Document of The World Bank FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Report No: ICR00004636 IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETION AND RESULTS REPORT ON A GRANT FROM THE IDA CRISIS RESPONSE WINDOW IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 21.9 MILLION (US$ 30 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS (FAO) AND IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 14.6 MILLION (US$ 20 MILLION EQUIVALENT) TO THE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS (ICRC) FOR THE SOMALIA EMERGENCY DROUGHT RESPONSE AND RECOVERY PROJECT March 25, 2019 Social, Urban, Rural And Resilience Global Practice Africa Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange Rate Effective, March 15, 2019) Currency Unit = USD SDR 0.72 = US$1 US$ 1.39 = SDR 1 FISCAL YEAR July 1 - June 30 Regional Vice President: Hafez M. H. Ghanem Country Director: Bella Bird Senior Global Practice Director: Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez Practice Manager: Meskerem Brhane Task Team Leader(s): Ayaz Parvez, Puteri Natalie Watson ICR Main Contributor: Nadim Saghir ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS APA Alternative Procurement Arrangements AWD Acute Watery Diarrhea CAHW Community Animal Health Worker CCPP Contagious Caprine Pleuropneumonia CCSA Cross-Cutting Solution Area CfW Cash-for-Work CMU Country Management Unit CPF Country Partnership Framework CRW Crisis Response Window CSI Coping Strategies Index CSR Corporate Social Responsibility DRM Disaster Risk Management EcoSec Economic Security EHI Essential Household Item ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plans EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FCS Food Consumption Score FCV Fragility, Conflict and Violence FEWSnet Famine Early Warning System Network FGD Focus Group Discussions FGS Federal Government of Somalia FM Financial Management FMS Federal Member States FMFA Financial Management Framework Agreement FSNAU Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit FY Financial Year GDP Gross Domestic Product GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery GP Global Practice GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism HDDS Household Dietary Diversity Score HH Household IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ICR Implementation Completion Results and Report ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross IDA International Development Association IDP Internally Displaced People IFR Interim Financial Report IPC Integrated Food Security Phase Classification ISN Interim Strategy Note ISM Implementation Support Mission KII Key Informant Interviews LoA Letter of Agreement M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MCH Mother and Child Health MOU Memorandum of Understanding NDP National Development Plan NIIHA Neutral, Impartial, and Independent NGO Non-Governmental Organization NPV Net Present Value OIG Office of the Inspector General OP Operational Policy OTP Outpatient Therapeutic Program PAD Project Appraisal Document PDM Post-Distribution Monitoring PDO Project Development Objective PHC Primary Health Care PMT Planning and Monitoring Tool PSP Payment Service Provider RMU Risk Monitoring Unit SAP Safeguards Action Plan SCD Systematic Country Diagnostic SEDRP Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project SRCS Somali Red Crescent Society SWALIM The Somalia Water and Land Information Management TLU Tropical Livestock Unit TPM Third-Party Monitoring TPTR Third-Party Technical Review TTL Task Team Leader UN United Nations UN OCHA The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WATHAB Water and Habitat WB / Bank World Bank WFP World Food Programme WHO World Health Organization TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA SHEET .......................................................................................................................... 1 I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ....................................................... 5 A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL .........................................................................................................5 B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) ..................................... 10 II. OUTCOME .................................................................................................................... 12 A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs ............................................................................................................ 12 B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) ...................................................................................... 14 C. EFFICIENCY ........................................................................................................................... 16 D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING .................................................................... 17 E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) ............................................................................ 18 III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME ................................ 22 A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION ................................................................................... 22 B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................. 24 IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME .. 25 A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) ............................................................ 25 B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE ..................................................... 29 C. BANK PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................................... 30 D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME ....................................................................................... 32 V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 33 ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS ........................................................... 38 ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION ......................... 47 ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT ........................................................................... 49 ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 50 ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS ... 52 ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY) ..................................................................... 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) DATA SHEET BASIC INFORMATION Product Information Project ID Project Name Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery P163830 Project Country Financing Instrument Eastern Africa Investment Project Financing Original EA Category Revised EA Category Partial Assessment (B) Partial Assessment (B) Organizations Borrower Implementing Agency Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) HQ Somalia (Supported Agency), International Committee of (Grantee), Food and Agriculture Organization of the the Red Cross (ICRC) - Somalia Delegation (Supported United Nations (Grantee) Agency) Project Development Objective (PDO) Original PDO The Project Development Objective is to address the immediate needs of the drought affected people within the territory of the Federal Republic of Somalia, and support resilient recovery through the provision of livelihood opportunities and the restoration of agricultural and pastoral production. Page 1 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) FINANCING Original Amount (US$) Revised Amount (US$) Actual Disbursed (US$) World Bank Financing 20,000,000 20,000,000 20,447,999 IDA-D2120 30,000,000 30,000,000 30,507,109 IDA-D2110 Total 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,955,108 Non-World Bank Financing 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 Total Project Cost 50,000,000 50,000,000 50,955,108 KEY DATES Approval Effectiveness MTR Review Original Closing Actual Closing 30-May-2017 02-Jun-2017 29-Jun-2018 30-Sep-2018 RESTRUCTURING AND/OR ADDITIONAL FINANCING Date(s) Amount Disbursed (US$M) Key Revisions 11-May-2018 50.96 Change in Loan Closing Date(s) Reallocation between Disbursement Categories KEY RATINGS Outcome Bank Performance M&E Quality Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory High RATINGS OF PROJECT PERFORMANCE IN ISRs Actual No. Date ISR Archived DO Rating IP Rating Disbursements (US$M) 01 28-Dec-2017 Satisfactory Satisfactory 41.93 Page 2 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 02 12-Jul-2018 Highly Satisfactory Highly Satisfactory 50.96 SECTORS AND THEMES Sectors Major Sector/Sector (%) Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 37 Other Agriculture, Fishing and Forestry 37 Health 5 Health 5 Social Protection 51 Social Protection 44 Public Administration - Social Protection 7 Water, Sanitation and Waste Management 7 Other Water Supply, Sanitation and Waste 7 Management Themes Major Theme/ Theme (Level 2)/ Theme (Level 3) (%) Social Development and Protection 68 Social Protection 68 Social Safety Nets 68 Page 3 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Human Development and Gender 64 Gender 40 Disease Control 19 Health Systems and Policies 12 Health Service Delivery 12 Nutrition and Food Security 64 Nutrition 12 Food Security 52 Urban and Rural Development 50 Disaster Risk Management 50 Disaster Response and Recovery 50 Environment and Natural Resource Management 14 Climate change 14 Adaptation 14 ADM STAFF Role At Approval At ICR Regional Vice President: Makhtar Diop Hafez M. H. Ghanem Country Director: Bella Deborah Mary Bird Bella Deborah Mary Bird Senior Global Practice Director: Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez Ede Jorge Ijjasz-Vasquez Practice Manager: Bernice K. Van Bronkhorst Meskerem Brhane Ayaz Parvez, Robert Curle Jesse Task Team Leader(s): Ayaz Parvez Reid ICR Contributing Author: Nadim Saghir Page 4 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) I. PROJECT CONTEXT AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES A. CONTEXT AT APPRAISAL Context 1. Between 2016 and 2018, Somalia was on the brink of famine resulting primarily from severe drought, its third in the past 30 years. At its peak, an estimated 6.7 million – half the population – were acutely food insecure and in urgent need of humanitarian assistance, mostly in remote rural areas.1 Food insecurity and scarcity of drinking water, coupled with displacement, contributed to a stark rise in malnutrition and water-borne disease. Some 1.2 million children in Somalia were projected to be acutely malnourished in 2018—an increase of 50 percent over the previous year.2 The country also faced an Acute Watery Diarrhea (AWD)/cholera outbreak in 12 of its 18 regions3, with nearly 5.5 million people were at risk of contracting water-borne diseases.4 An estimated 926,000 people were displaced by the drought from November 2016-September 2017.5 2. The impact of the drought was so devastating that not only immediate assistance and recovery was needed, but also better resilience and preparedness towards future drought events in Somalia. According to official estimates, and as confirmed by the 2018 Somalia Drought Impact Needs Assessment (DINA),6 damages amounted to US$1.02 billion, and losses were estimated at US$2.23 billion. The DINA found that total recovery needs were estimated at US$1.77 billion. Agriculture (irrigated and rain-fed crops) and urban development and municipal services were the sectors with the greatest needs, representing 28 percent and 17 percent of total needs, respectively. 3. As a result, the President of Somalia declared a “national disaster” in February 2017. Recurrent drought, food insecurity and subsequent famine risk had become a devastating and increasingly unsustainable cycle in Somalia in recent decades. The impact of the drought and resulting crisis had overwhelmed national response capacities in Somalia. Since the end of the previous drought/famine in 2011, that killed over 250,000 people, mainly women and children, some US$4.5 billion has been spent on emergency response to save lives. While these efforts have averted another famine, only long-term development gains will lift the country out of poverty, vulnerability and insecurity. The confluence of factors contributing to the current emergency—including multi-layered conflict, poverty and displacement—has created an exceedingly complex crisis and demanded an unprecedented response. 4. Preparation of the Project. In April 2017, the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) requested the World Bank’s (WB or the Bank) support to provide emergency assistance for the victims of drought in Somalia. The Bank 1 UNOCHA, 2017. Somalia Humanitarian Dashboard. 2 UNICEF. 2017. Somalia Situation Report (Sitrep #15): October 2017. 3 Ibid. 4 WHO. 2017. Outbreak Update: Cholera in Somalia: October 2017. 5 UNHCR. 2017. Displacements Dashboard, Protection & Return Monitoring Network, Internal Displacements During September 2017. 6 The DINA was prepared by the FGS, the FMS, the World Bank, the European Union and the United Nations between October to December 2018, and officially presented at a high-level launch in Mogadishu in January 2018. Page 5 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) responded immediately with the Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (SEDRP) by considering an exceptional allocation of US$50 million from the International Development Association Crisis Response Window (IDA CRW) to mitigate the impacts on the most vulnerable people and to lay a foundation for recovery and resilience in the drought-affected communities. The urgency on part of the Bank was largely driven by the dire need to join hands with the international community to avert a repeat of the 2011 famine in Somalia that led to huge loss of lives, and with a view of using its engagement in early and medium-term drought recovery to promote and leverage the famine prevention and resilience building agenda for Somalia. Given the over-riding importance of being able to provide timely support and contributions towards immediate drought recovery, the Bank committed to preparing the Project in extremely quick time, and one that would allow a swift injection of resources to shore-up the response of the humanitarian community, while adding elements of sustainable recovery and resilience building into its engagement. Given its non-accrual status at the time of preparation, Somalia was not eligible for IDA financing. Under these circumstances, the Bank pursued alternative partnership arrangements through the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). This projected represents the first time the World Bank provided IDA funding directly to FAO and ICRC. 5. To support drought recovery and build resilience, the World Bank agreed to quickly fund FAO and ICRC’s ongoing drought operations and longer-term resilience-building.7 Both ICRC and FAO had considerable unmet funding gaps in their present drought responses in Somalia, US$21 million and US$90 million respectively. The importance of leveraging this partnership and providing an immediate flow of funds was necessary in the context of the operation in order to sustain existing momentum and scale up ongoing activities without causing interruption to the drought response and recovery programs of both agencies. 6. The original project cost was a US$50 million from the International Development Association Crisis Response Window (IDA CRW). This included a grant (IDA-D2120) to ICRC for US$20 million (Component 1) and a grant (IDA- D2110) to FAO for US$30 million (Component 2), which became effective on June 2, 2017. The Project was prepared in an extremely compressed timeline of 5 weeks, from preparation to Board approval, using emergency processes, demonstrating the Bank’s growing agility to respond to such crises and addressing multi-sectoral, early recovery and medium-term resilience building agendas, folded under a single operation. 7. In line with the World Bank Agility Agenda, this included using retroactive financing for ICRC, while comprehensively assessing the technical, procurement, financial management, and safeguards eligibility of claimed expenses, and advance payments to FAO. The Project entailed: a) a surge of high-impact, immediate response and early recovery interventions while humanitarian operations continued in tandem, and; b) a range of multi-sector, ‘livelihoods-centered’ activities that increase coping capacity of the affected communities against the likely protracted impacts of the drought and promote a transition toward drought recovery and resilience building. This approach strategically addressed existing gaps and needs in the immediate and early recovery domains, while maximizing the World Bank’s comparative advantage and value addition by making resilience building a key underpinning of the interventions proposed to be financed under the operation. 