INTEGRATED SAFEGUARDS DATASHEET
APPRAISAL STAGE
I. Basic Information
Date prepared/updated: 11/04/2009
Report No.: AC4693
1. Basic Project Data
Country: Nigeria
Project ID: P097026
Project Name: Nigeria tate Governance and Capacity Building Project
Task Team Leader: George Addo Larbi
Estimated Appraisal Date: September 23,
Estimated Board Date: December 1, 2009
2009
Managing Unit: AFTPR
Lending Instrument: Technical Assistance
Loan
Sector: Sub-national government administration (95%);Central government
administration (5%)
Theme: Public expenditure, financial management and procurement
(65%);Administrative and civil service reform (20%);Other public sector governance
(10%);Tax policy and administration (5%)
IBRD Amount (US$m.):
0.00
IDA Amount (US$m.):
120.00
GEF Amount (US$m.):
0.00
PCF Amount (US$m.):
0.00
Other financing amounts by source:
BORROWER/RECIPIENT
0.00
0.00
Environmental Category: B - Partial Assessment
Simplified Processing
Simple []
Repeater []
Is this project processed under OP 8.50 (Emergency Recovery)
Yes [ ]
No [X]
or OP 8.00 (Rapid Response to Crises and Emergencies)
2. Project Objectives
The project development objective is to improve transparency, accountability and quality
in public finance management and human resource management systems, with a view to
strengthening governance in the participating states.
3. Project Description
The project will initially support three participating states under three participating (Tier
1 states) # Anambra, Kogi and Ondo - and ten selected (Tier 2). The three participating
states are states that met the full selection criteria at the time of appraisal and will
implement technical components A-C, whilst component D will be implemented by the
ten selected (Tier 2) states, based on their ability to meet the criteria. The criteria for
selection agreed between the Federal Ministry of Finance and the Bank are: (i) a formal
request for support from the Federal Ministry of Finance; (ii) evidence of willingness and
readiness to undertake a state PFM performance assessment (PER and PEFA or
PEMFAR) and adopt an agreed action plan for addressing weaknesses; data must be
available and accessible for the exercise; (iii) Commitment to Public Procurement and
Fiscal Responsibility reforms; at least draft bills should be available in the state; (iv)
Fiduciary performance of the state (procurement and financial management) on
past/existing Bank projects ; (v) balance in geo-political representation of states which is
a requirement of the Nigerian Government.
The project is designed around six components: the first three of which are the full
package of support to be implemented in the three participating Tier 1 states. The fourth
component will be used to provide technical assistance support on basic PFM, including
fiscal responsibility and procurement to states that did not meet the full criteria for
selection at the time of appraisal (referred to hereafter as #selected or Tier 2 states#) The
fifth component will be used to provide support to original project states (Bauchi, Cross
River and Kaduna). This is to enable them to scale up activities under BATMIS, reform
of budget preparation and execution, procurement reform, HR Management and Training
Enhancement components of the project and undertake further capacity building and
development of M&E system in selected MDAs.
Component A: Development and Modernization of Public Financial Management
Systems ($39.1 million) aims to develop and modernize the PFM systems of participating
states, with the objective of improving its efficacy and quality in managing public
finance. To enhance the quality of public expenditure in the states, the component will
support fiscal planning and standardization of PFM procedures, processes, and reporting
among participating state governments for consistency with the federal government.
Activities will include:(a) enactment and implementation of an organic public finance
management legislation (including fiscal responsibility legislation); (b) strengthening
capacity for budget preparation and public investment planning, presentation,
implementation and monitoring, (c) improvement in accounting and financial reporting;
(d) strengthening internal and external audit and oversight role of the State Houses of
Assembly; (e) improving tax administration (f) modernization and implementation of
State Integrated Financial Management Information Systems (SIFMIS); (g) enactment of
a sound and modern legal and regulatory framework to underpin effective procurement
(h) provision of technical assistance for setting up of a functional state public
procurement agency (i) preparation and use of State#s standard bidding documents (j)
Strengthening of State Public Procurement Agency and MDAs capacity to improve
quality and efficiency of procurement practices and enhanced value for money (k)
demand driven technical assistance to oversight and watchdog institutions and civil
society groups to develop and strengthen their capacity to monitor public procurement
reforms; and (i) pilot capacity building for selected local governments as an entry point
for engagement with local governments. The component will mainstream independent
monitoring into budget, procurement, audit and other PFM activities. These activities are
in line with the follow-up action plans that are part of the PEFA/ PERs and PEMFARs
undertaken by the potential candidate states. The PFM component will be coordinated
with other development partners# support in the selected states where applicable (e.g.
with EU-SRIP in Anambra state and Yobe states).
