, 2014 Additional Environmental and/or Social Development Specialist(s): Approved by: Practice Manager: Jehan Arulpragasam July 28, 2014 Comments: (Template Version November 2007)