7 The choice of as partners ICRC and FAO is further elaborated in the “Key Factors During Preparation” section. Page 6 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Theory of Change (Results Chain) 8. The Project was designed taking a multi-phased approach that targeted both short-term and medium-term impacts. Although a project-specific theory of change was not required and prepared for the Project Appraisal Document (PAD), the theory of change of the Project was embedded in its core activities, primarily in meeting food insecurity and building resilience. In retrospect, combining both quality-at-entry considerations, as well as learning from on-ground implementation experiences, a theory of change and results chain for both project components has emerged, as illustrated in the following tables. Table 1: Component 1, Theory of Change INTERMEDIATE PROBLEM PRIMARY ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACT OUTCOMES • Distribution of food • Food, household • Households Somalia’s 2017 drought left up to 6.7m people—more than half the population—in need of humanitarian • Provision of household items, and (HH) benefitting items unconditional cash from improved • Distribution of food rations, unconditional cash to cash support drought-affected and household population • Rehabilitation of items WASH infrastructure • Repair and rehabilitation of • Infrastructure existing boreholes improvements for • Rehabilitation and livestock storage and • Improved HH • Immediate improvement of hand-dug distribution assistance and on the brink of famine access to drought wells as well as surface WASH outreach food and recovery and water infrastructure strengthening strengthened • Providing extra storage and of community coping distribution for food security mechanisms communities and their • Improved HH for drought- livestock access to safe affected • Hygiene promotion, • Provision of • HH benefitting drinking communities household water treatment emergency and from, water (particularly (chlorine tablets) and mass primary health care • Improved HH targeting water treatment • Treatment of emergency health care access to more pregnant/lactating healthcare inaccessible • Provide emergency and women suffering • Women and and nutrition communities) primary health care, from acute children nutrition and cholera malnutrition benefitting from response through fixed and nutritional mobile health clinics, services stabilization centers and cholera treatment centers • Treat pregnant/lactating women suffering with acute malnutrition and under-5 children suffering from severe acute malnutrition Page 7 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Table 2: Component 2, Theory of Change INTERMEDIATE PROBLEM PRIMARY ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACT OUTCOMES • Cash for food • Improved water Somalia’s 2017 drought left up to 6.7m people—more than half the population—in need • Distribution of cash-for work and infrastructure • Repair and • Rehabilitation rehabilitation of existing of water water infrastructure infrastructure of humanitarian assistance and on the brink of famine • Improved HH access • Distribution of unconditional cash • HH to food and • Productive participation in strengthening food • Significant • Distribution of farming inputs cash for work security contributions and fishing inputs • Unconditional schemes • Improved HH access towards reduced • Provision of veterinary cash • Increased HH to water risk of famine in training • Veterinary income through • Improved HH access Somalia and • Restocking of small trainings cash for work to agricultural improved ruminants • Distribution of seeds • Fodder and livelihoods community production unconditional • Improved agro- resilience to the and equipment for trainings cash pastoral production prolonged fodder production • Increased HH • Strengthened effects of • Provision of training for fodder production • Drought access to disaster drought. preparedness agricultural preparedness and and response inputs and response • Drought preparedness plans livestock and response planning • Weather treatment and • Enhanced weather vaccination monitoring monitoring and services and forecasting forecasting • Dissemination of early warning information Project Development Objectives (PDOs) 9. The Project Development Objective was “to address the immediate needs of the drought affected people within the territory of the Federal Republic of Somalia, and support resilient recovery through the provision of livelihood opportunities and the restoration of agricultural and pastoral production.” Key Expected Outcomes and Outcome Indicators 10. The expected outcomes and PDO-level indicators from the Project included the following: • Increased number of beneficiaries with improved food access • Increased number of beneficiaries with improved access to safe water • Increased number of beneficiaries with improved access to livelihood opportunities Page 8 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) • Increased number of beneficiaries benefiting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment Components 11. The Project included two components: Component 1: Programmatic Support to ICRC for Immediate Drought Response; and Component 2: Programmatic Support to FAO for Immediate Drought Response and Recovery. 12. Component 1: Programmatic Support to ICRC for Immediate Drought Response (Original allocation at approval =: US$20 million; revised allocation before closing = US$20.45 million). This component supported ICRC’s ongoing multidisciplinary response to immediate needs arising out of the country-wide impacts of the drought in Somalia. This helped ICRC in continuing the pace and momentum of its distributions of food, non-food items and cash, and further scaling it up especially in hard-to-reach areas to promote food security and stem displacement. Support was also provided for treating malnutrition among children and pregnant/lactating women. Activities under this component also helped increase the availability of improved water for people in drought affected areas, by: repairing and rehabilitating water points; promoting good hygiene practices, and; providing water treatment materials especially in areas with a high risk of cholera. 13. This includes the following sub-components: • (1.1) Meeting Urgent Food Security Needs which financed the distribution of food, household items, and unconditional cash to drought-affected populations, especially in hard-to-reach areas; • (1.2) Improving Access to Water, Sanitation and Hygiene which included rehabilitation of water infrastructures, hygiene promotion and household water treatment; • (1.3) Improving Access to Healthcare and Nutrition which provided emergency and primary health care nutrition and cholera response through fixed and mobile clinics, and treated pregnant/lactating women and under-5 children suffering from acute malnutrition; • (1.4) Project Management which integrates all implementation and administration costs, third-party review, quality control, and grievance redressal mechanisms. 14. For ICRC, the first reimbursement of retroactive expenditure of US$15.2 million (75 percent of the Grant) for the period from 1 January to 30 April 2017 was paid as of 20 July 2017. This was based on a comprehensive technical eligibility, procurement, financial management and safeguards audit, a report to which effect is included in project archives. The expenditure for the period of May 2017 (final retroactive payment) for an amount approximately US$3.7 million was approved, with total disbursement for this component at US$18.9 million, which is about 95 percent of the US$20 million component amount. The remaining amount was prospectively reimbursed for activities formally agreed with the ICRC under a workplan, including those that enhanced the resilience building impact of the component and for activities that minimized procurement such as cash transfers. An additional amount of US$450,000, which was due to exchange rate gains, was also productively utilized under the Project. 15. Component 2: Programmatic Support to FAO for Immediate Drought Response and Recovery (Original allocation at approval = US$30 million; revised allocation before closing = US$30.51 million). This component supported the FAO’s Drought Response and Famine Prevention Plan for 2017, with the objective of increasing immediate access to food, safeguarding livelihoods and assets, and supporting the sustainable recovery of Page 9 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) agriculture, pastoral and agro-pastoral livelihood systems in target communities. Interventions under this component were designed to help address the immediate food needs of drought-affected households while also catalyzing recovery of productive assets, food production, and livelihood systems. Interventions were also designed to simultaneously deliver short-term emergency relief and support the safeguarding and recovery of assets (infrastructure, inputs, skills, labor) that underpin long-term resilience of agriculture production and rural livelihood systems. This project component was designed with built-in flexibility, offering a range of response options to be selected based on real-time needs and priorities on the ground, as they evolved. This allowed the project to adjust to seasonal requirements (linked to the agricultural calendar), security dynamics, evolving needs and coverage by other partners, as well as fill critical gaps in assistance by development partners as a whole. 16. This includes the following Sub-components: • (2.1) Cash-for-Work for Immediate Food Needs and Water Infrastructure Rehabilitation which provided immediate relief through the cash-for-work program and rebuilding community infrastructure; • (2.2) Emergency Cash and Agricultural Livelihood Support which provided emergency livelihood support (agricultural inputs) and unconditional cash; • (2.3) Restoration of Pastoral Livelihoods which treated and vaccinated livestock, provided rangeland cubes, provided equipment and training to farmers, and livestock restocking; • (2.4) Strengthening Disaster Preparedness, Monitoring and Early Warning Systems which improved the ability of vulnerable communities, government and partners to prepare for and respond to drought through drought response plans, weather monitoring and forecasting capabilities e.g. FSNAU (Food Security and Nutrition Analysis Unit and SWALIM (Somalia Water and Land Information Management). (2.5) Project Management which integrates all implementation and administration costs, third-party review, quality control, and grievance redressal mechanisms. 17. For FAO, an initial advance of US$23 million (76 percent of the grant) was made as of 22 June 2017, with the remaining US$7.5 million dispersed in FY18. The additional amount of US$507,109, which was due to exchange rate gains was also productively utilized, as explained elsewhere. B. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES DURING IMPLEMENTATION (IF APPLICABLE) Revised PDOs and Outcome Targets 18. The PDO and outcome targets remained the same throughout the entire project implementation. Revised PDO Indicators 19. The PDO indicators remained the same throughout the entire project implementation. Revised Components 20. The Components remained the same throughout the entire project implementation. Page 10 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Other Changes 21. Minor Level 2 Restructuring. The Project underwent one minor restructuring under the FAO Grant during project implementation, which revised the closing date to September 30, 2018 for the Project as a whole (although the ICRC Grant was closed as per the original date of 29 June 2018). 22. This extension was due to cost-efficiency savings and exchange rates gains, and considerable savings in operational costs budgeted to FAO, amounting to US$4.6 million, which allowed FAO to reprogram funding, scale up its ongoing response, and increase the expected number of beneficiaries. In response, FAO proposed a three-month, no-cost extension to utilize the remaining balance to scale-up under Sub-components 2.2, Emergency cash and agricultural livelihood; 2.3, Restoration of pastoral livelihoods; and 2.4, strengthening disaster preparedness. 23. Extension of the Project was warranted due not just to avail the productive reprogramming opportunities provided by the cost-savings, but also because, at the time of the request for extension, drought conditions continued in Somalia, with over 5.4 million people facing food insecurity in 2018 (of which 2.7 million were in IPC Phases 3 and 4). Additionally, rain forecasts during that period were below-average, increasing the risk of continued and even increased food insecurity. The extension, combined with the Project’s agile approach, allowed the funds to be utilized at the most critical timings during planting and harvesting periods of upcoming rainy seasons to ensure maximum positive impact on food security. The flexibility allowed the use of project funds to adjust to “real-time needs and priorities on the ground, as they evolve” is explicitly provided in the original project design (Refer: Para 53 of the Project Appraisal Document). The cost savings, combined with the continued food insecurity, allowed the Project to continue to provide urgent assistance to most-affected populations, further exceeding cumulative beneficiary targets by an additional 265,000 people. However, it also resulted in minor under-achievement of targets set for some outcome indicators, as reflected in the table included in Section II. 24. Further, FAO’s reduction in costs required for project management, US$195,464 (SDR 89,149) was reallocated from Category 2(a) to Category 1 in the Financing Agreement categories. 25. Prospective Financing Arrangements for ICRC. During project implementation for Component 1, a balance of more than US$1 million was realized by ICRC due to the combined effect of amounts that could not be retroactively reimbursed or due to exchange rate and other cost-efficiency savings. 26. With this prospective financing arrangement, ICRC was able to scale up its ongoing response, furthering its assistance, especially hard-to-access rural areas with the most vulnerable people. This amount was agreed and approved based on a work plan proposed by ICRC that would focus on strengthening drought-resilience activities under Sub-component 1.1. This remaining balance was used to support additional cash distributions, including 6,041 households via emergency cash assistance and 6,173 households via livelihood grants. Rationale for Changes and Their Implication on the Original Theory of Change 27. There was no implication on the Theory of Change. Page 11 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) II. OUTCOME A. RELEVANCE OF PDOs Assessment of Relevance of PDOs and Rating 28. The relevance of the PDO is rated as High based on the following analysis. 29. The PDO established under the Project was extremely relevant to a country context characterized by protracted drought and an impending full-fledged famine, by: (a) addressing the immediate needs of the drought affected people within the territory of the Federal Republic of Somalia, and; (b) supporting resilient recovery through the provision of livelihood opportunities and the restoration of agricultural and pastoral production. 30. Specific Relevance and Value Addition of Bank Engagement and Project. Additionally, the Project brought together a new multi-sector and multi-phased programmatic intervention to the ongoing multi-partner drought response in Somalia. This approach strategically addressed existing gaps and needs in the immediate and early recovery domains, while maximizing the Bank’s comparative advantage and value addition by making resilience- building a key underpinning of the interventions financed under the operation. The immediate phase entailed life-saving support through food security enhancement and provision of emergency livelihoods to improve community coping mechanisms, while the latter phase entailed investments in more sustainable recovery interventions such as for boosting agro-pastoral production and water resource management. Furthermore, the Project sought to build upon the Bank experience on the usefulness of employing multi-sectoral disaster recovery approaches, that also maximize the spatial coverage of such interventions, compared to isolated, single-sector focused responses. The Project was thereby designed to provide an integrated, holistic and more sustainable solution by combining interventions across the food security, agriculture, livelihoods, irrigation, water resource management and disaster risk management sectors and themes. The systematic planning of multi-sectoral and multi-phased recovery interventions under the Project also was also envisaged to: (a) promote collaboration and coordination among the different actors involved; (b) help clarify the roles and responsibilities of various actors and stakeholders, and; (c) allow for comprehensive multi-sector monitoring mechanisms to be instituted. 31. The Bank’s engagement also provided specific value addition and impetus to the FAO program by incorporating selected elements of FAO’s longer-term resilience strategy into the design of the FAO component, which was previously not included in their current drought recovery program. The Bank’s engagement was critical for quickly funding the existing funding gaps in ICRC and FAO’s ongoing program. This allowed both entities to sustain the pace of their engagement and strategically scale up their programs to cover critical geographic and thematic gaps. Hence, the Project also brought significant added value as follows: (i) timely flexible financing for the supported partners; (ii) promoting coordination between the WB and its supported partners; (iii) bridging the gap between emergency response and resilient recovery, and; (iv) potential to leverage additional financing resources to strengthen government capacity to interface with ongoing efforts. 32. The relevance of the project objective was further evidenced during implementation, as together with other partners, the Bank project contributed towards a significant and steady lowering of the Integrated Food Security Page 12 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Phase Classification (IPC)8 ratings for most of the country. As compared to August-December 2017, in July 2018, one year into the project, the ratings declined from IPC levels 3 and 4, to IPC levels 1 and 2 (see maps below), signifying a major lowering of the drought vulnerability and improved coping mechanisms for communities around the map. Figure 1: Somalia IPC Map for the Projected Period of Figure 2: Somalia IPC Map in July 2018 April-June 2017 Source: Somalia Acute Food Security Situation Overview, April-June 2017 available at: http://www.fsnau.org/ipc/ipc-map. 33. Contribution to World Bank and Government Strategies. The Project contributed to the IDA’s planned support from the CRW for the region, which highlights the need for a comprehensive approach for both short-term needs and medium to long-term resilience building in the region.9 In line with this approach, the Project supported immediate recovery of drought affected people of Somalia through provision of food assistance and restoration of livelihood opportunities in the medium-term, while helping avert famine and building resilience through sustainable restoration of agro-pastoral production. The Project also connected to priorities articulated within the Regional Initiative in Support of the Horn of Africa.10 Pillar One of the Regional Initiative related to Vulnerability and Resilience highlights the need to enhance the productive capacities and coping mechanisms of displaced populations, in a way that promotes social cohesion and mitigates tensions. 