Component B: Human Resource Management and Capacity Development ($9.3 million
equivalent. Diagnostic work undertaken by the Bank and other development partners
highlight the depth of human resources capacity and systemic weaknesses that undermine
the credibility of PFM, payroll and personnel management systems. They also highlight
the fact the wage bill constitute one of the biggest items of government expenditure and
subject to weak controls and abuses with negative impact on the quality of public
expenditure. The objective of this component will be to provide targeted capacity
building to PFM-related ministries, departments and agencies, as well as strengthen
training provision and personnel and payroll systems to minimize abuse and redirect
potential savings to improve services. Activities include the conduct of a thorough
assessment of existing skills and training needs of Ministries, Department and Agencies
(MDAs); targeted short to medium term trainings, provision of logistic support and
development, development of service standards for selected MDAs and modernization of
personnel records in the state public service.
Component C: Monitoring and Evaluation System Development ($7.5 million). In most
states, M&E is either non-existent or even where they exist the emphasis is on project
monitoring. One of the key challenges is how to monitor and measure the outcome of
public expenditures, especially in big spending ministries, departments and agencies.
This component will help to address these challenges by strengthening the capacity of
state governments to effectively allocate resources, development of M&E strategies to
track outcomes of government programs and improve the quality of service delivery,
using evidence generated from regular evaluation of programs. The focus will be on
improving the legal and institutional framework for results-based M&E and building the
institutional capacity for effective monitoring and management of development
outcomes. It will support activities related to (a) diagnosis of existing M&E systems; (b)
design and implementation of a new M&E system; (c) formulation of policies and
drafting of enabling regulations; (d) training and skills development for staff of State
Planning Commissions and MDAs; (e) establishment of an M&E secretariat to coordinate
M&E activities across the state alongside capacity building; and (f) pilot evaluations and
service delivery satisfaction surveys for key government programs.
Component D: Improvement in Public Financial Management in Selected (Tier 2) States
($24 million). Funding from this component will be used on first come first served basis
to provide support to selected states in to enable them to achieve Tier1 status. Support
will be limited to strengthening basic PFM and procurement systems, including fiscal
responsibility and procurement legislation and regulations.
Component E: Scaling up Selected Activities from the Original Project ($22million):
This component will provide support to Bauchi, Cross River and Kaduna states to scale
up activities under BATMIS, budget preparation and execution, procurement, HRM and
Training Enhancement and further capacity building necessary to consolidate and sustain
the outcomes of reforms supported by the project as well as strengthening of M&E
systems.
Component F: Project Coordination at National and State Level ($8.5 million): This
component will support project coordination at National level, including centrally
provided technical, quality assurance and other support services to states on PFM,
procurement, FM and project audit. It will also support the State Project Coordinating
Units.
4. Project Location and salient physical characteristics relevant to the safeguard
analysis
It is expected that the project operations will be in the following core states: Anambra,
Kogi and Ondo States. This is a category B project as the potential impacts are likely to
be small in scope, site specific, non cumulative and easy to remediate. The minor civil
works associated with the rehabilitation of existing training institutions are not expected
to cause any adverse long term impacts. This project will not fund activities that would
cause any significant adverse effect on the environment or any form of land acquisition or
restriction of access to sources of livelihoods or involuntary resettlement of any kind. The
ESMF has been carried out during project preparation to provide mechanisms to identify
impacts beyond the generic ones for which standard mitigation measures are built and
will be applied during the implementation phase. The potential environmental concerns
of this project has been addressed in the Environmental and Social Management
Framework (ESMF) and are likely to be those associated with the renovation and
rehabilitation of existing institutions. Environmental protection clauses will be included
in the contract documents.
5. Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialists
Mr Amos Abu (AFTEN)
6. Safeguard Policies Triggered
Environmental Assessment (OP/BP 4.01)
Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04)
Forests (OP/BP 4.36)
Pest Management (OP 4.09)
Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP 4.11)
Indigenous Peoples (OP/BP 4.10)
Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP 4.12)
Safety of Dams (OP/BP 4.37)
Projects on International Waterways (OP/BP 7.50)
Projects in Disputed Areas (OP/BP 7.60)
Yes
X
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
II. Key Safeguard Policy Issues and Their Management
A. Summary of Key Safeguard Issues
1. Describe any safeguard issues and impacts associated with the proposed project.
Identify and describe any potential large scale, significant and/or irreversible impacts:
The Project will not involve any major construction works; only physical renovation of
selected existing buildings is anticipated. There is not going to be new constructions or
land in-take or restriction of access to sources of livelihood. The activities here involve
mainly re-painting, changing of windows panes, roofing sheets and other minor
renovations of existing buildings. The project is not expected to have significant adverse
impacts on human populations or the environment. The exact locations of the sub-
projects and the associated localized impacts are not fully known during project
preparation.