34. The Project was also in line with the Interim Strategy Note (ISN) for the Federal Republic of Somalia (FY14-FY16) 11 during project preparation and the first-ever Country Partnership Framework (CPF) for the Federal Republic of Somalia FY19-2212 The ISN supports sustainable poverty reduction in fragile and conflict-affected contexts, 8 The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) consisting of five phases, is a means to classify varying phases of current food security situations based on outcomes on human lives and livelihoods. The phases are: (1) Minimal, (2) Stressed, (3) Crisis, (4) Emergency and (5) Famine. 9 IDA Crisis Response Window Support for a Regional Drought Response in Africa and Middle East and North Africa, IDA/SecM2017-0067, April 2017. 10 WB-UN Horn of Africa Regional Initiative. 11 Interim Strategy Note; Report No. 75212 – SO; for the Federal Republic of Somalia; November 11, 2013. 12 Country Partnership Framework; Report No. 124734 – SO; for the Federal Republic of Somalia; August 29, 2018. Page 13 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) while also prioritizing the strengthening of core economic institutions and expanding economic activity. By supporting the livelihoods of the drought affected population of Somalia, the project underpinned these priorities. The recent CPF notes that Somalia faces development challenges such as natural disasters which can hamper development gains and deepen exclusion, and thus emphasizes the need of disaster risk management and resilience to climate change as key objectives to consider. The Project is also in line with the Systematic Country Diagnostic (SCD), as well as the FGS’s National Development Plan (NDP), which have a strong focus on tackling poverty and building resilience. 35. Lastly, in September 2018 at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), the World Bank, United Nations, ICRC and a range of stakeholders announced the Famine Early Action Mechanism (FAM) as an unprecedented global partnership to prevent future famines. It seeks to formalize the links between early warning, finance and implementation arrangements, and to drive increased investment in famine prevention. Somalia has been designated a first-mover country and would provide an avenue for an early roll out of the approach. The experiences from the Project and the ongoing work on the operationalization of a Drought Recovery and Resilience Framework for Somalia provide a ready basis and platform for the launch of FAM activities that respond to a larger and holistic umbrella framework for resilience building. B. ACHIEVEMENT OF PDOs (EFFICACY) Assessment of Achievement of Each Objective/Outcome 36. Seen against the dual sub-objectives of the PDO of “addressing the immediate needs of the drought affected people”, and “supporting resilient recovery through livelihood opportunities and restoration of agro-pastoral production”, the overall efficacy of the Project is rated as High. The analysis supporting this rating is summarized below, with more details in subsequent sections. 37. The Project met or exceeded targets against all 4 out of its PDO indicators, as can be seen in Table 3 below. This includes full achievement on meeting targets on improving access to food, which is related to the first PDO dimension of “addressing the immediate needs of the people”. Similarly, the Project fully met the outcome targets in respect of the ‘resilient recovery” dimension of the PDO, in terms of improved access to water, livelihood opportunities and livestock treatment and vaccination (which constitute the remaining three outcome indicators included in the Results Framework). Furthermore, the “Other Impact” section dives deeper into the “resilient recovery” and implied “resilience-building” dimensions of the PDO, based on the third-party impact validation surveys carried out by FAO and partly by ICRC. In summary however, firm indications of improvements affected by the Project towards “resilient recovery” are manifest in the impact validation exercise pertaining to indicators related to Food Consumption, Household Dietary Diversity, Coping Strategies and Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU). 38. In respect of the 12 intermediate results indicators, 6 targets were fully met or exceeded, while another 5 were substantially met (>80% achievement), and for only one, the target was under-achieved – as shown in Table 3. The 5 intermediate results with substantial (>80%) but not full achievement however did not prevent the full achievement of all PDO-level indicators because: (a) the FAO overachievement compensated for ICRC under Page 14 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) achievement in the case of some combined indicators, and; (b) some of the intermediate results were not directly quantitatively linked with the PDO-level indicators. 39. The one intermediate result on which the target was under-achieved was the “number of individuals having received drought-related health services”, with achievement assessed at 37 percent. This was because the PAD targets set for this sector were based on the estimated catchment area (i.e. total population in the area) of the primary healthcare centers supported by the ICRC, and not an estimate of the population likely to visit the centers. It was not possible to determine exactly how many people would take advantage of the services, but overall, it could be considered positive that the numbers of people who visited were lower than the target. This may have been due to interventions in the other subcomponents of the project, such as general food distribution. At the same time, it is also possible that some people might not have accessed the centers due to security constraints of certain inaccessible areas for beneficiaries and that health services are normally a demand-based services. It may also be noted here that for the other health and nutrition related indicator under the ICRC component related to providing nutritional services to pregnant/lactating women and children under 5, the target was overachieved, and which may partly explain why the demand for curative health services may have correspondingly declined. 40. However, it may be noted that ICRC fully covered the intended catchment area underlying the calculation of the original PAD indicator for this result. Similarly, the main reason for the slight under-achievement in respect of the substantially-met indicators is the project’s reactive, flexible and needs-based targeting approach which is necessary in emergency contexts, which sometimes required diverting resources from one subcomponent to another, and which in the case of the FAO component, was specifically agreed under the restructuring exercise. Table 3: SEDRP Results Achievement Type of Project Development Objectives Target Number Achieved % Achieved* Indicator Number of individuals with improved food FAO and 474,600-632,800 767,118 139% access ICRC Number of individuals with improved food FAO and access of which number of females with 120,000-155,000 321,311 234% ICRC improved food access Number of individuals benefiting from ICRC 656,000 777,529 119% improved access to water Number of households with increased FAO 13,725-18,300 56,366 352% access to livelihood opportunities Number of households benefiting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment FAO 170,000-212,500 222,738 116% support Intermediate Results Indicators Number of households receiving food ICRC 35,000 29,172 83% rations Number of households provided with cash ICRC 53,000 42,315 80% grants Page 15 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Number of Essential Household Item (EHI) ICRC 11,000 9,544 87% kits distributed Number of pregnant/lactating women, and children under the age of five having been ICRC 22,000 31,159 142% reached with basic nutrition service Number of individuals having received ICRC 540,000 201,465 37% drought-related health services Number of water infrastructures ICRC 35 33 94% rehabilitated Number of infrastructures rehabilitated FAO 80-110 87 92% through the cash for work program Number of individuals participating in the FAO 6,000-8,500 13,102 181% cash for work program Percentage of households with increased FAO 70% 75% 107% income based on their livelihood activities Number of livestock being vaccinated 6,375,000- FAO 8,909,498 120% and/or treated 8,500,000 Number of households benefiting from FAO 10,000-12,500 24,000 213% nutrition support to livestock Beneficiaries that report that their FAO and FAO: 89%; ICRC: FAO: 119%; ICRC: communities were consulted and that their 75% ICRC 100% 133% project-related grievances were addressed * The percentage achieved for a target that is set as a range relies on the average value of the original target range. % of target achieved is equal % of target achieved ranges % of target achieved is or surpassed 100% between 80% and 100% below 80% C. EFFICIENCY Assessment of Efficiency and Rating 41. Based on the analysis provided below of economic and implementation efficiency, efficiency of the Project is rated High. 42. The cost-benefit analysis performed on sub-components 1.1, 2.1 and 2.3 of the Project suggest that the interventions remained economically feasible. The cost-benefit analysis performed on interventions featured under sub-components 1.1, 2.1 and 2.3 generated net present values (NPV) and internal rates of return in excess of 6%. Annex 4 presents the details of the cost-benefit analysis performed. 43. For the FAO component, Table 4 presents the unit cost of delivering programs under the Projects relative to comparative projects conducted by the FAO in the past. As can be seen, the unit costs remain relatively in line with comparable projects in the past. The positive variance for subcomponent 2.2 (cash+ agriculture) can be attributed to economies of scale achieved under this subcomponent. Page 16 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Table 4: Unit Cost of Delivering Programs under the SEDRP and Comparative Project by the FAO13 Comparative Percentage Components SEDRP Project of Variance Sub-component 2.1 – CFW 160.9 147.4 8% Sub-component 2.2 – Cash+ Agriculture 254.0 311.3 -23% Sub-component 2.3 – Livestock 28.5 27.7 3% Source: FAO, $/beneficiary 44. Efficiency analysis for the ICRC component remains difficult since ICRC does not have a fully harmonized or comparable data for conducting such analyses across their portfolio within or across countries. Any comparisons conducted under such limitations would undermine any substantive learning from such analyses. 45. The following factors illustrate the implementation efficiency achieved under the Project: (a) the ICRC component was completed within the original project duration including both for the retroactively financed and prospectively financed activities; (b) despite some initial delays, the FAO component was completed with a marginal 3-month extension of time, through the strengthened process monitoring and management system introduced under the project in the working of the FAO; (c) the project met its originally targeted disbursement schedule through the duration of the project, and; (d) the project outcomes where fully achieved while adhering to the financial management, procurement, safeguards and M&E requirements and terms set out under the Grant Financing Agreements with ICRC and FAO. D. JUSTIFICATION OF OVERALL OUTCOME RATING 46. Based on the above efficacy, efficiency and relevance of the PDO analyses, as well as the satisfactory implementation performance of the project, the team rates the overall outcome rating as Highly Satisfactory. This is based on: (a) the full achievement of all four of the Project’s PDO indicators and based on the full and/or substantial achievement of 11 out of the 12 intermediate results indicators; (b) the significant economic and cost efficiencies achieved under the Project as explained above; (c) the very high relevance of the PDO to the country context as established above, both at -entry and during and after implementation, towards drought recovery and contributions towards averting the risk of famine in the country, and; (d) the implementation efficiency of the Project in terms of meeting an ambitious completion timeline and fulfillment of Bank compliance requirements for project implementation, including fiduciary and safeguards compliance. 47. Further the results reported mostly by FAO, and to some extent, the ICRC, were subjected to third party validation at various levels, including the impact and process/output levels. The results of these validation and monitoring exercises confirmed the results reported by these entities through their internal results monitoring systems. Third-Party Technical Review 48. Achievements on the impact level indicators, which are beyond the project results framework, but which FAO maintains and monitors through third party agents at a programmatic level, show substantive improvements on 13 Comparing with various other similar programs by FAO in Somalia over 2017-18. Page 17 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) four key indicators related to the Project. These include the Food Consumption Score (FCS), Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS), Coping Strategies Index (CSI) and Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU). These indicators were then checked for the parts/regions of the FAO program funded under the Bank project, and this shows significant improvement over and after the project duration, as compared to the same indicators during the drought in 2016/17. The details of this analysis are included in the next section on other/resilience results. 49. Similarly, on the process efficiency and output delivery sides, FAO agreed to engage a third-party agent, who shared its report directly with the Bank. This report confirmed: (a) the adequacy and flexibility of selection criteria and beneficiary registration, levels of community participation, and gender and vulnerability targeting under the Project; (b) assured and timely delivery of agricultural inputs and fishery products to beneficiaries; (c) efficiency of contracting partner organizations for fieldwork and procedures in place to deal with non-compliance, and; (d) extent of safeguards compliance under the Project. 50. ICRC also conducted resilience impact assessments beyond the project indicators for activities under Component 1 of the Project. These assessments covered key impact areas such as Livestock Treatment, Food Consumption, Food Production and the Utilization of Livestock Grants. Similar to FAO’s impact study, these indicators were then checked for the parts/regions of the ICRC drought program funded under SEDRP and show significant improvement during and after the project duration, as compared to the same indicators during 2016/17 drought. The details of this analysis are also included in the next section on other/resilience results. 51. Upon the conclusion of Component 1 activities, ICRC engaged an independent consultant to provide a Third-Party Technical Review (TPTR) to complement its M&E due diligence on results and processes. Although ICRC does not normally adopt third-party monitoring for their projects, the unique circumstances allowed for a limited independent review of the process adopted and followed for all activities implemented under this component. The review validated the process due diligence maintained by ICRC for its component, employing sample qualitative data collection and analysis and semi-structured interviews with ICRC staff. However, this scope of this work was limited to documentary process checks, rather than field-based validation, which was not possible in ICRC target areas due to security sensitivities. E. OTHER OUTCOMES AND IMPACTS (IF ANY) Resilience Impact 52. While the Project accomplished the intended immediate and medium-term recovery outcomes for the drought- affected people in Somalia, improved community resilience proved to be a significant additional outcome of the Project, in fulfilment of the PDO and even going beyond the results included in the Project Results Framework. Resilience in the context of this Project largely entailed “the achievement of gradual and sustained disaster recovery (rather than only short term) and improved institutional and community disaster preparedness on various fronts”, as demonstrated in the sections ahead. FAO Component 53. As explained in the previous section, a number of resilience impacts attributed to the Project activities were Page 18 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) reported for the FAO Component 2 through third party monitoring in Bank-regions of the Project.14 54. Food Consumption and Dietary Diversity. Food consumption has improved as indicated by the increase of the Food Consumption Score (FCS)15 to 77.8, compared with 37.46 during the drought in 2016/17. The FCS shows that the beneficiaries have improved access to healthy quality food attributed to the intervention of the Project. In addition to accessing food, Project intervention has enabled beneficiaries to consume nutritious, diversified, healthy and stable food supply. Food quality has improved as reflected by the increase of the Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS)16 to 4.72, compared with 3.38 during the drought in 2016/17. Figure 3: Food Consumption Score (FCS) Figure 4: Dietary Diversity Score (DDS) 100 77.80 10 62.31 5.81 37.46 4.72 50 5 3.38 0 0 Pre-drought Drought WB Regions Pre-drought Drought WB Regions Source: FAO TPM 55. Productive Assets and Coping. The Project target communities were coping better as measured by the Coping Strategy Index (CSI)17, which decreased to 14.7 from a high of 18.30 during the drought in 2016/17. Productive assets were also restored, especially for livestock with the Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU)18, as well as the nominal numbers of livestock, from 0.95 during the drought in 2016/17 to 3.75 in 2018. Figure 5: Coping Strategies Index (CSI) Figure 6: Tropical Livestock Unit (TLU) 18.3 20 14.7 4.04 3.75 10 0.95 0 Drought WB Pre-drought Drought Current Source: FAO TPM 56. Crop Yield. Crop yield19 for Project beneficiaries was significantly better than non-beneficiaries, which is attributed to the Project’s intervention of quality seeds, fertilizer and tractor cultivation hours to beneficiary farmers. Maize beneficiary production was 1.09 t/ha while for non-beneficiaries it was 0.6 t/ha. Sorghum beneficiary farmers realized 1.03 t/ha while non-beneficiaries produced 0.65 t/ha. Project beneficiaries also 14 FAO. 2018. Dansom Third-Party Technical Review Reports. 15 FCS is an index based on dietary diversity, food frequency, and relative nutritional importance of different food groups. 16 HDDS is a qualitative measure of food consumption that reflects household access to variety of foods and is a proxy for nutrient adequacy of the diet of individuals within the households. 17 CSI describes actions taken by people when they have inadequate food. 18 TLU describes the total mass of various livestock species owned by a household as a single figure. 19 Crop Yield assessment measures the quantity of farm’s grain produce using crop cutting PET methodology Page 19 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) cultivated larger areas & produced more yield than non-beneficiaries. Sorghum Figure 7: Crop Yield (ton/ha) Non-Beneficiaries 0.65 Beneficiaries 1.03 Maize Non-Beneficiaries 0.6 Beneficiaries 1.09 Cowpeas Non-Beneficiaries 0.6 Beneficiaries 0.68 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Yield (Tonnes/Ha) Source: FAO TPM 57. Under this component, Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Mainstreaming and Early Warning (EW) trainings were also carried in Somalia, purposely to provide the vulnerable communities with opportunities to develop their skills, knowledge and attitude in DRR and its implementation strategies. The trainings enabled participants to put in place future floods and droughts contingency plans within their regions in the face of the expected hazards and climate change. It was therefore an important step towards enhancing capacity development of the locals in ensuring that they are equipped with hands on skills to facilitate DRR process not only in their villages but also within the community at large. At the end of the trainings the participants were able to apply the acquired DRR skills at local level thus reducing the risks.20 ICRC Component 58. As explained in the earlier section, Component 1 also saw several resilience impacts beyond the project indicators, based on impact assessments carried out by the ICRC.21 59. Livestock Treatment and Reduced Mortality. ICRC activities included a resilience component, which entailed support for veterinary services (anti-parasitic treatments) for livestock as well as recovery cash grants to agro- pastoralists and pastoralists. An important result of the campaign was the significant reduction of livestock mortality, which dropped from peaks of 75% for some livestock keepers to less than 10% after the treatments. For the total of ICRC’s activities in Somalia in 2017, 28,341 households were assisted by treatment of 1,055,087 livestock heads. Since mortality dropped from at least 50 to < 10%, it was estimated that roughly 40% of treated 20 Example of a training report was shared by FAO entitled “Training Report on Disaster Risk Reduction and Early Warning of Bari Region,” 1-15 January 2018. 21 ICRC. 2018. ICRC Partner Report for the SEDRP Implementation and Completion Results Report. Page 20 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) animals survived thanks to the treatments. Whilst the assessment of July 2017 showed the average mortality rate of 63%, the post treatment monitoring of early 2018 has indicated the average mortality rate of 9%, a decrease of 54%. 60. It can be therefore estimated that 40% (422,035) of 1,055,087 animals survived because of the campaign. Of that number, 30% were cattle, which means that altogether the intervention saved 295,425 small ruminants and 126,610 cattle. By attributing a value of US$30 per small ruminant and US$200 per cattle, the overall monetary value of the livestock saved is US$34,184,750 and the estimated value per household is therefore US$1,206. 61. Food Consumption. A minimum 80% of target households (HHs) consume at least two meals per day. The overall monitoring findings have shown that 84% of the total number of the assisted HHs (IDPs and residents) were able to consume at least two meals per day after receiving the ICRC assistance versus 28% based on the combined findings of the emergency needs assessments. While over 60% of the assisted IDP HHs had relied on the purchase of food ‘on credit’ and support from their relatives as the main source of food upon displacement, the post- assistance monitoring showed that only 8% of the assisted IDP HHs were relying on these coping practices as the main food source. The findings also revealed that 7% of the assisted beneficiaries were sharing the food received from the ICRC, including the food purchased based on the ICRC provided multipurpose cash grants (mainly observed among the IDPs in urban settings). 62. The SMART nutrition survey conducted in the target IDP settlements Abu Sharow and Towfeeq of Baidoa indicated a Severe Acute Malnutrition (SAM) rate of 5.4%. The post-assistance SMART survey conducted in the first quarter of 2018 indicated the decrease of SAM rate to 1.5%. 63. Access to Food Production Assets. This entailed agricultural recovery grants. While the assessment at the end of the 2017 Gu (April-June) season showed that only 19% of the HHs in the target areas were able cultivate their land within the Gu season, the monitoring of the HHs that were assisted ahead of the Deyr (September- November) season showed that 83% of the assisted HHs managed to cultivate the surface of an average of 2 hectares/HH. A total of 17% of the assisted HHs utilized the cash grant to cover primarily essential food expenditures and cover the debts during the previous two seasons. 64. Utilization of Livestock Grants. The post-assistance monitoring, which took place in February 2018 (after the kidding/lambing period), has shown that the target HHs managed to increase the number of own small ruminants from 4.4 per HH, as revealed during the July-August 2017 assessment, to 19.8 small ruminants per HH. The monitoring also revealed that 92% of the assisted HHs invested a part of the cash grant to buy small ruminants (on average 8.7 small ruminants per HH). The findings on the utilization of the received cash grants also shown that on average 62% of the grant was used for the purchase of livestock, while the remaining part was used for the purchase of essential food items, water and fodder. Gender 65. An estimated 321,311 female beneficiaries compared to a targeted female population of 120,000-150,000 had improved access to food through FAO and ICRC’s interventions. This represents about a 42% share of female beneficiaries actually achieved under the Project vis-à-vis this important indicator and means that the Project exceeded its original gender target of 25% implied in the PAD. Page 21 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Poverty Reduction and Shared Prosperity 66. Roughly 75% of households reported increased income based on livelihood activities as a result of FAO’s interventions supported through the Project and through other projects compared to an original target of 70%. In 2017, prior to the FAO-supported interventions, the average annual estimated income was estimated at SoSh 682,000. In 2018, following the FAO-supported interventions, the average annual estimated income was estimated at SoSH 1,190,000, representing an increase of 74% on average. It is important to note that these figures are based on information regarding livestock sales and crop yield sales. Other Unintended Outcomes and Impacts 67. The SEDRP addressed project-related grievances of beneficiaries which were consulted. In the case of the FAO, out of the 89.1% of respondents in communities which were consulted throughout the implementation period and 100% responded that their project-related grievances were addressed, against the target of 75%. The grievances were mainly about delays in payments which was caused due to the slow delivery of contracted Money Vendors. The ICRC consulted 100% of the beneficiaries and addressed 100% of the grievances which were reported. III. KEY FACTORS THAT AFFECTED IMPLEMENTATION AND OUTCOME A. KEY FACTORS DURING PREPARATION 68. The Project was prepared under exceptional circumstances and relatively quickly (5 weeks) during an emergency response in a high- risk, dynamic, and volatile country context, focusing on short-timeframe and quick impacts (one year) to prevent famine. Considering the emergency, the Project received Board approval for six waivers.22 Given FGS’ non-accrual status (not eligible for IDA financing), the World Bank pursued direct contracting of FAO and ICRC (for the first time). While the World Bank did not directly finance the FGS through the Project, the Bank informed Somali authorities of preparation progress and strategically engaged on coordination efforts using trust funded activities23. 69. The Project design was based on ICRC and FAO’s ongoing programs, leveraging FAO and ICRC’s existing on-the- ground capacities and access to hard-to-reach areas, and as such were chosen as partners of choice for this engagement. The Project was designed to immediately scale-up life-saving support to achieve quick impacts benefiting highly vulnerable and impacted people, while gradually transitioning to early recovery and resilience building activities. Thus, the Project aimed to set-out a general approach to manage the transition from relief to recovery (operationalizing “the Humanitarian-Development Nexus” approach). Although embedded in a larger program, the Project management systems were set up to track World Bank-specific contributions (i.e., tracking project versus program results). 22 Waivers for (i) FAO/ICRC to receive funding out of the CRW; (ii) the commitment charge for the duration of the grants; (iii) Anti- Corruption Guidelines to FAO; (iv) Anti-Corruption Guidelines to any suppliers of ICRC contracted prior to the Financing Agreement; (v) to permit IDA to provide retroactive financing of 40 percent of the total IDA grant amount. 23 Including through the Drought Impact Needs Assessment and Recovery and Resilience Framework. Page 22 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 70. ICRC is one of the largest humanitarian organizations in the world with presence in over 80 countries, and consistently receiving funding from various bilateral donors and is supported by numerous international partners. ICRC has been operational in Somalia since 1984, and the principles of neutral, independent, impartial humanitarian aid were respected in this process. Given its policy of neutrality and long track record of delivery, ICRC has access to areas and communities where others do not, and thereby enabling timely support to the most vulnerable. ICRC’s overall programmatic drought-response included elements of Economic Security (food, non- food and livelihood), Water and Habitat (water infrastructure, treatment, hygiene promotion and engineering), and Health (curative and preventive aspects at all healthcare tiers, nutrition), allows it to provide a holistic and integrated package of support to the drought affected communities. This multi-disciplinary capacity to respond also enhanced timeliness due to reduced transaction, consultation and coordination time. 71. Similarly, FAO has been one of the key UN institutions behind the Somalia Drought Response and Famine Prevention Plan for 2017, which aimed to provide both lifesaving interventions and emergency livelihood support as well as support to medium-term drought recovery and resilience building. FAO's operational footprint extends across all regions of Somalia. It implements a wide range of humanitarian and resilience-building interventions benefitting Somalia's farmers, agro-pastoralists, pastoralists and fishers, in addition to collecting, analyzing and disseminating high-quality and up-to-date information on food security, nutrition and natural resources. FAO’s approach to building resilient livelihoods in Somalia sequences, layers and integrates interventions that: (i) protect lives and livelihoods against shocks and crises, (ii) increase sustainable, risk sensitive and nutrition-sensitive food production and consumption, (iii) create opportunities for income, employment and livelihood diversification, and; (iv) manage natural resources sustainably and equitably. The project design stressed the importance of interventions that build long-term resilience, therefore raising the profile of resilience as part of FAO’s drought response. Financing FAO to scale up its program helped address immediate needs of rural Somalis who are most vulnerable to the ongoing drought and famine risks, while building resilience to withstand future shocks. A strong partnership is already in place – the Financial Management Framework Agreement (FMFA) – between the World Bank and UN organizations which facilitated this relationship. 72. As such, the SEDRP established distinct components for FAO and ICRC, including separation of project management and other such sub-components. This was meant to clarify the scope of work of both entities, as well as smoothen the process and results monitoring, and ease the Bank’s subsequent implementation support and documentation role. 73. Preparation required the quick reconciliation of organizational differences between the World Bank and the partners, including the synching of risk management, procurement, and financial management systems and terminology. This required coordination and intensive work by the World Bank at both headquarters and field levels. For example, the World Bank conducted a meticulous expenditure review and procurement and safeguards post audits to determine eligibility for retroactive financing (ICRC financial systems do not allow for budget disaggregation down to the project level, which required the task team to undertake tedious and rigorous post audits for certifying retroactive financing). 74. The design of SEDRP was also to be flexible and responsive to the evolving emergency and security situation. This included the use of retroactive and advance financing to free up partner resources to respond to emerging needs at the programmatic level, including resilience-building activities. The Results Framework included a range of targets for some indicators and utilized fewer activities and broad activity descriptions providing greater flexibility. The Project also allowed for the justified reallocation of resources across sub-components as these were package under one expenditure category. Page 23 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 75. Finally, the Project design ensured no overlap or duplication of geographic targeting across ICRC and FAO. This included leveraging existing UN-ICRC coordination mechanisms, following that, in general, ICRC works in areas that are inaccessible to the UN (i.e., ICRC ensures continued complementarity of its actions in any given area upon the UN gaining access). B. KEY FACTORS DURING IMPLEMENTATION 76. In general, the Project implementation progress and performance remained consistent through the life of the Project, although FAO performance improved gradually but substantially over the project duration. The implementation progress was rated Satisfactory for FAO and Highly Satisfactory for ICRC after the first Implementation Support Mission in September 2017. In June 2018, the implementation progress rating remained consistently Satisfactory for FAO and Highly Satisfactory for ICRC. Upon conclusion of the Project in September 2018, implementation for both FAO and ICRC were both rated as Highly Satisfactory. Key factors during implementation are described below. 77. Organizational Capacity. The FAO and ICRC demonstrated strong organizational capacity, programming a large amount of financing in a short timeframe in line with strict World Bank timelines and emergency standards. The Project benefitted from building on FAO and ICRC’s ongoing drought response in all regions of Somalia, leveraging existing systems and on-the-ground capacity. This included existing risk management systems, such as ICRC’s Risk Monitoring Unit (RMU), and online procurement systems. 78. The Project benefited from FAO’s previous experience managing multi-donor funded projects, as well as surge capacity from its headquarters for safeguards, communication, and project implementation. 79. The World Bank engaged ICRC at both field and headquarter levels, while the headquarters was the main interlocutor between the Bank and ICRC Somalia Delegation during implementation to enable the ICRC field staff to focus on operational response. For example, data requests and mission scheduling were done through ICRC headquarters in Geneva. Occasionally, the focus at headquarters resulted in some inefficiencies and additional transaction costs required to resolve technical issues. 80. FAO and ICRC worked closely with the World Bank to quickly absorb project resources and improve their transactional efficiency. As a result, both FAO and ICRC calibrated process monitoring systems to identify processing delays and course-correct, which will benefit future programming. 81. Both ICRC and FAO benefited from Third Party Review to verify results, including both process and impact monitoring (the latter for FAO only). 82. External Challenges: The Project identified three main external factors affecting implementation progress, including insecurity/access, flooding, and burdensome regulation. a. Accessible areas were reduced due to insecurity, resulting in delays for cash programming and works rehabilitation where vendors were unable to travel and reach target areas. Flooding, including from Cyclone Sagar in May 2018, limited access to several target areas, including for animal vaccinations and the distribution of agricultural inputs. In response, FAO/ICRC engaged alternative implementation arrangements, Page 24 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) shifted target areas, or changed their assistance modalities (e.g., from cash to food), accordingly due to flexibilities provided under the project design. b. Cumbersome processes for revenue collection by national authorities and additional security expenses increased costs of money vendor operations for FAO, while international financial regulation for transferring money to Somalia, such as ceiling amounts, also affected vendor cash flow. Furthermore, there were delays in rolling out Project activities in Somaliland due to the Government of Somaliland’s requirement that FAO verify that service providers were registered in Somaliland (not just Somalia). 83. The World Bank and FAO/ICRC worked closely together to monitor these risks (using a robust risk management framework) and trouble-shoot these challenges, thereby offsetting any potential impacts posed by these towards the pace and quality of project implementation. IV. BANK PERFORMANCE, COMPLIANCE ISSUES, AND RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME A. QUALITY OF MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) M&E Design 84. The Project Results Framework was derivative of, and built upon some of the existing performance indicators being used under the ICRC and FAO programs. However, these were attuned to meet the specific needs of the bank’s Results Framework template and requirements, and extensively discussed and agreed within the Bank team and with the implementation partners. Given the emergency nature of the Project, these were kept as simple, quantitative and measurable as practically possible, while not compromising the qualitative aspects of results measurement. The Results Framework indicators, during the course of implementation, were proven to be adequate in measuring the substantive quantitative and qualitative dimensions of the PDO related to “provision of immediate support” and ensuring “resilient recovery”. This analysis was further deepened by progressive impact validation through third-party validation of outcomes, often beyond the scope of the original results framework, which contributed significantly to improving the robustness of both the “monitoring” and “evaluation” functions envisaged under the Project’s M&E regime. 85. During project preparation and as per the PAD, it was agreed that both ICRC and FAO would be independently responsible for their M&E program of the Project, using the Project’s results f ramework to issue quarterly updates on the overall implementation and results. The ICRC and FAO were responsible for setting up a Results Monitoring System that allowed to report on the Results Framework and any related outcomes and impact information for the project. This section describes their respective monitoring and evaluation frameworks. 86. Additionally, since the Project was designed using a flexible programmatic approach to adapt to the evolving nature of the crisis, this allowed for flexibility across the subcomponents (supported by the Bank’s Agile Agenda). The Results Framework reflected this by using target ranges for some of the indicators. Page 25 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ICRC Component 87. Throughout the duration of the project, the ICRC ensured the participation of drought-affected communities in the design of its response and established robust verification and monitoring systems to ensure that quality assistance goes to those that it is intended to reach. This included the consolidation of the Risk Monitoring Unit (RMU), which is unique to ICRC Somalia only, and specific approaches to ensuring the sourcing and procurement of quality goods for distribution in line with ethical processes. The RMU, which was based in Nairobi, undertook objective verification work through its own staff as well as using locally hired consultants. Much of the work was linked to EcoSec activities and focuses on procedures, communication in relation to entitlements, verification of post-distribution monitoring and the verification of the existence of beneficiaries. The RMU also included two call centers based in Nairobi and in Mogadishu, that were scaled up and down based on the level of need in order to respond to the concerns raised by beneficiaries. The call centers were staffed by individuals who were able to converse in different Somali dialects to ensure the inclusiveness of the service provided. 88. The RMU also constituted an important form of community engagement and facilitated the passing of clear messages as to who should be included on registration lists and who should not. After the registration and prior to the verification, the community was also engaged in the next phases of the projects including the cleaning up of the registration list, verification processes before the delivery of assistance, and dissemination of the toll-free number through which the ICRC can be reached. The RMU informed the EcoSec team of the verification schedule in order to allow the target beneficiaries to keep their mobiles switched on to facilitate access during the process. With accurate lists, each ICRC staff member was able to verify and close approximately 50 cases per day. 89. The approach adopted by the delegation enabled beneficiaries to provide feedback, complaints and/or raise questions during and after the beneficiary registration process, during and after the assistance delivery, including the post-distribution monitoring. Within the initial exchange with the target communities, the community members were provided with the mobile phone number of the involved FOs and the central mobile phone number that is in Nairobi office, which was indicated on the leaflet that was distributed at the community level and which included general information on the ICRC and its key activities and approach in the given context. 90. Although ICRC has a robust risk management structure with its Risk Monitoring Unit (RMU), during project implementation, it was noted that there was a need for further improving the monitoring of complaints and closing the feedback loop on grievance redressal. This would allow grievance information to come back full circle, in order to expedite redressal and inform strategic and operational decision-making. 91. A similar process was undertaken for the recovery grants which included additional criteria to cross-check, for example, the number of livestock held by each registered person. 92. Systematic post-distribution monitoring (PDM), which constitutes a standard part of ICRC procedures, was undertaken by ICRC and Somali Red Crescent Society (SRCS) field staff to ensure program quality and targeting compliance. This was also followed up by the RMU. Depending upon the type of assistance provided, PDM focused on selection and verification processes; HH economy; distribution processes; amounts and quality of assistance provided; use of assistance provided; short term outcomes; services delivered and levels of satisfaction; and accountability and feedback. Page 26 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) FAO Component 93. The processes of planning, monitoring and evaluating made up the project’s Result-Based M&E, which supported decision-making towards the achievement of the intended goals. Planning helped to focus on results that matter, while M&E facilitated learning from past successes and challenges encountered during implementation. 94. Targeting processes including adhering to the pre-determined selection criteria and to the numbers of beneficiaries engaged were verified by Dansom Research and Consultancy and FAO through random checks (phone calls and household visits whenever possible) on 30 percent of beneficiaries. Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with community elders and leaders were also used. Field observations and interviews with both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries confirmed that target beneficiaries met the predetermined selection criteria, and that the beneficiaries received support from the various project interventions. M&E Implementation ICRC Component 95. Data were collected across the Economic Security (EcoSec), Water/Sanitation, and Health sectors and captured in ICRC’s institutional Planning and Monitoring Tool (PMT) and program-specific databases. The ICRC’s M&E consisted of a continuous and systematic process of assessment throughout the duration of the project, which involved the collection, measurement, recording and analysis of information gathered (including data disaggregated by gender and by age) on all the activities in progress and the results achieved. All project activities were monitored using a variety of approaches, including pre-distribution verification, on-the-spot distribution and activity performance monitoring, and post-distribution/activity monitoring. The M&E of health and nutrition activities included the collection of data against standard indicators at all ICRC-supported primary healthcare centers and stabilization centers. 96. In order to improve the efficiency of the beneficiary registration and verification processes, EcoSec field officers and SRCS volunteer teams in 13 regions were trained on the use of tablets with data collection applications, which enabled the transfer of data to the EcoSec team in Nairobi and follow up by the field teams on a daily basis. This contributed further to improving the quality of the initially received registration lists, planning of the verification process with RMU and the corroboration process itself. 97. In order to ensure that assistance reached the most vulnerable segment of the Somali population, EcoSec took the following steps: a. Establishment of clear vulnerability and selection criteria (with a focus on female-headed HH); b. In coordination with SRCS staff, ICRC field staff undertook initial recipient selection; c. Cash transfer verification by the RMU (as detailed above); and d. For cash transfers, provision of cash through mobile phones. 98. The 100 percent verification process resulted in an initial 30 percent of individuals being removed from the registration list prior to undertaking a second verification exercise. It is important to highlight the detailed and intricate process involved - first of all in identifying and registering beneficiaries along strict vulnerability criteria and subsequently, in vetting these initial batches via pre-assistance monitoring. The fact that only 70 percent of Page 27 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) the initially registered beneficiaries are finally supported is a good example of the measures taken in order to include that the assistance (and donor funds) reaches those who need it the most. 99. For the EcoSec drought response, 100 percent post-registration verification was carried out for those receiving cash and this took place prior to the transfer being made. The process aimed to match the registered name and location to the registered phone number. In the case of a potentially serious anomaly being identified, the ICRC undertook further steps to ensure its assistance was going to the right place. Given the number of people registered and the decision to verify all of them, the process was time-consuming and relied upon teams of people in the two ICRC call centers. Similarly, in situations where the number of the verified beneficiaries was very low (70% or less), the ICRC carried out an extra verification round with the prior mobilization of the target communities through the already verified beneficiaries and the community representatives. FAO Component 100. M&E activities were conducted in the field by 12 M&E Field Monitors and by Third Party Independent Monitors. A Performance Tracking Officer was responsible for tracking project activities and outputs by coordinating with FAO implementing Sectors. Completed activities and achieved outputs were then compared with planned output and activity indicators. Upon verification of planned versus achieved outputs, the information was updated on the project’s results framework. 101. Quantitative data were collected through four main assessments; i) Vulnerability Impact Assessment, ii) Post Distribution Assessment; iii) Livestock Impact Assessment; and iv) Crop Yield Assessment. Qualitative data was collected through: i) Drought Situation Monitoring, ii) Focus Group Discussions (FGDs); iii) Key Informant Interviews (KIIs); and iv) Direct Field Observations. 102. Dansom Research and Consultancy implemented the Third-Party Technical Review (TPTR) for the project. The TPTR was contracted to i) verify activities; ii) track implementation; iii) measure the results achieved by the project; and iv) monitor social and environmental sustainability of interventions in line with the environmental and social management plan that FAO and the WB had agreed to. 103. During the implementation period, Dansom conducted various studies and submitted reports that provided measurement of key results indicators, which were updated in the project’s Results Framework. Verification missions to confirm delivery of services to intended beneficiaries were also conducted. The missions uncovered potential noncompliance issues which are under review by the FAO Office of the Inspector General (OIG) —further details are provided in the Risks and Mitigation Measures Framework of FAO Somalia. 104. Subsequently, during the ICR mission, the Bank team requested FAO to engage a national consultant to conduct a rapid assessment of process monitoring and output delivery. The key results of this exercise are reported in an earlier section of this report. M&E Utilization 105. As noted at the beginning of this section, the interventions’ implementation and results were released on a quarterly basis and were assessed against the targets established under the PAD’s results framework. Based on this monitoring, the ICRC and the FAO recalibrated their activities in order to ensure that results remained on track to attain the expected results framework, and to bring about strategic and operational course corrections Page 28 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) where necessary. Justification of Overall Rating of Quality of M&E 106. Based on the rigor, depth and quality of M&E systems under the Project, as described above, the team rates the Overall Outcome Rating of Quality of M&E as High. B. ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND FIDUCIARY COMPLIANCE 107. The Project’s Environmental and Social Safeguards implementation performance is rated Satisfactory. As the financing of ICRC activities was retroactive, an Environmental Audit was conducted to assure ICRC implementation was in concordance with World Bank safeguards policies. ICRC does not have safeguards policies analogous to the World Bank; it rather has a corpus of related policies, including Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) guidelines, including upstream vetting of supplies for good CSR practices, Code of Ethics for Purchasing, Sustainable Development Policy, Accountability to Affected Persons approach (upgraded to a framework in fall 2017), medical waste management procedures, and community-based protection measures. FAO prepared an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF), which complied with both FAO and World Bank safeguards policies. During implementation, FAO sector-specific ESMPs were fully implemented; reporting on ESMP compliance is extensive. FAO compliance, and reporting on such, with their technical specifications for seed procurement, vaccinations, range cubes, and fodder seed distribution, is good practice for future similar interventions. FAO’s quarterly safeguards reports were succinct, with many Annexes (e.g. 90 for Q3 2018) attaching physical documentation of compliance (e.g. satellite photos). During the course of the Project, and partly because of it, FAO and ICRC improved their monitoring of complaints as well as their closing of the feedback loop of grievance redress. The FAOs’ use of technology for GRM (hotlines) and for ESMP compliance, including stakeholder feedback (call centers) is also good practice, especially for a fragile country context. The hotlines received complaint calls, most related to delays in payment. The call center was used to independently contact beneficiaries and ensure compliance to project guidelines. 108. Financial Management Compliance. This operation was prepared within an extremely compressed timeline of five weeks due to the corporate urgency to deliver the Project to the Board on a speedy basis, allowing the Bank’s timely support to the drought affected people. The usual Bank fiduciary safeguards that applies to the normal IDA IPF instrument was waived, and the Bank FM team relied on the ICRC organizational systems, procedures and respective internal controls. The retroactive financing portion of the project required that all the expenditures that were applied for this type of financing were to be verified before a refund would be made to ICRC, hence compelling Bank staff to more deeply understand ICRC’s financial and cost accounting systems. The Bank resolved these issues by conducting a thorough review and understanding of the ICRC budgeting, cost allocation mechanisms, revenue/ expenditure recording and financial and cost accounting systems globally, regionally and specific field delegation offices including the Somalia country delegation filed office. During the financial management assessment, it was agreed that the project audit would be conducted for ICRC. FAO being part of the UN family, project audits were conducted in accordance with its own Financial Regulations and the Financial Management Framework Agreement signed between the World Bank and the United Nations. In addition to the ICRC’s institutional audit, specific Agreed Upon Procedures (AUP) for the expenses attributed to the project were undertaken to provide additional assurance on the application of the grant proceeds. Overall, there were no ineligible expenses in the project which were detected or brought to the attention of the Project. Page 29 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 109. ICRC has a robust system of expense tracking. Even though the FAO internal approval and reporting systems are slow in terms of responding to the Bank FM requirements, the Bank was able to work with the FAO’s current and existing framework and compliance was verified during the life of the project. 110. Procurement Compliance. Given the emergency operational context and the situation on the ground and based on a preliminary needs and gaps analysis by the Bank team, the Bank agreed for FAO and ICRC to use their own procurement procedures or “Alternative Procurement Arrangements (APA)” as allowed under Section III. F. of the Bank: Policy Procurement in IPF and Other Operational Procurement Matters (July 2016). Procurement assessments were conducted for both organizations which revealed that the procurement rules and regulations of both FAO and ICRC are generally consistent with the Bank’s Core Procurement Principles and Governance requirements set out in the Procurement Policy. Waivers of application of the anti-corruption guidelines for the IDA grant to FAO as well as a waiver to ICRC for the partial application of the anti-corruption guidelines were sought from the Board and granted. During project implementation, the Bank procurement team entirely relied on the FAO and ICRC procurement processes. APA was therefore applied in Somalia portfolio for the first time and this flexibility worked well and facilitated fast procurement. 111. To assist the large numbers of people in Somalia affected by the emergency with humanitarian assistance, the operation had to be fast-tracked. Thus, an upfront disbursement of US$20 million (100% of the component) to ICRC was allowed under retroactive financing. For this to work; works, goods, non-consulting services and consultant’s services that were eligible for Retroactive Payments were subjected to post-review by the WB on a sample basis and service providers under the Bank financed project were subject to Bank’s sanctions list. The post review was conducted by the Bank procurement team in both ICRC offices in Nairobi and Geneva. The procurement team experienced some challenges relating to the fact that some of the ICRC procurement supporting documents are filed at different locations within the ICRC offices (Nairobi and Geneva). It took time to locate these documents and match them to the specific procurements, but ultimately the review allowed for timely support to quick-impact interventions on the ground. C. BANK PERFORMANCE Quality at Entry 112. The Bank’s performance in ensuring quality at entry is rated as Highly Satisfactory based on the following assessment. 113. The World Bank successfully mobilized special IDA CRW resources, and the task team was successful in identifying and responding to the urgent drought recovery needs of the country, and in preparing the project within a 5- week period from the appraisal mission to Board. The Project was based on a rapid and remote needs assessment conducted simultaneously with project preparation using trust fund resources from GFDRR. The Project objectives were relevant and firmly supported Somalia’s urgent priorities for both immediate drought recovery and the transition towards resilience-building. Project design capitalized on the relevant knowledge, lessons learned on dealing with natural disasters such as droughts, especially with a repeat of the devastating 2011 Horn of Africa drought looming, and international experience through engaging with both FAO and ICRC. The World Bank team preparing the Project comprised a range of skills, knowledge and operational experiences across multiple Global Practices (GPs) and Cross-Cutting Solution Areas (CCSAs) and utilized both HQ and field-based staff for fiduciary Page 30 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) due diligence, which allowed a rapid preparation of around 5 weeks from the scoping mission to Board-approval. This displayed the urgency and commitment from the Bank to mobilize its resources within an extremely compressed timeline through emergency procedures. However, despite this drastically shortened preparation period, the Bank team ensured necessary due diligence across the design of project activities, implementation arrangements, M&E systems and in instituting the necessary fiduciary and safeguards compliance tools and systems for the Project. 114. The World Bank formulated the Project under a quick-disbursing multi-phased and multi-sectoral approach to ensure not only immediate recovery needs, but also medium to long-term recovery, resilience and development needs to ensure relevance of the PDOs and its outcome. The approach was a collaborative effort between the Bank, FAO and ICRC, reflecting the immediate assistance as well as long term needs for sustainable recovery and resilience-building across Somalia. Quality of Supervision 115. The Bank’s performance in ensuring quality of supervision is rated as Highly Satisfactory based on the following assessment. 116. The Project benefited from a steady and committed World Bank team, which successfully identified and resolved implementation challenges and risks along the way. The World Bank team worked closely with ICRC and FAO counterparts throughout the life of the Project and through the 3 Implementation Support Missions (ISMs) conducted. The team was able to provide extensive support and timely input to the clients and worked to resolve any issues or delays in implementation through intense remedial action. The team’s strategy of holding short but intensive missions, with respect to our clients’ busy schedules and more importantly, the urgent needs of people on the ground in an FCV context, as well as a focus on short-term achievements also paid off in meeting the project objectives. Agreeing on specific short-term action plans, setting specific goals and deadlines proved crucial in keeping project momentum. These ways of engaging with the clients proved fruitful as it was the first-time the Bank team had to work directly with ICRC and FAO, and vice-versa. 117. The financial management team, in its ICR contribution, found frequent and close interactions with the Bank’s technical task team, to be of great value-addition and rated the task team involved in the project as extensively experienced and versatile in handling such an emergency operation, and this helped the FM team to make quick FM decisions during the design and implementation of the project. Finally, the team noted strong interdependency between technical, operational and fiduciary design of the ICRC component of the project particularly in determination of ICRC retroactive expenditures eligibility framework. 118. Implementation Support and Technical Assistance. The World Bank provided intensive, regular, and effective implementation support throughout the life of the Project at both headquarters and field levels. The Project was led by a Task Team Leader (TTL), and later together with a co-TTL from the Country Management Unit (CMU) in Nairobi, with multi-sector supervision support across Global Practices (e.g., water, livestock). The core Project task team provided consistent support to the implementing partners across key technical areas, such as safeguards, procurement, and financial management. 119. The World Bank worked proactively with FAO and ICRC to identify and address issues that caused implementation Page 31 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) delays. For example, this approach helped the FAO in better systematizing its implementation monitoring systems and safeguards compliance, and more routine reporting against their work plan and tracking of results. This helped in the timely identification of implementation bottlenecks and expediting the pace and quality of implementation. The Bank team also worked closely with FAO and ICRC to maximize the utilization of the project design flexibilities, which helped achieve and at times, exceed the targeted project results. Prime examples of this included the reprogramming of funds for FAO through a three-month no-cost extension and ICRC’s use of US$1 million for prospective financing focused on resilience-building activities. 120. The World Bank directly engaged with the firm (Dansom) hired by FAO to conduct the third-party technical review of the project and verification of impacts, providing technical guidance and oversight support. For example, the Firm included an additional focus on verifying safeguards and process monitoring results as advised by the Bank task team. 121. A continuous dialogue and reconciliation of organizational differences between the World Bank and partners was required throughout Project implementation, particularly for ICRC. The ICRC’s fundamental principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence, critical to ensuring access to project beneficiaries, were at times incongruent with World Bank policies of access to information and stakeholder communication. For example, ICRC could not use the Third-Party Review to gauge Project impacts at the field level given sensitivities around providing third-party access to beneficiaries. Furthermore, ICRC uses a centralized Geneva-based system for key elements of implementation like procurement, financial management, and expenditure and results monitoring, requiring the Bank to adopt a dual engagement approach to coordinate and maintain linkages with both ICRC Geneva and its Somalia field office. This partnership required intensive institutional cross-learning and trouble- shooting to advance the Project. 122. The World Bank informally and periodically informed the Somali authorities of implementation progress, while FAO/ICRC coordinated operations bilaterally and through the UN cluster system, including the cash working group and food security cluster. However, the initially envisioned mechanism under the PAD of having the Bank’s Country Representative, ICRC Head of Delegation, FAO Country Representative and Somalia’s Minister of Humanitarian Affairs and Disaster Management regularly coordinate together and discuss the overall progress for the respective activities did not always work. This is partly understandable given ICRC’s rules of engagement with other partners and the government in highly-sensitive operating environments, which require enacting its principles of strict independence and neutrality. However, the Bank team made an effort to meet with each institution individually throughout the life-cycle of the Project to ensure alignment across the FAO and ICRC project activities and with the overall drought response and recovery program in the Somalia. Justification of Overall Rating of Bank Performance 123. Given the Highly Satisfactory rating of the Bank’s performance in ensuring both quality at entry and supervision, the overall rating for the Bank’s performance is considered Highly Satisfactory. D. RISK TO DEVELOPMENT OUTCOME 124. The project’s dual focus on quick early recovery activities and transitional resilience-building activities seeks to Page 32 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) safeguard and sustain the developmental gains made under the Project. This included disaster risk management measures, by supporting and building the capacity of FAO-managed institutional mechanisms such as the FSNAU and SWALIM. While significant momentum and sustainability has been achieved, further investment of human and capital resources are required to sustain progress for some of these activities. For example, building the capacity of water catchment management committees, establishing regulatory frameworks for watershed and waste management, and the provision of additional inputs to maintain water infrastructure. 125. There are also external risks to the developmental outcomes achieved under the Project, particularly given the country’s high exposure to repeated natural climate change-related shocks and political instability. However, the Somali Government is committed to resilience-building and reducing these risks over time, as enshrined in the Somalia National Development Plan (FY2017-2019) and the Bank’s Country Partnership Framework for Somalia (FY2019-2022). Furthermore, leveraging the momentum and learning from the project, both ICRC and FAO are dedicated to pursuing subsequent programming to build on project investments, especially with regards to resilience-building. 126. During the preparation of the Project, it was also envisaged that additional trust fund resources would be raised, to make use of the World Bank’s convening power to provide technical assistance at a programm atic level to various actors on developing and operationalizing a medium term and multi-sectoral drought recovery and resilience building framework. Building on the strategic engagement opportunities provided by the Project, the task team engaged the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) and Federal Member States (FMS) for conducting a systematic and comprehensive Drought Impact Needs Assessment (DINA) – a joint partnership between the Government, World Bank, European Union (EU) and United Nations. This was successfully completed over a 3- month period and officially launched in January 2018 and included the first ever comprehensive damages, losses and needs assessment of the Somalia drought. Translating the DINA findings into action, the Government of Somalia has now developed a Resilience and Recovery Framework (RRF), with support from the Bank task team and other partners. Over a 3–5-year timeframe, the RRF will support Somalia’s progress from early drought recovery through to longer term resilience and disaster preparedness. It establishes a collective vision and strategy for enabling recovery and resilience building and breaking out of the cycle of vulnerability and humanitarian crises. Using evidence-based analysis and a bottom-up consensus building methodology, it identifies recovery and resilience building priorities and proposes a financing approach and institutional arrangements by which these can be acted on by the Government of Somalia and its international partners. In doing so, the RRF supports national efforts to strengthen resilience to recurrent disasters, respond to climate change and increase disaster management and crisis response capacity. V. LESSONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 127. The Project design and implementation yielded lessons that could inform future Bank operations, particularly in the realm of “Fragility Conflict and Violence” (FCV) and emergency contexts. The Project was conceived during an emergency response in a high risk, volatile, and dynamic FCV context exacerbated by drought and a near famine. This section highlights relevant lessons to inform future operations in complex emergencies, and provides corresponding recommendations (in italics), as categorized below: Bank Engagement, and Design and Implementation of Operations in FCV/Complex Emergencies Page 33 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 128. Embracing a strategic shift by the Bank to engage early in a crisis and advance the humanitarian-development nexus. The Project was designed to immediately scale-up life-saving support to achieve quick impacts benefiting highly vulnerable and impacted people, while gradually transitioning to early recovery and resilience building activities. Consider further institutionalizing and standardizing relief to recovery approaches in complex emergencies. 129. Providing timely and flexible financing through the use of a programmatic and flexible funding approach. The Project design was based on existing ICRC and FAO programs. Although embedded in a larger program, the Project management systems were set up to track Bank-specific contributions (i.e. tracking program versus project results). This included the use of retroactive and advance financing to free up partner resources to respond to emerging needs at the programmatic level. The Results Framework included a range of targets for some indicators, while utilizing fewer activities and broad activity descriptions for greater flexibility. The Project also allowed for the justified reallocation of resources across sub-components as these were package under one expenditure category. The Bank may consider programmatic and flexible funding approaches for similar operations, allowing for course-corrections as the complex emergency evolves. However, it is important not dilute the intended development outcomes. 130. Using retroactive financing as a strategic tool, but on a selective basis. The Project’s use of retroactive and advance financing freed up partner resources to respond to the ongoing crises24, including early and medium-term recovery interventions, with an underlying element of resilience-building.25 Maximizing the use of retroactive financing can help meet relief to development needs at scale. The retroactive approach may be most appropriate at the height of a crisis; however, it should be used selectively and, on a case-by-case basis to weigh the benefits and drawbacks. Other viable alternatives in working with organizations such as ICRC could include prospective funding opportunities, although that may require engaging in early joint programming or dialogue to ensure Bank priorities are considered in the design of such partner programs. 131. Leveraging strategic opportunities provided by emergency projects for widening and deepening of impact. The Project team, cognizant of its limitations in providing direct support to government, utilized the engagement to help affect a gradual transition from humanitarian action towards sustainable recovery and resilience building in the country. This is being achieved through the Somalia Drought Impact and Needs Assessment (DINA) and Recovery and Resilience Framework (RRF), which are poised to provide a multi-partner, multi-sector and multi- phased program for consolidating the early and medium-term recovery gains under the Project. The team recommends that tools such as the DINA/RRF are developed through such project engagements to build capacities of the government and affected communities for increased sustained disaster recovery and preparedness, improved community coping mechanisms, and disaster risk reduction and resilience building. 132. World Bank Value Added. The project brought together a new multi-sector programmatic intervention to the ongoing multi-partner drought response in Somalia that strategically addressed existing gaps and needs in the immediate and early recovery domains, while maximizing the Bank’s comparative advantage and value addition by making resilience-building a key underpinning of the interventions financed under the operation. The WB’s engagement has provided specific value addition to the FAO and ICRC programs by incorporating selected 24 During the time of Project preparation, ICRC had a considerable unmet funding gap in its Somalia drought response of US$21 million. The Project was able to provide an immediate flow of funds to ICRC using retroactive financing in order to sustain existing momentum and scale-up its ongoing activities without causing funding-related disruptions. 25 Such as livestock treatment and healthcare training, cash grants to enhance community resilience, and training on improved agricultural practices, etc. Page 34 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) elements of their resilience strategy into the design of their components This allowed both entities to sustain the pace of their engagement and strategically scale up their programs to cover critical geographic and thematic gaps. Third Party Implementation and Direct Engagement with Partners in Complex Emergencies 133. Enhancing the ability of the Bank for Third Party implementation and direct engagement with partners. In the context of Somalia’s IDA non-accrual status, the Project was designed to leverage path-breaking partnerships with the ICRC and FAO, marking the first time the WB provided direct IDA-funding. While the Bank has Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) in place with such partners for “normal” operating conditions, these are not always applicable to emergency/FCV settings. This demonstrates the ability of the Bank to work directly, quickly, effectively, and in compliance with Bank standards through such partners, using the various flexibilities deployed under the Project, and despite organizational differences. This requires intensive interaction, tolerance for differing systems, and gradual and incremental institutional cross-learning across Bank task teams and implementation partners. 134. ICRC proved a partner of choice to address the most urgent needs of the affected people in some of the least accessible areas – its longstanding principles of neutrality allowing it to operate in areas others could not. The ICRC’s and FAO’s multi-disciplinary programmatic approach to the drought response, helped the Project in providing multi-sector and multi-phased support to the most drought affected people. Further, the elements of resilience-building embedded in ICRC’s and FAO’s immediate response and early recovery activities allowed the Project to contribute towards both recovery and resilience building objectives. 135. Supporting greater programming flexibility by Bank and ICRC. ICRC currently seeks donor funding against a set annual program at the country level. There is a need for greater flexibility to accommodate more customized design solutions for Bank operations, since the Bank cannot always fund pre-programmed interventions. This could be achieved by identifying areas of joint interest overlapping across their respective programs and engagements in a country to be able to agree on specific types of interventions that the Bank can also potentially incorporate into its own project modalities. Given the ICRC’s specific mode of operations and the importance it places on international neutrality, there are only certain spaces for joint work between the two institutions. However, careful joint planning and programming can lead to positive outcomes within this space, especially in insecure areas where the Bank is not able to operate and/or in fast-moving humanitarian crises. 136. Disaggregating budgetary and expenditure tracking. Currently, ICRC financial systems only allow budget and expenditure disaggregation at the broader (general objective) level. Hence, attribution of which financing agency is funding specific activities is difficult. Such expenditure delineation and disaggregation by the ICRC systems at the specific objective level will allow institutions like the Bank to more readily identify and fund specific areas of focus within a larger ICRC program in a country. 137. Reconciling organizational differences for future engagement. Despite the successes achieved under this Project for inter-agency collaboration, more dialogue and negotiation are required to universally reconcile organizational differences between the Bank and agencies such as FAO and ICRC and agree to norms-of-practice that percolate down to the operational level (in the areas of WB Results Framework-based M&E, process monitoring, safeguards and project-level fiduciary systems and reporting requirements, etc.). 138. Enhancing operational coordination and collaboration across partners. While the FAO/ICRC coordinate somewhat through the UN cluster system and local partnerships, further work is needed to advance closer Page 35 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) coordination and collaboration, including more routine communication and joint planning. Also, there is a need for setting up viable mechanisms for fostering greater and closer coordination across the Bank, Government, and partners in such situations, such as bearing in mind the limitations of the ICRC given its neutral, impartial, and independent mandate. 139. Exploring specific opportunities for scaling-up the Bank-ICRC-FAO partnership in Somalia. Most activities under the ICRC and FAO programs embed elements of resilience-building, demonstrating the possibility to gradually strengthen the focus from early recovery towards resilience-focused activities. Possible opportunities for ICRC and FAO to engage in the Somalia RRF may be explored; for example, in scaling up their contributions to the national drought recovery and resilience building agenda. Recommendations for Operational Adjustments within the Bank to more Effectively Engage in Complex Emergencies 140. In summary, the team also recommends that the Bank undertake a ‘process review’ for making its engagement in complex emergencies more scalable, efficient and effective. This could include a range of process adjustments and improvements, as follows: 141. Enabling a flexible operating environment for rapid project preparation. The Project was prepared under exceptional circumstances and relatively quickly during an emergency response in a high-risk, dynamic, fragile, and volatile country context. Considering the emergency, the Project received Board approval for six waivers, allowing more flexibility in a constrained environment.26 However, obtaining the waivers was transaction- intensive and administratively burdensome. The table below reflects the rapid project preparation processes used for the Project, entailing Board approval within 5 weeks of the start of the identification mission. This shows that such rapid processing is possible under the Bank system to engage and effectively deliver in active complex emergencies but requires swift decision-making and intensive task-driven collaboration across various Bank units to work as one team to ensure urgent delivery in such situations. Moving forward, the Bank should consider developing standard guidance to task teams to fast-track and process waivers in FCV and emergency contexts. Table 5: SEDRP Expedited Processing Timeline SEDRP’s Expedited Processing Timeline – 5 weeks from Project Preparation to Board (Year: 2017) CD Approval and AIS Sign-Off 7 April Task Team Identification Mission and PAD Preparation 20 April-6 May Decision Package for PM Concurrence 8 May Decision Review 11 May Completion of Appraisal and Go Ahead for Negotiations 14 May Negotiations with ICRC and FAO 16 May Clearance of Board Approval Package by RVP 22 May Submission of Board Package to SECPO 23 May Board Approval 30 May Effectiveness 2 June First Disbursement 22 June 26 Waivers for (i) FAO/ICRC to receive funding out of the CRW; (ii) the commitment charge for the duration of the grants; (iii) Anti- Corruption Guidelines to FAO; (iv) Anti-Corruption Guidelines to any suppliers of ICRC contracted prior to the Financing Agreement; (v) to permit IDA to provide retroactive financing of 40 percent of the total IDA grant amount. Page 36 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 142. Further aligning the Bank system for direct engagement with partners. While the Bank has over the years, come a long way in creating opportunities for directly contracting UN and civil society agencies in emergency situations, more may be needed. For instance, SEDRP required Board exceptions for directly contracting FAO and ICRC, waiving off commitment charges and the use of its anti-corruption guidelines. And unlike the UN system, there are currently no broader partnership agreements in place to ease collaboration between the ICRC and the World Bank. Hence the Bank may consider a further realignment of its preparation and implementation procedures for facilitating direct third-party implementation arrangements. 143. Using Third-Party Monitoring tools for joint oversight of Bank-partner programs. Project experience suggests that there are pros and cons of engaging third party monitoring agents for assessing the performance of such partner-implemented programs. While the use of third-party agents can prove very useful in independent validation of results, there are limitations such as in the case of ICRC where field verification is often not possible due to security constraints. Also, hiring their party agents through partners may compromise of the principle of neutrality and complete independence required of such agents. The Bank may consider developing alternative mechanisms for engaging third party agents for such projects, using the Bank’s own resources, or through multi - partner-financed arrangements, as has been done in some countries. 144. Enhancing the usefulness of existing inter-agency Framework Agreements between the Bank and UN Agencies. While the existence of such framework agreements with UN agencies makes it much easier and faster to engage them in emergency situations, many aspects must be re-negotiated during project processing, sometimes due to differing interpretations of how to apply framework modalities to specific ground conditions and project circumstances. The team recommends case studies of selected projects to systematically identify, and find solutions to address, such issues, which would further enhance the operational efficacy and effectiveness of engaging with UN agencies, both during the design and implementation stages of projects. . Page 37 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 1. RESULTS FRAMEWORK AND KEY OUTPUTS A. RESULTS INDICATORS A.1 PDO Indicators Objective/Outcome: Increased number of beneficiaries with improved food access Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of people with Text 0 474,600-632,800 767,118 improved food access 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 of which number of females Text 0 120,000-155,000 321,311 with improved food access 30-May-2017 Comments (achievements against targets): Objective/Outcome: Increased number of beneficiaries with improved access to safe water Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of people benefiting Number 0.00 656000.00 777529.00 Page 38 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) from improved access to safe 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 water Comments (achievements against targets): Objective/Outcome: • Increased number of beneficiaries with improved access to livelihood opportunities Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of households with Text 0 13,725-18,300 56,366 increased access to livelihood opportunities 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Objective/Outcome: • Increased number of beneficiaries benefiting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of households Text 0 170,000-212,500 222,738 benefiting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 support Comments (achievements against targets): Page 39 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) A.2 Intermediate Results Indicators Component: Component 1: Programmatic Support to ICRC for Immediate Drought Response Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of households Number 0.00 35000.00 29172.00 received food rations. 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of household Number 0.00 53000.00 42315.00 provided with cash grant 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of Essential Number 0.00 11000.00 9544.00 Household Item (EHI) kits distributed 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Page 40 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of Number 0.00 22000.00 31159.00 pregnant/lactating women, and children under age five 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 reached by basic nutrition service Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of people receiving Number 0.00 540000.00 201465.00 drought-related health services. 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Consultation rate: For the ICRC's PHC program in Somalia in 2017 as a whole, the average consultation rate was 0.63%, against the target of 1%. The rate for ANC1 (Antenatal Care) was higher, at 0.99%. The PAD targets set for this sector were based on the estimated catchment area of the primary healthcare centers supported by the ICRC. It was not possible to determine exactly how many people would take advantage of the services, but overall, it could be considered positive that the numbers of people who visited were lower than the target. This may have been due to interventions in the other sectors of EcoSec and WatHab, which reduced health and nutrition needs. In food crisis situations, if all the preventive measures such as general food distribution Page 41 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) and supplementary programs are strengthened the need for clinical care reduces. At the same time it cannot be excluded that some people might not have accessed the centers due to security constraints. Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of water Number 0.00 35.00 33.00 infrastructures rehabilitated 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Component: Component 2: Programmatic Support to FAO for Immediate Drought Response and Recovery Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of infrastructures Text 0 80-110 87.00 rehabilitated through the cash for work program. 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of people Text 0 6,000-8,500 13,102 Page 42 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) participating cash for work 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 program Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Percentage of households Percentage 0.00 70.00 75.00 increased income based on their livelihood activities. 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of livestock being Text 0 6,375,000-8,500,000 8,909,498 vaccinated and/or treated 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Number of household Text 0 10,000-12,500 24,000 benefiting from nutrition support to livestock 01-Dec-2016 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 Page 43 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Comments (achievements against targets): Formally Revised Actual Achieved at Indicator Name Unit of Measure Baseline Original Target Target Completion Beneficiaries that report that Percentage 0.00 75.00 89.00 there Communities were consulted and their project- 01-Jun-2017 30-May-2017 28-Sep-2018 related grievances were addressed Comments (achievements against targets): Page 44 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) B. KEY OUTPUTS BY COMPONENT Objective/Outcome 1: Address the immediate needs of the drought affected people within the territory of the Federal Republic of Somalia 1. Number of people with improved food access Outcome Indicators 1.1. Of which number of females with improved food access 2. Number of individuals benefiting from improved access to water 1. Number of households received food rations 2. Number of households provided with cash grants 3. Number of Essential Household Item (EHI) kits distributed Intermediate Results Indicators 4. Number of pregnant/lactating women and children under five reached by basic nutrition services 5. Number of people receiving drought-related health services 6. Number of water infrastructures 1. 761,106 people with improved food access 1.1. Of which 321,311 are women with improved food access 2. 777,529 people benefitting from improved access to water Key Outputs by Component 3. 29,172 households received food rations (linked to the achievement of the 4. 42,315 households provided with cash grants Objective/Outcome 1) 5. 9,544 households receiving EHI kits 6. 31,159 pregnant/lactating women and children under five receiving basic nutrition services 7. 201,465 people receiving drought-related health services 8. 33 water infrastructure rehabilitated (of which only 2 boreholes were financed under SEDRP) Objective/Outcome 2: Support resilient recovery through the provision of livelihood opportunities and the restoration of agricultural and pastoral production 1. Number of households with increased access to livelihood opportunities Outcome Indicators 2. Number of households benefiting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment support 1. Number of infrastructures rehabilitated through the cash for work program Intermediate Results Indicators 2. Number of people participating in cash for work program Page 45 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 3. Percentage of households increased income based on their livelihood activities 4. Number of livestock being vaccinated and/or treated 5. Number of households benefiting from nutrition support to livestock 6. Beneficiaries that report that their communities were consulted and their project-related grievances were addressed 1. 56,366 households with increased access to livelihood opportunities 2. 222,738 households benefitting from livestock vaccination and/or treatment support 3. 87 infrastructures rehabilitated through the cash for work program Key Outputs by Component 4. 13,350 people participating in cash for work program (linked to the achievement of the 5. 75% of households with increased income based on their livelihood activities Objective/Outcome 2) 6. 8,909,498 livestock vaccinated and/or treated 7. 24,000 households benefiting from nutrition support to livestock 8. 89% of beneficiaries reported that their communities were consulted and their project- related grievances were addressed Page 46 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 2. BANK LENDING AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT/SUPERVISION A. TASK TEAM MEMBERS Name Role Preparation Supervision/ICR Ayaz Parvez, Robert Curle Jesse Reid Task Team Leader(s) Francis Akolu Muthuiya, Anjani Kumar, Winter M. Procurement Specialist(s) Chinamale Leonard Mutuku Matheka Financial Management Specialist Benjamin Kithome Kilaka Team Member Helidah Refiloe Atieno Ogude Team Member Atishay Abbhi Team Member Salome Awuor Aganda Team Member Axel Rifon Perez Team Member Shahrzad Mobasher Fard Team Member Matthias Mayr Team Member Utz Johann Pape Team Member Sajid Anwar Team Member Esayas Nigatu Gebremeskel Team Member Puteri Natalie Watson Team Member Noel Chisaka Team Member Zishan Faiza Karim Team Member Timothy John Charles Kelly Team Member Verena Phipps-Ebeler Social Specialist Chalida Chararnsuk Team Member Dominick Revell de Waal Team Member George Ferreira Da Silva Team Member Frank Anthony Fariello Team Member Page 47 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) Nidhi Sachdeva Team Member Stephen Paul D'Alessandro Team Member Bernard Harborne Team Member Jean Okolla Owino Team Member M. Yaa Pokua Afriyie Oppong Social Specialist Edith Ruguru Mwenda Counsel Vikram Raghavan Team Member Francis Ghesquiere Program Manager Sylvester Kofi Awanyo Team Member Nathalie S. Munzberg Safeguards Advisor/ESSA Nadim Saghir Team Member Sanjay N. Vani Team Member Tracy Hart Environmental Specialist B. STAFF TIME AND COST Staff Time and Cost Stage of Project Cycle No. of staff weeks US$ (including travel and consultant costs) Preparation FY17 44.214 403,049.65 Total 44.21 403,049.65 Supervision/ICR FY17 0 3,600.00 FY18 62.124 1,348,522.35 FY19 10.293 190,846.17 Total 72.42 1,542,968.52 Page 48 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 3. PROJECT COST BY COMPONENT Amount at Approval Actual at Project Percentage of Approval SEDRP Components (US$M) Closing (US$M) (%) Component 1: Programmatic Support to 20.00 20.45 102 ICRC for Immediate Drought Response Component 2: Programmatic Support to FAO for Immediate Drought Response 30.00 30.51 102 and Recovery Total 50.00 50.96 102 Original Cost as per PAD Revised Cost as per ICRC Component (US$M) Implementation (US$M) Subcomponent 1.1: Meeting Urgent Food Security Needs 13.90 16.03 Subcomponent 1.2: Improving Access to Water, Sanitation 3.60 1.24 and Hygiene Subcomponent 1.3: Improving Access to Healthcare and 2.50 4.38 Nutrition Total 20.00 21.65 Original Cost as per PAD Revised Cost as per FAO Component (US$M) Implementation (US$M) Subcomponent 2.1: Cash-for-Work for Immediate Food 6.63 5.77 Needs and Water Infrastructure Rehabilitation Subcomponent 2.2: Emergency Cash and Agricultural 9.95 11.77 Livelihood Support Subcomponent 2.3: Restoration of Pastoral Livelihoods 8.30 7.22 Subcomponent 2.4: Strengthening Disaster Preparedness, 1.60 2.42 Monitoring and Early Warning Systems Subcomponent 2.5: Project Management 3.46 3.31 Total 30.00 30.50 Page 49 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 4. EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS 1. The economic analysis conducted as part of the project preparation process suggests that the proposed interventions under sub-components 1.1, 2.1 and 2.3 are economically feasible. The interventions featured under sub-components 1.1, 2.1 and 2.3 were selected based on the longer stream of benefits which are expected to accrue. The interventions under these three sub-components have led to positive economic rates of return, largely in excess of the discount rate of 6 percent assumed for these interventions, by: (i) saving human lives; (ii) reducing expenditures on drugs and medical care; (iii) rehabilitating the productive assets of agro-pastoralists; and (iv) generating additional agro-pastoral production through livelihood support/rehabilitation. 2. The following assumptions have been made towards the economic analysis of sub-components 1.1, 2.1 and 2.3: i. Valuation of costs and benefits: based on market and shadow prices; ii. Appraisal period: a 15-year appraisal period is selected for projects due to the effect of the interventions on saved lives; and iii. Discount rate: a 6 percent discount rate is applied. Sub-component 1.1: Meeting Urgent Food Security Needs (US$13.9 million) 3. This sub-component, which was implemented by the ICRC, financed the distribution of food, household items, and unconditional cash to drought-affected populations, especially in hard-to-reach areas. Through this ICRC intervention, 684,334 beneficiaries were provided with one of three core emergency activities, i.e., (i) the distribution of in-kind food; (ii) distribution of unconditional cash; and (iii) the distribution of essential household items (EHIs). The in-kind food packages, which included 50 kg of rice, 25 kg of beans, 12.5 kg of corn soya blend, and 10 liters of oil per household, supported six-member families for approximately two months. Along with its first food distribution, each household received one EHI kit that included jerry cans, plastic basins, shawls, tarpaulins, kitchen sets, fuel-efficient stoves, mosquito nets, and hygiene kits. While in some instances, food distributions targeted some of the most affected resident communities in rural areas, EHI kits were distributed exclusively to the newly displaced families due to the drought. Unconditional cash transfers in the amount of US$100 on average were given where markets could absorb the cash and merchandise was available. The average amount of benefit across the in-kind and cash benefits was estimated at US$20 per beneficiary. The net present value of this intervention was estimated at US$1.6 million and the internal rate of return was estimated at 13%. Sub-component 2.1 – Cash-for-Work for Immediate Food Needs and Water Infrastructure Rehabilitation (US$3.2 million) 4. To prevent famine by shoring up food access, this intervention supported the cash-for-work program to rehabilitate water infrastructure assets, along with the distribution of unconditional cash transfers. The cash- for-work component assisted some 10,358 Somali households with US$2,774,489 (i.e., an assistance of US$265 per household on average), while the unconditional cash transfer assisted 2,774 households with US$412,028 (i.e., an assistance of US$138 per household on average). The cash-for-work component allowed for: (i) the rehabilitation of 76 water catchments which increased the water storage capacity by 618,900 m3, providing water provision for 137,400 animals over a three month period; (ii) the development of eight irrigation canals of 41 km Page 50 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) in length to irrigate 4,872 hectares of farmland for 1,660 farmers; and (iii) the construction of three contour soil bunds, helping to control soil erosion in the area. The net present value of this intervention was estimated at US$12 million and the internal rate of return was estimated at 36%. Sub-component 2.3 – Restoration of Pastoral Livelihoods (US$7.6 million) 5. This sub-component significantly enhanced the productive capacity of Somali farmers, provided community animal health workers training, vaccinated animals against Contagious Caprine Pleural Pneumonia (CCPP) and provided emergency supportive treatment to common infectious conditions, and provided vector control intervention in the riverine areas of South and Central Somalia during and after heavy rains were experienced. This sub-component supported: (i) the production and the processing of fodder through the procurement of 115 processing machines which were distributed to 3,038 households; (ii) the distribution of fodder seeds with a total of 27.5 metric tonnes of assorted fodder seed being distributed to 3,403 households in the districts of Dollow, Beletxaawa and Luuq in the Gedo, Middle Shabelle and Banadir regions; (iii) the training of community animal health workers that provide basic animal health services to an estimated 1,853 animal-rearing households in the districts of Borama and Lughaye in the Awdal region in Somaliland; (iv) vaccination against CCPP for 8.9 million animals and emergency supportive treatment to common infectious conditions such as endo- and ecto parasite, bacterial infections and protozoa infections in the Banadir region; and (v) the vector control intervention in the riverine areas of South and Central Somalia during and after heavy rains were experienced to control the spread of Rift Valley Fever with a total of 1.7 million animals receiving pour-on medication for vectors and being treated against internal and external parasites. The net present value of this intervention was estimated to be largely positive and the internal rate of return was estimated to be much in excess of the discount rate of 6% assumed in the cost-benefit analysis. 6. The sensitivity analysis performed indicates that the economic rate of return for interventions under Component 2 remain significant even if potential downside adjustments to the economic assumptions made were to materialize. 7. The interventions identified under the Project addressed the urgent food and nutrition requirements of the most vulnerable segments of the population and helped restore or sustain agro-pastoral production, and bear positive externalities on the overall population through numerous direct and indirect benefits being engendered. The direct benefits of this Project include saved human lives, decreased livestock mortality, increased and sustained milk production, and sustained agricultural production of maize, sorghum and cereal. The indirect benefits of this Project are decreasing the incidence of malnutrition and starvation across all segments of the population and, most notably, among youth, female and elderly population, providing more affordable access to potable water, improving the technical capacity of agro-pastoral production, easing tensions between host and IDP communities, and improving monitoring of 3,700 strategic water sources in the country. Page 51 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 5. BORROWER, CO-FINANCIER AND OTHER PARTNER/STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 1. The draft ICR was shared with both ICRC and FAO for their review and for any clarifications they required from the Bank. The comments by FAO and ICRC are summarized as follows: FAO Comments 2. FAO expressed satisfaction with the Project’s Highly Satisfactory rating and took the opportunity to fully express their appreciation to the support provided by the Bank in making SEDRP a success. They are also in full agreement with the recommendation for possible future opportunities for FAO to engage with the Bank including through the Somalia Recovery and Resilience Framework (RRF) as well as other thematic areas of resilience and development. 3. Furthermore, FAO requested several changes be incorporated, and the Bank has reflected those changes in the ICR. These included (1) replacing the IPC map (Figure 1) for April-June 2017 to better capture the severity of the drought and risk of famine, (2) correcting the dates and financial values reported in paragraph 17, and (3) updating the total beneficiaries and USD value of assistance because of FAO’s final project reconciliation and financial closures (i.e., updating Annex 1 and Table 3). 4. The revision to the economic analysis included minimal changes to (a) increase the number of individuals with increased food access (by 6,021 Somalis) (b) increase the number of households with increased access to livelihood opportunities (by 1,002 households), and (c) decrease the number of individuals participating in the cash for work program (by 248 Somalis). The updated numbers slightly changed the value of assistance reported in Section C: Efficiency, requiring updating of Table 4 (unitary cost comparison). 5. In addition, FAO requested that the Bank provide further clarification regarding the “Reconciling Organization Differences for Future Engagement” paragraph in the “Lessons and Recommendations” section. ICRC Comments 6. ICRC have also provided positive feedback to the ICR and have noted the following points. The World Bank’s support to the ICRC in 2017 was innovative and life-saving, helping the ICRC reach significantly more beneficiaries across its multisectoral programs of Economic Security (EcoSec), Health, and Water and Habitat (WatHab) during a complex emergency. The ICRC was pleased to enter into this first large-scale operational partnership with the World Bank, which leveraged the operational capacity of the ICRC working in conflict environments with its neutral, impartial, and independent (NIIHA) approach and the development knowledge of the Bank. It is an important example of putting the humanitarian-development nexus into action for the benefit of people affected. 7. The ICRC met the project objectives under extremely difficult and volatile conditions. Employing its expertise in emergency-response programing and delivery, standardized monitoring and evaluation methodology, complemented and strengthened by its Risk Management Unit in Nairobi, the ICRC met all requirements of the partnership engagement. These interventions, executed by the ICRC and supported by the WB, contributed significantly in the international humanitarian community’s collective effort to avert, within a limited time frame, the unacceptable mortality rates witnessed during Somalia’s preceding large-scale drought in 2011. Page 52 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) 8. The project, which came together under particularly unique if not exceptional circumstances, highlighted a number of key takeaways and lessons learned, notably at a broader level. These include the pertinence of seeking partnerships building on complementarity, the importance of engineering flexibility in responses to needs in fluid crisis environments, the salience of finding compromises in the differing approaches to information sharing/confidentiality and safeguards in sensitive conflict environments. These include safeguarding the ICRC’s NIIHA to ensure it retains access to those left furthest behind, as well as the centrality of trust and risk-sharing in partnerships. 9. As the World Bank is being called on to respond more effectively and quickly in crisis situations, the critical and complementary roles that our respective organizations play in emergency settings with weak-capacity environments call for a strengthening the partnership effort to make the international response in such contexts more effective and sustainable. Differences between the legal and fiduciary frameworks of the Bank and the ICRC still render collaboration difficult to achieve. A drive that focuses on principles and objectives, rather than seeking convergence on policies and procedures would acknowledge and respect differences in governance structures, founding documents, and internal requirements that are the strength of the partnership, while still seeking to achieve shared outcomes. Work at the institutional level to tackle some of these issues is ongoing and constructive, aiming at ensuring interoperability allowing to fully leverage respective comparative advantages in joint responses to crises. Page 53 of 54 The World Bank Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (P163830) ANNEX 6. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS (IF ANY) The following documents have been uploaded to WBDocs and can be shared upon request:27 1. FAO. 2018. OSRO/SOM/713/WBK. Implementation Completion & Results (ICR) Report. Project Implementation Period: 30 May 2017 to 30 Sep 2018. 2. FAO. 2018. Dansom Third-Party Technical Review Reports. 3. FAO. 2018. Training Report on Disaster Risk Reduction and Early Warning of Bari Region, 1-15 January 2018. 4. FAO. 2019. Process Monitoring and Efficiency Financial Report. SEDRP. 5. World Bank. 2017. Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project. Project Appraisal Document. Report No: PAD2425. 6. World Bank. 2018. Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project. Restructuring Paper. Report No: RES31949. 7. World Bank. Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project. ICRC Component 1 and FAO Component 2 Aide Memoires from 2017-2018. 8. World Bank. Implementation Status & Results Reports (ISRs). Sequence Number 1 and 2. 9. World Bank. 2017. January-April 2017 and May 2017 Assessments of Retroactive Financing of ICRC Interventions for the Somalia Emergency Drought Response and Recovery Project (SEDRP). 27 ICRC has requested to not include their reports for public disclosure as per their corporate policy. Page 54 of 54