2. Describe any potential indirect and/or long term impacts due to anticipated future
activities in the project area:
The potential impacts are likely to be small-scale and site specific consistent with
category B projects.
3. Describe any project alternatives (if relevant) considered to help avoid or minimize
adverse impacts.
To successfully identify and manage potentially significant adverse impacts on the
environment and population, an Environmental and Social Management Framework
(ESMF) has been prepared and approved by the appropriate regulatory institution in the
Nigeria with World Bank concurrence.
4. Describe measures taken by the borrower to address safeguard policy issues. Provide
an assessment of borrower capacity to plan and implement the measures described.
In disclosing the ESMF in-country at the specified sites, the public is aware of this
project and they would make comments as appropriate. In addition, the ESMF has an
annex that contains the general environmental and social clauses that will bind the
building contractors/project officials towards respecting environmental and social
diligence. The borrower's capacity is limited but provision has been made to supplement
this with consultants whenever necessary.
5. Identify the key stakeholders and describe the mechanisms for consultation and
disclosure on safeguard policies, with an emphasis on potentially affected people.
The key stakeholders for SGCB Project II environmental issues would be implementing
agencies, project implementing units, potential contractors and other citizens. The EMSF
was disclosed at the WB Country office, in-country in State Ministries of Environment
and Budget and Planning of the various states. A newspaper publication was used to
draw the attention of the public to the disclosed document on February 11, 2009. It was
also disclosed in the Bank's Infoshop on February 17, 2009. There will be no affected
persons as the all the civil work will be on already existing structures.
B. Disclosure Requirements Date
Environmental Assessment/Audit/Management Plan/Other:
Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal?
Yes
Date of receipt by the Bank
11/03/2008
Date of "in-country" disclosure
02/11/2009
Date of submission to InfoShop
02/17/2009
For category A projects, date of distributing the Executive
Summary of the EA to the Executive Directors
Resettlement Action Plan/Framework/Policy Process:
Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal?
Date of receipt by the Bank
Date of "in-country" disclosure
Date of submission to InfoShop
Indigenous Peoples Plan/Planning Framework:
Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal?
Date of receipt by the Bank
Date of "in-country" disclosure
Date of submission to InfoShop
Pest Management Plan:
Was the document disclosed prior to appraisal?
Date of receipt by the Bank
Date of "in-country" disclosure
Date of submission to InfoShop
* If the project triggers the Pest Management and/or Physical Cultural Resources,
the respective issues are to be addressed and disclosed as part of the Environmental
Assessment/Audit/or EMP.
If in-country disclosure of any of the above documents is not expected, please
explain why:
C. Compliance Monitoring Indicators at the Corporate Level (to be filled in when the
ISDS is finalized by the project decision meeting)
OP/BP/GP 4.01 - Environment Assessment
Does the project require a stand-alone EA (including EMP) report?
If yes, then did the Regional Environment Unit or Sector Manager (SM)
review and approve the EA report?
Are the cost and the accountabilities for the EMP incorporated in the
credit/loan?
The World Bank Policy on Disclosure of Information
Have relevant safeguard policies documents been sent to the World Bank's
Infoshop?
Have relevant documents been disclosed in-country in a public place in a
form and language that are understandable and accessible to project-affected
groups and local NGOs?
All Safeguard Policies
Have satisfactory calendar, budget and clear institutional responsibilities
been prepared for the implementation of measures related to safeguard
policies?
Have costs related to safeguard policy measures been included in the project
cost?
Does the Monitoring and Evaluation system of the project include the
monitoring of safeguard impacts and measures related to safeguard policies?
Have satisfactory implementation arrangements been agreed with the
borrower and the same been adequately reflected in the project legal
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
documents?
D. Approvals
Signed and submitted by:
Task Team Leader:
Environmental Specialist:
Social Development Specialist
Additional Environmental and/or
Social Development Specialist(s):
Name
Date
Mr George Addo Larbi
Mr Amos Abu
10/22/2009
10/22/2009
Mr Anand Rajaram
11/04/2009
Approved by:
Sector Manager:
Comments: