World Bank Document · 2016. 7. 12. · document of the world bank for official use only report no:...

Document of

The World Bank

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Report No: 79965 - WS

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

FOR A

PROPOSED GRANT

IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR3.3 MILLION(US$5 MILLION EQUIVALENT)

IN CRISIS RESPONSE WINDOW RESOURCES

TO THE

INDEPENDENT STATE OF SAMOA

FOR AN

AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES CYCLONE RESPONSE PROJECT

September 19, 2013

Sustainable Development DepartmentPapua New Guinea, Timor Leste and Pacific IslandsCountry Management UnitEast Asia and Pacific Region

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in theperformance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without WorldBank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS

(Exchange Rate Effective August 31, 2013)

Currency Unit = West Samoan Tala (WST)WST2.35 = US$1US$1.52 = SDR1

FISCAL YEARJanuary 1 - December 31

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ACEO Assistant Chief Executive OfficerACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchACU Aid Coordination UnitAFCRP Agriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response ProjectAPHD Animal Production and Health DivisionCAS Country Assistance StrategyCD Crops DivisionCRW Crisis Response WindowDA Designated AccountEA Environmental AssessmentEOI Express of InterestESMF Environmental and Social Management FrameworkESMO Environmental and Social Management OfficerESMP Environmental and Social Management PlanFAO Food and Agriculture OrganizationFD Fisheries DivisionFY Financial YearGDP Gross Domestic ProductGOFAR Government Finance and Reporting SystemGoS Government of SamoaGSSC Grant Scheme Steering CommitteeHIV Human Immunodeficiency VirusIBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and DevelopmentIC Individual ConsultantICB International Competitive BiddingIDA International Development AssociationIFR Interim Financial ReportMAF Ministry of Agriculture and FisheriesMDG Millennium Development GoalsM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMIS Management Information SystemMNRE Ministry of Natural Resources and EnvironmentMOF Ministry of Finance

MOU Memorandum of UnderstandingMWCSD Ministry of Women, Community and Social DevelopmentOP/BP Operational Policy/Bank PolicyORAF Operational Risk Assessment FrameworkPEAR Preliminary Environmental Assessment ReportPCG Project Coordination GroupPDO Project Development ObjectivePDNA Post Disaster Needs AssessmentPDO Project Development ObjectivePIM Project Implementation ManualPM Project ManagerPMU Project Management UnitPPCD Policy, Planning and Communications DivisionPSC Project Steering CommitteePUMA Planning and Urban Management AgencyQCBS Quality and Cost Based SelectionSACEP Samoa Agriculture Competitiveness Enhancement ProjectSAO Samoa Audit OfficeSBEC Small Business Enterprise CentreSBS Samoa Bureau of StatisticsSPC Secretariat of the Pacific CommunitySPREP Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment ProgramTA Technical AssistanceTCE Tropical Cyclone EvanUNDP United Nations Development ProgramUSD US DollarsWB World BankWBG World Bank GroupWST West Samoan Tala

Regional Vice President: Axel van TrotsenburgCountry Director: Franz Drees-Gross

Sector Director: John RoomeSector Manager: Michel Kerf

Task Team Leader: Mona Sur

SAMOAAgriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................. 1

A. Introduction...........................1..... ................... 1

B. Country Context....................1...... ................... 1

C. Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints ...... ......... 2

D. Sectoral and Institutional Context. .................................... 4

E. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes ................... 5

II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES ........................................................... 5

A. PDO........................................................ 5

B. Project Beneficiaries ..................................... ........ 6

C. PDO Level Results Indicators......................6.... ............ 6

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................... 6

A. Project Components ..................................... ........ 6

B. Project Financing .......................................... ..... 8

C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design. ......... ............. 8

IV. IM PLEM ENTATION .................................................................................................. 9

A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements ..................... ..... 9

B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation .......................... ............ 11

C. Sustainability................... ............................. 11

V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES......................................................12

A. Risk Ratings Summary Table ...................................... 12

B. Overall Risk Rating Explanation .............................. ...... 12

VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 12

A. Economic Analysis ............................................. 12

B. Technical .................................................... 13

C. Financial Management...................... ................. 13

D. Procurement ......................................... ......... 14

E. Social (including Safeguards) ...................................... 14

F. Environment (including Safeguards) .................................. 15

Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring ............................................................. 17

Annex 2: Detailed Project Description......................................................................... 22

Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements....................................................................... 28

Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF).................................... 37

Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan....................................................................... 41

PAD DATA SHEET

Independent State of Samoa

Agriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response Project (P145938)

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT

EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC REGION

EASNS

Report No.:79965 - WS

Basic Information

Project ID Lending Instrument EA Category Team Leader

P145938 IPF B Mona Sur

Lending Instrument: Investment Project Financing Fragility or Capacity Constraints [X]

Financial Intermediary [ ]

Series of Projects [ ]

Project Implementation Start Date Project Implementation End Date

December 31, 2013 December 31, 2015

Expected Effectiveness Date Expected Closing Date

December 31, 2013 December 31, 2015

Joint IFC

n/a

Sector Manager Sector Director Country Director Regional Vice President

Michel Kerf John Roome Franz Drees-Gross Axel van Trotsenburg

Borrower: Ministry of Finance

Responsible Agency: Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries

Contact: Mr. Fonoiava Sealiitu Sesega Title: Chief Executive Officer

Telephone 68522561 Email: [email protected]

Project Financing Data(in USD Million)

] Loan [X] Grant [ ] Other

] Credit [ ] Guarantee

Total Project Cost: US$5.12 Total Bank Financing: US$5.00

Total Cofinancing: US$0.12 Financing Gap: US$0.00

Financing Source Amount

BORROWER/RECIPIENT 0.12

Total 5.12

Expected Disbursements (in USD Million)

Fiscal 2014 2015 2016Year

Annual 3.60 1.00 0.40

Cumulati 3.60 4.60 5.00ve

Institutional Data

Sector Board

Agriculture and Rural Development

Sectors / Climate Change

Sector (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)

Major Sector Sector % Adaptation Mitigation

Co-benefits % Co-benefits %

Crops 50

Animal Production and Fishing 30

General Agriculture 20

Total

ZI certify that there is no Adaptation and Mitigation Climate Change Co-benefits information

applicable to this project.

Themes

Theme (Maximum 5 and total % must equal 100)

Major theme Theme %

Other rural development 100

Total 100

Project Development Objective(s)

The development objective of the project is to provide recovery assistance to cyclone-affected farmersand fishers through vouchers and grants with the aim of restoring their lost production capacity, and toenhance preparedness of the agricultural sector to better respond to future disasters.

Components

Component Name Cost (USD Millions)

Cyclone Recovery for Subsistence Farmers and Fishers 3.08

Cyclone Recovery for Commercial Farmers and Fishers 0.41

Restoration of MAF Facilities and Strengthening the 0.70Agricultural Sector's Capacity for Disaster Preparedness andResponse

Project Coordination and Management 0.93

Compliance

Policy

Does the project depart from the CAS in content or in other significant Yes [ ] No [X]respects?

Explanation:

Does the project require any waivers of Bank policies? Yes [ ] No [X]

Have these been approved by Bank management? Yes [ ] No [ ]

Is approval for any policy waiver sought from the Board? Yes [ ] No [ ]

Explanation:

Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Yes [X] No [ ]

Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes No

Environmental Assessment OP/BP 4.01 X

Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04 X

Forests OP/BP 4.36 X

Pest Management OP 4.09 X

Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP 4.11 X

Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10 X

Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12 X

Safety of Dams OP/BP 4.37 X

Projects on International Waterways OP/BP 7.50 X

Projects in Disputed Areas OP/BP 7.60 X

Legal Covenants

Name Recurrent Due Date Frequency

Project oversight and management Three months aftereffectiveness

Description of CovenantThe Recipient shall establish a Project Steering Committee, MAF Executive Management Team, ProjectManagement Unit and Grant Steering Committee.


Supplier MOU One month aftereffectiveness

Description of Covenant

The Recipient, through MOF and MAF, shall enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with eachrespective supplier participating in the Voucher Program, on terms and conditions acceptable to theAssociation.


Project Implementation Manual Prior todisbursement underCategories (2) and(3)


The Recipient shall adopt a Project Implementation Manual.


Annual work plans Throughout theprojectimplementationperiod


The Recipient shall prepare an annual work plan and budget.


Payment System Operator Prior todisbursement under

Category 2


The Recipient shall hire a Payment System Operator.


Piloting of the payment system Prior todisbursement underCategory 2


The Recipient shall certify in writing that the piloting of the payment system has been successful.


Safeguards Throughout projectimplementation

period


The Recipient shall implement the project according to the ESMF and the IPMP.

Team Composition

Bank Staff

Name Title Specialization Unit

Mona Sur Task Team Leader Agricultural EASNSEconomics

Miriam Witana Procurement Specialist Procurement EASRI

Stephen Hartung FM Specialist Financial Management EASFM

Maeva Betham-Va'ai Liaison Officer Liaison Officer EACNF

Antonia Wong Operations Officer Operations Officer EACNF

Gitanjali Ponnambalam Program Assistant Program Assistant EACNF

Marjorie Mpundu Senior Counsel Legal LEGES

Zaid Safdar Operations Officer Information TWICTTechnology

Alexey Morozov Extended Term Consultant Legal LEGES

Haiyan Wang Senior Finance Officer Disbursements CTRLN

Daisy Lopez Zita Finance Analyst Disbursements CTRLN

Non-Bank Staff

Name Title Office Phone City

Robert Epworth Consultant, Agriculture BuderimSpecialist

Peter McCrea Consultant, Agriculture ChristchurchEconomist

Ravi Corea Consultant, IT Specialist Macleod

Jonas Bautista Consultant, Safeguards ManilaSpecialist

Robert Lee FAO Fisheries Specialist Bangkok

Roderick Kennard Consultant, Livestock PaddingtonSpecialist

MacKenzie Fillow Consultant, Legal Sydney

Locations

Country First Location Planned Actual CommentsAdministrativeDivision

Samoa Vaisigano Vaisigano X

Samoa Va'a-o-Fonoti Va'a-o-Fonoti X

Samoa Tuamasaga Tuamasaga X

Samoa Satupa'itea Satupa'itea X

Samoa Palauli Palauli X

Samoa Gagaifomauga Gagaifomauga X

Samoa Fa'asaleleaga Fa'asaleleaga X

Samoa Atua Atua X

Samoa A'ama A'ama X

Samoa Aiga-i-le-Tai Aiga-i-le-Tai X

Samoa Gaga 'emauga Gaga 'emauga X

I. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

A. Introduction

1. This Project Appraisal Document seeks the approval of the Executive Directors toprovide a grant of US$5 million equivalent from the International Development Association(IDA) Crisis Response Window (CRW). The CRW funds would support the Government ofSamoa (GoS) in responding to Tropical Cyclone Evan (TCE), an exceptional natural disaster,which resulted in approximately US$210 million in damage and losses to Samoa, includingUS$33 million in damage and losses to the agriculture sector. While other donors have pledgedfinancial resources for the reconstruction effort, the amount is not sufficient and the CRW isconsidered the last resort for additional funding. CRW funds will be utilized to provide recoveryassistance to cyclone-affected farmers and fishers with the aim of restoring their lost productioncapacity and enhancing preparedness of the agriculture sector to better respond to futuredisasters. In addition to the proposed project, IDA has provided US$15 million equivalent(including US$10 million equivalent in CRW funding) for a Development Policy Operationwhich was approved by the Bank's Board of Executive Directors in July, 2013. IDA also intendsto provide a proposed US$20 million equivalent (including US$5 million equivalent in CRWfunding) for an Enhanced Road Access Project.

B. Country Context

2. Samoa is a lower middle-income country with a 2012 per capita GNI of approximatelyUS$3,200. The population of the country is about 180,000, with about 75 percent living on theisland of Upolu, where the capital city of Apia is located; most of the remaining 25 percent liveon the larger island of Savai'i. Regarded as one of the best performing economies in the Pacificbefore the 2009 tsunami, Samoa's GDP growth averaged 4.3 percent annually between 1998 and2008. Similar to other small island countries, Samoa was greatly affected by the food and fuelprice shocks of 2008 and the global economic crisis, with the economy contracting by more than5 percent cumulatively during 2009 and 2010. The economy had still not returned to 2007 levels,when TCE struck the country in December, 2012. The impact of TCE is expected to reducegrowth in FY2013 from a pre-cyclone forecast of 2 percent to 0.9 percent. Samoa's fiscal andexternal balances, already under significant pressure as a result of previous crises, are alsoexpected to deteriorate further. The FY2013 fiscal deficit is now estimated to widen to almost 7percent of GDP and the current account deficit to 13 percent of GDP.

3. The services sector which accounts for about 63 percent of GDP has been the maincontributor to growth, with the sector growing at an average annual rate of 3.8 percent between2000 and 2011. Industry accounts for about 27 percent of GDP and grew at about 2.6 percent peryear between 2000 and 2011. The agriculture sector, on the other hand, has performed verypoorly over the last decade with an average annual growth of negative 2.2 percent. Theeconomic importance of the sector has declined rapidly, with agricultural value added fallingfrom about 17 percent of GDP in 2000 to 10 percent in 2011. Despite the declining importanceof the sector, it remains an important source of employment, with 34 percent of the economicallyactive population involved in subsistence activities. The 2009 Agricultural Census indicates thatclose to 85 percent of households are involved in some type of agricultural activities. Among the

1

agriculturally active households, 18 percent are engaged in minor agricultural activities (largelyhome gardening), 40 percent are subsistence farmers, 38 percent produce primarily for homeconsumption and sell small amounts of surplus production, and only 4 percent are engaged incommercial production, producing primarily for sale.

4. Whilst extreme poverty in Samoa is low and declining, progress against otherMillennium Development Goals (MDGs) and in reducing basic needs poverty has been mixed.The latest data available for 2008 show that the proportion of individuals living in extremepoverty more than halved since 2002, declining from 10.6 to 4.9 percent. However, using arelative poverty line, over the same period, the SBS-UNDP 2008 Poverty Analysis found that theprevalence of basic needs poverty increased from 22.9 to 26.9 percent of the population,indicating that the dividends of growth are not being fully felt by the less well-off in society.However, using a non-relative measure, the same study found that, between 2002 and 2008, thereal expenditure of the lowest three deciles increased by around 8 percent nationally, with thehighest increase in urban and peri-urban areas. Rural areas did less well, with the consumption ofthe lowest three deciles either stagnating or declining. Progress toward achieving other MDGshas slowed over the past five years. The latest MDG report found that Samoa was off-track inbasic needs poverty, immunization rates, women's empowerment, HIV prevention and reducingnon-communicable diseases (NCDs).

C. Situations of Urgent Need of Assistance or Capacity Constraints

5. Tropical Cyclone Evan (TCE) struck the Island of Upolu on December 13, 2012, killingfive people, displacing approximately 4,250 people, and causing widespread damage. The Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) estimated that total damage and losses to Samoa as a resultof TCE were approximately US$210 million - or about 30 percent of annual GDP. Economiclosses were estimated to amount to about US$100 million. The PDNA estimated that 46 percentof damage and losses fell on private enterprises and individuals. The worst affected sectors, indescending order of magnitude, are transport, agriculture, electricity and tourism.

6. Damage to the agricultural sector as a result of high winds and flooding was especiallysevere, and make up the bulk of longer-term economic losses. The cyclone caused an estimatedUS$33 million in damage and losses to Samoa's agriculture, livestock and fisheries sectors.About 75 percent of the agricultural area in Upolu was either severely or moderately affected,and the crop sub-sector was hardest hit both in damages and losses. The PDNA estimated thatdamage and loss in the crops sub-sector accounted for about 84 percent of total agriculture sectorimpacts (Table 1). Almost the entire banana and breadfruit crops (two major food crops) werelost in the worst affected areas, and coconut plantations sustained significant nut loss. Croplosses were high because the cyclone occurred during the peak production season for fruit treesand the off-season vegetable harvest. Destruction to root crops was less prevalent, although thequality of taro was affected. Much farm equipment, along with farm buildings, private farmroads, and farm vehicles was damaged or destroyed. While there were no reports of widespreadflood and erosion damage to agricultural land, flash flooding in some localized areas on Upoluwiped out or heavily damaged a number of farms.

2

7. The impact on fisheries and livestock was less severe than on crops, accounting for about10 percent and 5 percent of sector damage and loss, respectively. Some livestock producersreported the death of animals and destruction of farm infrastructure, and widespread damage tofences due to fallen trees. Commercial fruit, vegetable, and livestock farms sustained significantdamage. In the commercial and artisanal fisheries sector, boats, canoes, and fishing gear weredamaged or destroyed, and some fresh water aquaculture farms also sustained damage.

8. In the wake of TCE, the Government of Samoa (GoS) acted quickly to provideemergency relief services and restore key public services to affected areas in coordination withdevelopment partners. The GoS worked with development partners to put together acomprehensive PDNA and subsequently prepared a costed Recovery Framework. Theframework sets out the actions to be taken over the coming three years to rebuild damaged publicinfrastructure, support households to recover and ensure a strong policy program to underpinincreased resilience, and an even more effective response to any future disasters. Prioritiesidentified for the agricultural sector in the Recovery Framework include the distribution of inputsto farmers, financial support to farmers and fishers through grants and loans, repair orreplacement of damaged government infrastructure and equipment, and an agriculture sectordisaster risk reduction program to improve preparedness and reduce losses during future extremeweather events. The GoS has established a recovery working group reporting to the Cabinet andwill monitor implementation of the recovery through a common reporting framework. The GoShas developed an implementation and output reporting mechanism across all ministries andprograms. The working group, based on lessons learned from the previous recovery program,will advise, coordinate and monitor the ministries and agencies.

Table 1: Agriculture Sector Damage and Loss (thousand WST)

Disaster Effects Ownership

Sub-sector Damages Losses Total Public Private

Crops 4,905 58,061 62,966 275 62,691

Livestock 3,516 800 4,316 66 4,250

Fisheries 2,084 5,493 7,602 25 7,577TOTAL 10,505 64,354 74,884 366 74,518

9. This project complements other development partner recovery support for the agriculturalsector. To date, assistance for recovery in the agricultural sector has been fairly limited. GoS hasextended concessional credit to the private sector to recommence their operations and it is likelythat some commercial farmers will have availed of this assistance. Small amounts of seed,planting materials and hand tools have been distributed by NGOs including the AdventistDisaster Relief Agency (ADRA) and Women in Business Development Incorporated (WIBDI).The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) plans to support vulnerablecrop farmers and will provide inputs in-kind (seeds, planting material, fertilizer and small tools)to vulnerable households in about 5 districts. The FAO project has earmarked about Euro201,000 for agricultural inputs. It is likely that this project will start and finish before theproposed AFCRP is in full swing, and therefore both initiatives will complement each other.

3

D. Sectoral and Institutional Context

10. Agriculture plays an important role in Samoa's economy. Due to cultural heritage aswell as economic need, a large percentage of Samoa's population is engaged in agriculture.Households consisting of extended family units are the major producers, practicing small scaleand labor intensive mixed farming. The country consists of 360 villages divided foradministrative purposes into 41 districts. The villages are governed by traditional local councilsof chiefs (matai) that shape social and cultural habits. Land is cultivated under 'customary' landtenure arrangements whereby villagers are allocated land by the matais. Less than 20 percent ofland is freehold or government owned, a proportion of which is leased to farmers for agriculturalproduction.

11. Farm size averages six acres, focused predominantly on the subsistence staples of taro,banana, ta'amu, breadfruit, and coconut and a variety of fruits and vegetables. There are only ahandful of larger commercial farmers selling directly to either supermarkets, restaurants andinstitutions, but even these operations are of limited scale.

12. Livestock farming is also largely subsistence production based on cattle, poultry, pigs,and sheep, with a few larger semi-commercial units also producing these livestock. One largercommercial poultry unit commenced operation recently, but sustained significant damage duringthe cyclone. Pre-cyclone Upolu had a cattle population of 19,000 head, about 115,000 pigs,about 200,000 head of poultry and a small number of sheep. Cattle herds have been crossedextensively with exotic breeds for more than thirty years, but virtually all pigs and poultry in thecountry are indigenous, with few exotic crosses.

13. One-quarter of rural households are engaged in fishing, with most of the catch used forhome consumption. Only a small number of households engage in off-shore commercial fishing(tuna exported frozen to American Samoa). Coastal and lagoon fisheries consist primarily ofsmall dugout and fiberglass canoes and boats fishing in the lagoon area, and larger aluminumboats fishing on the outer edges of the reefs. The vast majority of the lagoon fishing issubsistence carried out by fishers gleaning the reefs and/or by using spear fishing gear.Aquaculture in Samoa, primarily comprised of tilapia farming, is still very rudimentary.

14. The agriculture sector is constrained by a mix of policy and institutional factors, whichhave combined to impede the productive potential of rural households and agribusinesses. First,while successive Samoa Development Strategies (2003-2007 and 2008-2012) have promotedagriculture through market-oriented strategies, both public and private investment over the pastdecade has been low. Second, only one quarter of rural households are engaged in formalmarkets, the majority of households being subsistence farmers. Third, existing farming systemsare labor intensive, and rural labor is becoming more scarce and expensive due to high wages inurban areas and opportunities offered by migration. At the same time, the rocky nature of soils inSamoa presents a challenge to larger scale farming and mechanization. Fourth, access toagricultural credit is difficult, lending products are inappropriate for agriculture and interest ratesare high, constraining on-farm investment and production systems needing significant workingcapital. Finally, Samoa has still to develop effective farm support services, including market-driven research and extension to promote improved technologies, and farmer access to improved

4

breeding stock and planting material is limited. Some of these constraints are being addressed bythe IDA funded Samoa Agriculture Competitiveness Enhancement Project (SACEP).

15. Agriculture in Samoa is also very vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change.Climate change manifesting itself in more frequent and extreme rainfall events, longer dryerspells and drought events, rising sea levels, extreme winds and high air and water temperaturesmakes agricultural production more challenging. A higher incidence of pests and disease isexpected. Since Samoa has limited irrigation infrastructure, irregular or inconsistent rainfall isextremely problematic.

16. While there are traditional male/female roles in the production cycle, the agriculturalworkload is usually shared. The exception is fishing, where women and older men glean thelagoons and inner reefs, while younger men fish the outer lagoons, reefs, and sea.

17. The Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF) has prepared an agriculture sector plan(2011-2015) to prioritize public and private investments in the sector. Government spending foragriculture in 2010/11 was WST12.4 million, about 2.3 percent of the total budget. The majorsource of external support to the sector is from the IDA funded SACEP, which became effectivein June 2012. SACEP is supporting fruit and vegetable growers and livestock producers toimprove their productivity and take greater advantage of market opportunities. Bilateral partners(Australia, New Zealand, and China) also provide support to agriculture, mainly throughtechnical assistance, along with other multilateral partners (United Nations and European Union)who are providing additional support through various projects. The FAO includes Samoa insome national and regional technical cooperation projects. There are also regional programsimplemented by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), the Secretariat of the PacificRegional Environment Program (SPREP), and the Australian Centre for InternationalAgricultural Research (ACIAR).

E. Higher Level Objectives to which the Project Contributes

18. In line with the Recovery Framework and Implementation Plan for Cyclone Evanformulated by the GoS, the higher-level objectives of the proposed project are to restoreagricultural and fishery livelihoods and facilitate economic recovery. The proposed operation isaligned with the 2012 - 2016 Country Partnership Strategy objectives of rebuilding economicresilience, encouraging investment for inclusive growth, and building resilience to naturaldisasters and climate change. Through its emphasis on subsistence farmers and fishers, thisproject contributes to the World Bank Group goals of eradicating extreme poverty and promotingshared prosperity.

II. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

A. PDO

19. The development objective of the project is to provide recovery assistance to cyclone-affected farmers and fishers through vouchers and grants with the aim of restoring their lost

5

production capacity, and to enhance preparedness of the agricultural sector to better respond tofuture disasters.

B. Project Beneficiaries

20. The Project would be implemented over a period of two years. It would cover the wholecountry, although direct assistance to beneficiaries would be confined to those living on Upolu inthe areas designated as severely or moderately affected in the PDNA. 1 In the absence of detailedrecords of individual household losses, all subsistence farming and fishing households in thecyclone affected districts would be targeted. It is anticipated that the project would directlybenefit about 7,000 subsistence households. In addition, about 100 commercial farmers andaquaculturists who have incurred cyclone damage would also be supported under the project.

C. PDO Level Results Indicators

21. The PDO Level Results Indicators are as follows:

(a) Beneficiary subsistence farming and fishing households acquire farm assets andinputs to recover from cyclone losses. This outcome indicator would be captured bythe value of redeemed vouchers.

(b) Approved recovery plans of commercial farmers implemented.

(c) Methodology developed and adopted and MAF staff trained on compiling regularagricultural production data and assessing damages and loss for the agricultural sectorand capacities strengthened in disaster preparedness and response.

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

A. Project Components

22. Project activities would be grouped into four components: (a) Cyclone Recovery forSubsistence Farmers and Fishers; (b) Cyclone Recovery for Commercial Farmers and Fishers;(c) Restoration of MAF Facilities and Strengthening the Agricultural Sector's Capacity forDisaster Preparedness and Response; and (d) Project Coordination and Management.

23. Component 1. Cyclone Recovery for Subsistence Farmers and Fishers: Carrying outa program of activities aimed at restoring production capacity of cyclone affected subsistencefarmers and fishers including: (i) issuing vouchers to subsistence farmers for purchase of eligiblefarm items; (ii) issuing vouchers to subsistence fishers for purchase of eligible fishing equipmentand/or farm items.

1 Severely affected districts include Aanalofi, Falealili, Gagaemauga, Lefaga, Safata, Sagaga le Falefa, Siumu, andVaa o Fonoti. Moderately affected districts include Anoama'a I Sisifo, Anoama'a Sasa'e, Faleata, Falelatai -Samatau, Gagaemauga, Lepa, Lotofaga, Sagaga le Usoga, Vaimauga I Sisifo, and Vaimauga I Sasa'e.

6

24. Component 2. Cyclone Recovery for Commercial Farmers and Fishers: Carrying outa program of activities aimed at restoring production capacity of cyclone affected commercialfarmers and fishers, including: (i) providing Recovery Grants to commercial farmers to assist inrestoration of farm equipment and infrastructure lost or damaged due to the cyclone; (ii)providing Recovery Grants to commercial farmers involved in aquaculture to assist in restorationof the equipment or infrastructure damaged due to the cyclone.

25. Component 3. Restoration of MAF Facilities and Strengthening the AgriculturalSector's Capacity for Disaster Preparedness and Response: Carrying out a program ofactivities aimed at: (i) supporting the repair of essential MAF facilities, damaged during thecyclone; (ii) establishing systems for the regular collection and updating of agriculturalproduction information; (iii) developing a standard methodology for collection and analysis ofdamage and loss data for the agricultural sector; and (iv) strengthening capacities of farmers andsector institutions in disaster preparedness and response.

26. Component 4. Project Coordination and Management: Implementation andmanagement of the project including: (i) provision of technical assistance, necessary forcoordination and implementation of the project; (ii) procurement of vehicles and provision ofadequate work facilities for MAF; (ii) design and implementation of a Management InformationSystem (MIS) for the Voucher Program and Recovery Grant Scheme and enhancing MAF'smonitoring and evaluation systems to track implementation progress and results.

27. Under Component 1, electronic vouchers, using smart cards or mobile phones, will beissued to subsistence farmers and fishers. Beneficiaries will be able to redeem the voucher valueat designated suppliers, and purchase eligible farm or fishing equipment. Households located incyclone-affected villages with Community Based Fisheries Management Plans or MarineProtected Areas would be able to use their vouchers to purchase eligible fishing equipmentand/or farm items. Beneficiary households in villages without these management plans orprotected areas would be issued with vouchers for agricultural items only. Households in districtsseverely affected by the cyclone would receive a higher value of vouchers than those inmoderately affected areas. The precise voucher value would be determined once the beneficiaryselection is finalized; it is estimated that voucher values will range from about WST750(US$320) for households in moderately affected areas to WST1,200 (US$520) in severelyaffected areas. Vouchers would be valid for 15 months from the date of issue.

28. Under Component 2, commercial farmers in the severely and moderately affecteddistricts would be eligible for Recovery Grants for replacing cyclone damaged crop, livestockand aquaculture equipment and infrastructure. Beneficiary commercial farmers in severelyaffected areas would receive a larger grant than those in moderately affected areas. The exactvalue of Recovery Grants would be determined once the beneficiary selection is finalized; it isestimated that grants will range from about WST4,500 (US$1,900) in moderately affected areasto WST7,000 (US$3,000) in severely affected areas. MAF will electronically issue grants tocommercial farmers and aquaculturists upon determining their eligibility. Details on the VoucherProgram and the Recovery Grant Scheme are given in Annex 2. Assistance channeled throughvouchers and grants is intended to help restore the productive capacity of farmers and fishers.

7

B. Project Financing

29. The project would be financed by a US$5.0 million Grant from the IDA Crisis ResponseWindow. The funds would support the GoS in responding to an exceptional natural disaster.

Project Cost and Financing

IBRD or IDAProject Components Prjc cost Financing % Financing

(US million)million)

1. Cyclone Recovery for 3.08 3.08 100Subsistence Farmers and Fishers2. Cyclone Recovery for 0.41 0.29 70Commercial Farmers and Fishers3. Restoration of MAF Facilities 0.70 0.70 100and Strengthening the AgriculturalSector's Capacity for DisasterPreparedness and Response4. Project Coordination and 0.93 0.93 100Management

Total Costs 5.12 5.00 98

Total Project Costs 5.12 5.00 98Front-End Fees

Total Financing Required 5.00

C. Lessons Learned and Reflected in the Project Design

30. The project is designed to reflect the following lessons:

(a) Emergency recovery operations should have a simple design, taking into considerationlocal implementation capacity. The Voucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme aredesigned to expedite the disbursement of funds to beneficiaries, while minimizing theadministrative burden of operating these programs.

(b) Sustainable recovery not only requires timely implementation of rehabilitation andreconstruction activities, but also the preparation of a program that places these activitiesadequately within the longer-term goal of reducing overall disaster vulnerability. Activitiesplanned under Component 3 of the project will enhance disaster preparedness.

(c) Several options for providing recovery assistance to farmers and fishers were considered,including cash transfers, procurement and provision of inputs (in-kind) and the use of vouchers.Although international experience indicates that provision of cash transfers in the aftermath of adisaster is an efficient and effective way of providing assistance for recovery, there was strongreluctance within government to distribute cash. Cash is perceived as being prone to misuse by

8

recipients. Given government's priority to ensure that recovery assistance under this project isinvested in the agricultural sector, vouchers were considered to be an appropriate instrument asthey are a means of providing access to a specific set of goods and services with a certain levelof control and a degree of assurance that recipients will buy goods that are considered to beimportant.

(d) It has been recognized that vouchers typically entail slower set-up, heavier work-load forthe staff, and end up being more expensive than cash transfers, as they bring with them anadditional administrative burden. Issuance of vouchers requires time to engage suppliers,requires sensitization on how the voucher system works, as well as monitoring their use at pointsof sale. Contracts and systems also need to be put in place to pay suppliers, and coordination isneeded between finance and administrative departments. Many of these disadvantages have beenovercome in other countries by taking advantage of the growth in mobile phone usage andelectronic banking services to implement electronic vouchers. This project, too, will takeadvantage of high mobile phone penetration and expanding electronic banking and services.

(e) The project design was also informed by lessons from other fisheries disaster recoveryprograms, where recovery assistance contributed to over-fishing by providing additional fishinggear and boats to affected households. Under this project, assistance for subsistence fishers islimited to villages with Community Based Fisheries Management Plans or villages with MarineProtected Areas.

IV. IMPLEMENTATION

A. Institutional and Implementation Arrangements

31. Several agencies would be involved in project implementation, including Ministry ofFinance (MOF), Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), Ministry of Natural Resources,and Environment (MNRE), Disaster Management Office (DMO), and the Ministry of Women,Community and Social Development (MWCSD). Project management support would beprovided at a number of levels - general oversight, management review and project coordination- to oversee implementation and coordinate the activities of implementing agencies.

32. General oversight would be provided by a Project Steering Committee (PSC), undertakenby a newly formed sub-committee of the existing SACEP Steering Committee. The AFCRP PSCwill be established within three months of project effectiveness. The PSC would guide theoverall direction of the project, review annual work programs, resolve implementationbottlenecks outside the control of MAF, and adjust implementation arrangements, if necessary,in pursuit of the project development objective.

33. The MAF Executive Management Team, comprised of the Chief Executive Officer(CEO) and all Divisional Assistant CEOs (ACEOs), the AFCRP Project Manager and theSACEP Project Coordinator (who is also the Sector Coordinator) would be responsible forreviewing annual work programs, budgets and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) results, andfor resolving implementation bottlenecks within MAF's control. The MAF ExecutiveManagement Team will be established within three months of project effectiveness.

9

34. Project Coordination. A Project Management Unit (PMU) would be formed withinthree months from effectiveness of the project, headed by a dedicated AFCRP Project Manager(PM), based in MAF and engaged for the period of the project. The PM would coordinate allproject activities and monitor the development impact of the project. The PM would besupported by five staff - a Financial Management Officer, a Finance Assistant and three ProjectOfficers. The PMU would be supported by short-term Technical Assistance (TA) on financialmanagement, procurement, environment and social safeguards, and information technology.Procurement would be handled by the relevant staff of the SACEP Project Coordination Group(PCG). The SACEP Environmental and Social Management Officer (ESMO) would alsoprovide safeguards support to the AFCRP PMU. The three Project Officers would beresponsible for social and environmental screening and monitoring, facilitating implementationof the Voucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme, and for results monitoring.

35. Project Implementation. In a similar arrangement to SACEP, day-to-day activities,involving interaction with subsistence and commercial farmer and fisher beneficiaries, and thedevelopment and implementation of new methodologies to strengthen disaster preparedness inthe sector, would be the direct responsibilities of the ACEOs of the Crops Division (CD), AnimalProduction and Health Division (APHD), and Fisheries Division (FD) - working in conjunctionwith their counterparts from the Internal Affairs Division of MWCSD for subsistencehouseholds.

36. Subsistence farmer/fisher household identification would be coordinated by the PolicyPlanning and Communications Division (PPCD) of MAF, with the assistance of MWCSD, CD,APHD and FD. MWCSD would provide preliminary eligible household lists. Preliminary listswould be reviewed and signed off by village level verification teams, with each team comprisingthe Mayor, representatives of the women's group, youth, and village council, plus an oratorselected by the village council. Verified lists would be posted on all church notice boards in thetargeted villages and published in a national newspaper, with opportunity provided forobjections. Details of the subsistence beneficiary identification process are given in Annex 2.

37. Access to project financing by subsistence households would be through a projectdeveloped electronic voucher system. These vouchers would be issued to each beneficiaryhousehold for the purchase of approved production inputs and equipment from a range of projectparticipating input suppliers. The operational details of the Voucher Program are summarized inAnnex 2.

38. Well-established agricultural and fishing input suppliers would be invited to participate inthe project, and a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would be prepared, within the firstmonth of project effectiveness, between MAF and each participating supplier, specifying alldetails of the input supply and payment arrangements. Training workshops would be conductedwhen vouchers are distributed, and each beneficiary household would also receive a pamphlet onthe Voucher Program, which would include the list of qualifying inputs, participating inputsuppliers and their detailed goods price list.

39. The Recovery Grant Scheme would be implemented by MAF. Responsibility for overallcoordination would lie with the Project Manager. A Grant Scheme Steering Committee (GSSC)

10

chaired by the AFCRP Project Manager and comprising of representatives from MAF (CD, FD,PPCD, and APHD), MOF and the Small Business Enterprise Center (SBEC) would beestablished within three months of Project effectiveness to provide overall guidance for theimplementation of the scheme and endorsement of recovery plans for funding. Selection andimplementation of recovery plans would follow a six step process as laid out in Annex 2 anddetailed in the Project Implementation Manual.

B. Results Monitoring and Evaluation

40. The project M&E system, including an MIS for the Voucher Program and the RecoveryGrant Scheme, would track the project Results Framework indicators to assess overall projectperformance. It would capture information on environmental and social indicators to assess theeffectiveness of environmental and social mitigation measures. Activities would involve randomvisits to beneficiary households to ensure compliance with safeguards and to monitor how inputsare used. The system would work both as a day-to-day management tool for MAF, and as amechanism for assessing project impact. The AFCRP Project Manager, supported by the PPCDand the three Project Officers, would be responsible for M&E activities and related reportingrequirements. Project data would be summarized on a bi-annual basis, and included in theProgress Reports to be circulated to government authorities, the Bank and other interesteddevelopment partners.

C. Sustainability

41. Government commitment to the cyclone recovery effort is ably demonstrated in thePDNA which it prepared in close cooperation with development partners. Commitment todevelopment of the agriculture sector is reflected in its recently prepared Strategy for theDevelopment of Samoa (2012-2016) which emphasizes the importance of enhancing foodsecurity, promoting commercial investment and the diversification of crop production.Implementing this strategy led to the evolution of SACEP. The proposed project would focus onthese same aspects, and restore farm and fishery capacity lost through the cyclone, as well asstrengthen MAF's ability to respond to future natural disasters.

42. Implementation success and therefore project sustainability will hinge on a number offactors, including effective coordination between MAF and MWCSD in identifying eligiblebeneficiary households, MAF developing a good working relationship with participating inputsuppliers, and upgrading the MAF skill base to ensure that it is better prepared to respond tofuture natural disasters. Project design and implementation arrangements incorporate a numberof features to address these issues and to enhance project sustainability, including MOUs withsuppliers to clearly define project administrative arrangements, involvement of civil society infinalizing the beneficiary lists, and selected TA to assist in the institutional strengthening ofMAF to cope with future natural disasters. Partnership with the private sector on electronicvouchers will support the longer term viability and potential scale up of the voucher schemewithin the agriculture sector or government.

11

V. KEY RISKS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

A. Risk Ratings Summary Table

Risk Category Rating

Stakeholder Risk Substantial

Implementing Agency Risk

- Capacity High

- Governance High

Project Risk

- Design High

- Social and Environmental Moderate

- Program and Donor Low

- Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability High

Overall Implementation Risk High

B. Overall Risk Rating Explanation

43. The overall implementation risk is rated as High, stemming from the weakimplementation capacity of MAF and the limited experience it has in implementing Bank fundedprojects, especially involving disbursement of funds to beneficiaries through electronic vouchers.There is a shortage of skilled technical and managerial staff in the sector, and the existing MAFstaff do not have all the necessary skills required to implement all planned project activities,especially in a cyclone recovery project where distribution of funds to beneficiary householdsneeds to be done as quickly as possible, if the project is to have the desired development impact.The existence of a functioning PCG for SACEP, strengthened by selective international technicalassistance will no doubt partially mitigate this risk, as will the establishment of a dedicatedAFCRP PMU, with a Project Manager and extra staff to bolster the MAF's capacity in financialmanagement, M&E and safeguards. Further mitigation will be through the substantial capacitydevelopment and training programs being provided by SACEP, by upgrading the institutionalcapacity of MAF and broadening the skills base of staff.

VI. APPRAISAL SUMMARY

A. Economic Analysis

44. A detailed economic and financial analysis was not undertaken during preparation due tothe emergency nature of this project and since the exact investments that will be undertaken bybeneficiaries of the Voucher Program and Recovery Grant Scheme are not known a priori. Anex-post evaluation of the costs and benefits of investments made by beneficiary farmers will beundertaken during implementation. Support to subsistence and commercial farmers and fishersthrough the Voucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme will help ensure that adequate

12

working and investment capital is available to producers to enable them to recover to pre-cyclonelevels.

45. Analysis undertaken as part of the PDNA estimated that the average wage-earning andself-employed worker in the agriculture sector would sustain an imputed reduction of annualincome in the order of 49 percent in 2013, as a result of the production losses caused by CycloneEvan. These imputed income losses would continue until at least 2014. Considering the largeloss of income sustained in 2013, in the absence of assistance such as that proposed under thisproject, farmers would not be in a position to invest in agricultural inputs and planting materialin 2014 to ensure that production recovers to pre-cyclone levels.

B. Technical

46. The design of the project is driven by the need to facilitate rapid recovery of subsistenceand commercial farm households affected by the cyclone. The use of vouchers to disburse fundswill help ensure that the funds are spent on approved agricultural or fisheries inputs and assets byrestricting the validity of vouchers to certain types of suppliers and goods. However, the processwould not be unduly prescriptive in that beneficiaries would have the freedom to decide on theinputs they require and also when to purchase them, within a 15 month window. While GoSdoes have experience with vouchers which were used to distribute grant funding for houserebuilding following the 2009 tsunami, this project could not be efficiently supported using thesame manual processes, due to the complexity and volume of transactions anticipated.

47. An electronic voucher scheme will be implemented building upon prior experience ofMAF, as well as lessons drawn from other developing countries. The scheme would improve theefficiency of the voucher program, reduce the time to deliver vouchers, reduce administrativecosts, and enhance flexibility and control. Samoa has existing capabilities to operate anelectronic voucher program in the form of electronic payment services offered by mobile phoneoperators or local banks. Both of Samoa's mobile phone service providers offer (or have thecapability to offer) an "e-wallet" service for electronic transfer of funds that could be used toimplement electronic vouchers. Some local banks offer card-based payment and cash transfersystems, one of which has the potential to support MAF requirements. Either of thesetechnologies may be used to implement the voucher program, with good control and reportingcapabilities. The decision on technology will be made at project commencement, based on aconceptual design of the Voucher Program, technical specifications, and cost.

C. Financial Management

48. The main financial management risks relating to this project are the breakdown of theelectronic voucher system, misuse of the vouchers or failure to keep the appropriate records,given that the process will be new to all staff. The mitigating measures to be implemented toreduce the risks associated with the current Financial Management System are: (1) theestablishment of a number of controls within the Voucher Program, which will enable thedistribution of funds to identified beneficiaries whose subsequent purchases will be fullytraceable; (2) monthly reconciliation of project accounts to the government records andreconciliations of the vouchers as required; and (3) appointment of dedicated financial

13

management staff, including a part-time Finance Advisor, a full-time Financial ManagementOfficer, and an additional Finance Assistant.

49. The Financial Management Assessment determined that oversight for this project will bethrough a minimum of six monthly implementation reviews by the designated World BankFinancial Management Specialist. In addition, quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) will berequired to be submitted to the Bank within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter andannual audits of the project to be furnished to the Bank within 6 months of the end of each fiscalyear.

D. Procurement

50. Procurement capacity and risk assessments were carried out by the Bank during projectpreparation. The main procurement risks identified are: (i) delays in decision-making due tomultilayered approval processes and capacity limitations; (ii) poor contract management andadministration; and (iii) failure to maintain adequate procurement records. To mitigate theserisks, the project will: (i) utilize the already established SACEP Project Coordination Group forall project related procurement; (ii) monitor procurement processes including clearance processesbased on the agreed key monitoring indicators; (iii) appoint dedicated technical staff for contractmanagement and quality assurance during project implementation; and (iv) use a standardchecklist for project recordkeeping. An initial procurement plan covering the first 18 months ofthe project has been prepared and a summary is included in Annex 3.

E. Social (including Safeguards)

51. Overall the project is likely to have a positive impact on Samoan society by supportingfarmers and fishers to recover from the impacts of Cyclone Evan. During preparation, theproposed project attracted strong support from both farmers and fishers on Upolu, where themajority of project activities will take place.

52. The Indigenous Peoples Policy (OP/BP 4.10) has been triggered and the relevantsafeguards measures required under the policy have been applied to this project. The ethnicstructure in Samoa is predominantly ethnic Samoan (92.6 percent) with a minority of Europeansand biracial Europeans/Polynesians. Indigenous peoples in this context generally refer to allnative Samoans in project affected villages. Samoa's indigenous customs and traditions havelargely remained intact and are strongly reflected in their current political and economicinstitutions, particularly in the family and village socio-political structures, as well as in thecustomary land ownership system. Project preparation and design was guided by a SocialAssessment and free prior and informed consultations have been conducted for the project by theMAF in a sample of affected villages in accordance with cultural protocols. Strong stakeholdersupport has been demonstrated throughout these consultations, indicating broad communitysupport for the project. To minimize possible farmer/fisher perceptions of being unfairly left outin the beneficiary selection process, MAF has put in place measures to ensure transparency inbeneficiary selection, while taking into consideration the existing village decision makingprocess. There are no potential community impacts as the project will only provide grants toindividual households. A grievance redress mechanism has been established and is included inthe ESMF.

14

53. There will be no land acquisition, destruction of assets, displacement of dwellings orrestriction of access to livelihoods under this project. All civil works supported under the projectwould be confined within existing or original infrastructure sites and all rehabilitation activities,including relocation of damaged fish ponds within private farms, will be carefully screened forthese impacts.

F. Environment (including Safeguards)

54. In accordance with OP 4.01, an Environmental and Social Management Framework(ESMF) was prepared by the MAF. The ESMF analyses the positive and negative impacts of thedifferent types of activities that will be financed by the project. It also sets out the principles,procedures and guidelines for screening environmental and social impacts of farm and pondrehabilitation, mitigation measures, implementation arrangements, the monitoring plan andarrangements for training and capacity building.

55. There is a possibility that activities to be supported under the project could have negativeenvironmental impacts, for example if vouchers or recovery grants are used to purchaseenvironmentally hazardous agro-chemicals or used to purchase certain types of fishing gearwhich could lead to damaging corals or increasing the catch of juvenile fish. To address this,items eligible for purchase using project vouchers have been pre-screened to excludeenvironmentally hazardous items, such as chemical pesticides and herbicides, gillnets, andunderwater torch lights. In addition, MAF pamphlets on good farming and fishing practices,including Integrated Pest Management, will be distributed to voucher recipients and relevanttraining will be made available to them. To prevent overfishing, replacement fishing equipmentwill only be financed in villages that have an existing Community Based Fisheries ManagementPlan or a designated Marine Protected Area.

56. The environmental and social impacts of rehabilitating commercial farm infrastructureand MAF facilities are expected to be minor given the scale of these activities. All rehabilitationworks on commercial farms and on MAF facilities will be carefully screened.

57. The Pest Management Policy (OP 4.09) is triggered for this project. While the projectwill not finance chemical pesticides for beneficiaries of the Voucher Program or the RecoveryGrant Scheme, there is a possibility that project activities may indirectly lead to increased use ofpesticides by farmers. The MAF has developed an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan aspart of the ESMF for the SACEP, in line with the standards and requirements set forth in OP4.09. The SACEP IPM Plan will also be used for this project.

58. The Natural Habitats Policy (OP 4.04) is also triggered because the recovery grants underComponent 2 would involve relocation of two or three poorly situated tilapia ponds. Therelocation sites of these ponds will be carefully screened to avoid sites that would encroach oradversely affect any natural habitats as defined in OP 4.04, or any sensitive environments. Otherproject activities are unlikely to affect any critical or non-critical natural habitats, as they will beundertaken within their existing sites.

59. The Executive Summary of the ESMF has been translated into Samoan, and together withthe entire ESMF, disclosed locally through the MAF website (www.maf.gov.ws) and made

15

available in public places where stakeholders would have easy access. The English version of theESMF was disclosed in the Bank's InfoShop on August 22, 2013.

16

Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring

SAMOA: Agriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response Project

Results Framework

Project Development Objectives

The development objective of the project is to provide recovery assistance to cyclone-affected farmers and fishers through vouchersand grants with the aim of restoring their lost production capacity, and to enhance preparedness of the agricultural sector to betterrespond to future disasters

These results are at Project level

Project Development Objective Indicators

Cumulative Target Values ResponsibilityData Source/ for

Unit of .EndMehdlg DaaClctoIndicator Name Core Measure Baseline YR1 YR2 YR3 YR4 Frequency Methodology Data Collection

Measure Target

Beneficiarysubsistencefarming and Valuemoffishing households reeeedMAF records!

vouchers 0 4.4 7.3 7.3 Bi-annual MAFacquire farm (million Project MISassets and inputs to WST)recover fromcyclone losses.

Approved recoveryplans of MAF records/commercial Percentages 0 40% 80% 80% Bi-annual MAFenterprises

17

implemented.

Methodologydeveloped andadopted and MAFstaff trained oncompiling regular Final reportagricultural from MAFproduction data, onassessing damages procedures 0 1 1 One time MAF records MAFand loss for the adopted andagricultural sector number ofand capacitiesstrengthened indisasterpreparedness andresponse.

Intermediate Results Indicators

Cumulative Target Values ResponsibilityData Source/ for

Unit of .EndMehdlg DaaClctoIndicator Name Core Measure Baseline YR1 YR2 YR3 YR4 Frequency Methodology Data CollectionMeasure Target

Percentage of 71 MAFeligible subsistence Percentage 0 90% 90% Bi-annual records/ MAFfarmers that have Project MISreceived vouchers.

Percentage of MAFrecovery plans of Percentage 0 90% 90% Bi-annual records/ MrFjecorSeligible Project MIS

18

commercialfarmers andaquaculturistsapproved

LiPercentage of MAFDamaged MAF MAF records/

. budgeted 0 30% 90% 90% records/ MrojecorSfacilities repaired. exedtr rjetMS Project MISexpenditure Project MIS

Client days oftraining providedto farmers on MAFtechnologies and Client Days 100 200 300 records/ MrojecorSpractices for more Project MISresilientagriculture.

Client days oftraining providedto female farmers MAFon technologies Client Days 50 50 100 records/ MrecorSand practices for Project MISmore resilientagriculture.

19

Annex 1: Results Framework and Monitoring

Country: Samoa

Project Name: Agriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response Project (P145938)

Results Framework

Project Development Objective Indicators

Indicator Name Description (indicator definition etc.)

Beneficiary subsistence farming and fishing The indicator will be measured by the value of redeemed vouchers.households acquire farm assets and inputs to recoverfrom cyclone losses.

Percentage of approved recovery plans of The indicator will be measured by signed completion certificates for eachcommercial enterprises implemented. recovery plan.

Methodology developed and adopted and MAF staff The indicator will be measured by completion of a final report on procedurestrained on compiling regular agricultural production adopted and the number of staff trained.data, assessing damages and loss for the agriculturalsector and capacities strengthened in disasterpreparedness and response.

Intermediate Results Indicators

Indicator Name Description (indicator definition etc.)

Percentage of eligible subsistence farmers that have Percentage of targeted subsistence farmers that have received support throughreceived vouchers. vouchers under the project. The list of eligible farmers will be finalized prior

to issuance of vouchers.

Percentage of recovery plans of eligible commercial Percentage of target commercial farmers/aqua culturalists that have had theirfarmers and aquaculturists approved. recovery plans approved.

Damaged MAF facilities repaired. Measures recovery of essential assets for MAF. Measured in terms ofpercentage of budgeted expenditure spent.

20

Client days of training provided to farmers on This indicator measures the number of client days of training provided i.e. thetechnologies and practices for more resilient number of clients (farmers) who completed training multiplied by the durationagriculture. of training expressed in days. 8 hours are assumed to be equivalent to one day.

Client days of training provided to female farmers This indicator measures the number of client days of training provided tofor more resilient female farmers i.e. the number of clients (female farmers) who completed

ongtchloes atraining multiplied by the duration of training expressed in days. 8 hours areassumed to be equivalent to one day.

21

Annex 2: Detailed Project Description


1. The development objective of the project is to provide recovery assistance to cyclone-affected farmers and fishers through vouchers and grants with the aim of restoring their lostproduction capacity, and to enhance preparedness of the agricultural sector to better respond tofuture disasters

2. Project activities would be grouped into four components: (a) Cyclone Recovery forSubsistence Farmers and Fishers; (b) Cyclone Recovery for Commercial Farmers and Fishers;(c)Restoration of MAF Facilities and Strengthening the Agricultural Sector's Capacity for DisasterPreparedness and Response; and (d) Project Coordination and Management.

3. Component 1: Cyclone Recovery for Subsistence Farmers and Fishers. The objectiveof this component would be to carry out a program of activities aimed at restoring productioncapacity of cyclone affected subsistence farmers and fishers including: (i) issuing vouchers tosubsistence farmers for purchase of eligible farm items; (ii) issuing vouchers to subsistencefishers for purchase of eligible fishing equipment and/or farm items.

4. Vouchers for subsistence farmers. Vouchers would be issued to project beneficiaries inUpolu in the areas designated as severely or moderately affected in the PDNA 2 for procuring arange of eligible farm items including, inter alia, planting material and breeding livestock (pigsand poultry), fertilizer, farm tools and construction materials from any registered supplierparticipating in the project.

5. Vouchers for subsistence fishers. Vouchers would be issued to eligible fisher householdsin the same severely and moderately affected areas for procuring a range of agreed items,including, inter alia, cast nets, goggles, spears and canoe repair materials. Vouchers would beissued for fishing equipment only in villages with Community Based Fisheries ManagementPlans or with Marine Protected Areas. Fishing households in villages without these managementplans or protected areas would be issued with vouchers for agricultural items only, precludinguse of project funds for purchase of fishing gear.

6. An expanded list of agreed inputs and equipment are detailed in the table below.Beneficiary households in areas severely affected by the cyclone would receive a higher value ofvouchers than those in moderately affected areas. The precise voucher value would bedetermined once the beneficiary selection is finalized; it is estimated that voucher values willrange from about WST750 (US$320) for households in moderately affected areas to WST1,200(US$520) in severely affected areas. Vouchers would be valid for 15 months from the date ofissue. During the awareness and sensitization phase of the project the importance of investing in

2 Severely affected districts include Aanalofi, Falealili, Gagaemauga, Lefaga, Safata, Sagaga le Falefa, Siumu, andVaa o Fonoti. Moderately affected districts include Anoama'a I Sisifo, Anoama'a Sasa'e, Faleata, Falelatai -Samatau, Gagaemauga, Lepa, Lotofaga, Sagaga le Usoga, Vaimauga I Sisifo, and Vaimauga I Sasa'e.

22

more durable assets will be emphasized and farmers will be encouraged not to simply utilizetheir vouchers for consumables.

7. A list of beneficiaries will be compiled by MAF and MWCSD with inputs from VillageMayors and a verification team, including the village woman's groups representative, the villageyouth representative, the village council representative, and a village orator selected by thevillage council. The lists will identify whether households in the severely and moderatelyaffected areas are eligible for vouchers (subsistence farmers and fishers) or recovery grants(commercial farmers and aquaculturists). Preliminary lists will be published in a newspaper ofnational circulation and posted on church notice boards in affected villages. Farmers/fishers thathave been omitted from these lists, or wrongly classified, would have an opportunity to contactMAF to verify their status. MAF, together with MWCSD, will verify the status of thesehouseholds, make any necessary changes and finalize the list of eligible households. These finallists would then be made public. Subsistence farming and/or fishing households are defined ashouseholds actively engaged in such activities principally for their own subsistence needs,although at times surplus produce may be sold to local markets. Households are family groupsthat share a common kitchen and generally work together for a common interest and welfare.

Table 1: Eligible Input Purchases by Voucher Type

Subsistence Fishing Households Subsistence Farming HouseholdsPositive List (Allowed) Positive List (Allowed)

1. Three-prong Hand Spear 1. Fertilizer (Organic or Inorganic)2. Diver Fins for adult 2. Vegetable, pasture and fodder3. Diver mask professional type seed4. Snorkel 3. Seedling and planting materials5. Cast net (Throw net) Spanish type , 1 4. Fencing wire and posts

inch stretched mesh x 10 ft long x 5. NailsPolyamide monofilament 0,28mm 6. Livestock feeddiameter. 7. Construction timber

6. Eight (8) to ten (10) ft Rod and Reel 8. Materials for Animal sheltercomplete with monofilament line repair.

7. Fishing lures (Siripiri Galala) 9. Bow saws and axes8. Insulated cool box for marine use, made 10. Knapsack sprayers (for foliage

with UV inhibitors between 40 and 50 fertilizers)liters capacity with strong hands and 11. Irrigation equipment, waterdrain plug. harvesting/storage

9. Paint/Timber/nails/rope for canoe repair 12. Crop shelter (e.g. poly-tunnels,shade cloth, etc)

Negative List (Not allowed) 13. Farm implements (e.g. hoes,1. Fishing nets with mesh size of less than shovels, rakes, wheelbarrows,

1.2 inches hand sprayers, secateurs, etc)

2. Gillnets 14. Basic carpentry tools for repair3.1 work (e.g., hammers, saws, etc)15. Rural water tanks

1. Beeing livestock pistn

Subsistencefishing households may alsofe

purchase any items on the positive list8for poultry only)

23

subsistence farming households. 17. Organic or naturalpesticides/herbicides

Negative List (Not allowed)1. Chemical Pesticides/Herbicides

8. Expressions of interest (EOI) to participate in the voucher program would be requestedfrom agricultural and fishing input suppliers. As part of their EOI, such suppliers would berequested to provide information on: products that could be supplied from the approved list,including a breakdown of brand/type and current retail price; their capability, in terms ofprocessing electronic transactions and maintaining accounting/information systems, andwillingness to enhance those systems to accommodate the needs of the Voucher Program;current stocks on hand and capacity/timing to meet future demand; and years in business, annualturnover for the past three years, evidence of financial statements, details of bankruptcy orcriminal convictions of company directors, etc.

9. Once input suppliers are selected, an MOU would be prepared between MAF and eachsupplier, specifying all details of the input supply arrangement. Beneficiary households wouldpurchase approved inputs from registered input suppliers and would 'pay' for the goods withtheir electronic vouchers. The beneficiary representative would be required to present their ID tothe input supplier. The goods purchased, the amounts and the identity of the purchaser will berecorded. Paper copies of the receipt and delivery note will also be retained by the supplier foraudit purposes, with additional copies provided to the beneficiary.

10. The payment systems operator, to be hired prior to issuing vouchers and grants, will submita periodic electronic statement, supported by any paper documentation that may be required, tosuppliers as well as MAF, stating the transactions completed within that period and identifyingthe beneficiary, supplier, date and amount. The supplier would submit a statement reconciled tothe operator statement to the PMU, including additional information on items sold, in an agreedelectronic format, supported by any hard copies as agreed. The period of reporting (monthly,fortnightly or weekly) will be decided between the parties.

11. The PMU would perform sample audits on the information provided to ensure that allpurchases comply with the Voucher Program requirements. This information will also update theproject MIS and be the basis for progress reporting.

12. If non-compliance is detected, the PMU will take action according to the terms of theMOU, depending on the extent and type of non-compliance. The supplier will be heldresponsible if goods outside the eligible list are sold to beneficiaries and they will be required toreimburse MAF for these goods. It will not be feasible for certain suppliers such as livestocksuppliers to participate in this process. In such cases, the PMU will set up a special process tofacilitate payments using the same electronic payments scheme to transfer funds from thebeneficiary to the supplier within a supervised transaction.

13. Component 2: Cyclone Recovery for Commercial Farmers and Fishers. Theobjective of this component would be to carry out a program of activities aimed at restoringproduction capacity of cyclone affected commercial farmers and fishers, including: (i) providing

24

Recovery Grants to commercial farmers to assist in restoration of farm equipment andinfrastructure lost or damaged due to the cyclone; (ii) providing Recovery Grants to commercialfarmers involved in aquaculture to assist in restoration of equipment or infrastructure damageddue to the cyclone.

14. Recovery Grants for commercial farmers. Commercial farmers in severely andmoderately affected areas whose farm equipment or infrastructure was lost or damaged due tothe cyclone would be eligible for Recovery Grants. These grants could be used to procurematerials and inputs including, inter alia, plastic and shade houses, irrigation equipment,construction material and livestock housing. Project support would be limited to regaining onlylost capacity, and not for expanding operations.

15. Recovery Grants for commercial aquaculturists. Commercial farmers involved inaquaculture (tilapia farming) in the cyclone affected areas who have damaged or lost equipmentor infrastructure would be eligible for support under the project. Only enterprises fullyoperational prior to the cyclone would be eligible for support. Project support would be limitedto only regaining lost capacity, and not for expanding operations. To be eligible for a recoverygrant, ponds/tanks improperly sited from an environmental point of view would have to beresituated on the farm. The cyclone destroyed 8 of the existing 39 tilapia operations, and thesewould potentially be eligible for project support.

16. The Recovery Grant Scheme would be implemented by MAF. Responsibility for overallcoordination will lie with the Project Manager. A Grants Steering Committee (GSSC) chairedby the Project Manager and comprising representatives from MAF (CD, FD, PPCD, and APHD),MOF and SBEC would be established to provide overall guidance for the implementation of thescheme and endorsement of applications for funding. The Recovery Grant Scheme wouldprovide grants equal to 70 percent of the capital costs of replacing cyclone damaged eligiblecrop, livestock and aquaculture equipment and infrastructure. The remaining 30 percent of repaircosts would be organized by farmers/aquaculturists from their own equity (including in-kindlabor) or other sources. The exact value of Recovery Grants would be determined once thebeneficiary selection is finalized; it is estimated that Grants will range from about WST4,500(US$1,900) in moderately affected areas to WST7,000 (US$3,000) in severely affected areas.Grants would be disbursed to successful applicants using the same electronic payment method asused for subsistence beneficiaries.

17. Selection and implementation of recovery plans would follow a six step process:

(a) Step 1: Promotion and Registration of Interest. The scheme would be wellpublicized to ensure every eligible commercial farmer has fair and equal access,including a mass media campaign organized by the PMU to inform farmers about thescheme. Through the mass media campaign, farmers interested in applying for aRecovery Grant would be invited to register their interest with the PMU.

(b) Step 2: Preparation of Recovery Plan. Individual farmers/aquaculturistsinterested in accessing the scheme would prepare and submit a Recovery Plan using astandard template describing the cyclone damage and proposed repair/replacement

25

investment. MAF would provide some support under the project for the completion ofthese applications.

(c) Step 3: Screening of Recovery Plans. MAF would screen plans to ensure that theproposed repairs are for activities that are technically viable and eligible for fundingunder AFCRP. MAF would also undertake environmental and social screening andassist with identification of any mitigation measures and preparation of EMPs, ifneeded. Once the technical, environmental and social screening process is completedby MAF, the plans would be submitted to the GSSC for approval of the grant.

(d) Step 4: Signature of Grant Agreements. The PMU would inform all applicants ofthe approval or rejection of recovery plans. Applicants whose grants are approvedwould then be invited to sign a Grant Agreement, which would lay out the conditionsof the grant and beneficiary's obligations and responsibilities when using the grant.

(e) Step5: Implementation of Recovery Grant Scheme. Funds up to the maximumapproved amount would then be disbursed to the beneficiary using the electronicpayment system as used for the Voucher Program. Beneficiaries would then transactdirectly with approved suppliers. Use of the grant by successful applicants wouldfollow the guidelines detailed in the Project Implementation Manual.

(f) Step 6: Implementation Support and Monitoring. The PMU will monitorRecovery Grant activities and provide implementation support. PMU staff wouldmake regular on-site visits on a random basis, at the discretion of the PMU. Eachbeneficiary commercial farmer would be visited at least twice.

18. Component 3: Restoration of MAF Facilities and Strengthening the AgriculturalSector's Capacity for Disaster Preparedness and Response. The objective of this componentis to carry out a program of activities aimed at: (i) supporting the repair of essential MAFfacilities, damaged during the cyclone; (ii) establishing systems for the regular collection andupdating of agricultural production information; (iii) development of a standard methodology forcollection and analysis of damage and loss data for the agricultural sector; and (iv) strengtheningcapacities of farmers and sector institutions in disaster preparedness and response.

(a) Repair of damaged MAF facilities. Facilities and equipment owned by MAFCrops Division (CD), Animal Production and Health Division (APHD) and FisheriesDivision (FD) that were destroyed or damaged in the cyclone would be repaired orreplaced. This would include: repair of the boundary fence at Nu'u and Atele,rehabilitation of irrigation and drainage systems for the fruit gene bank at Atele,replacement of damaged trees of genetic importance at the fruit gene bank, plastictunnels and shade houses at the CD headquarters in Nu'u; chainsaws for fenceclearance; replacing veterinary drug supplies used in the immediate post cycloneperiod; replacement of lost marker buoys that delineate fish and shellfish sanctuaries;repair of the aquaculture workshops and the FD research vessel; and replacement ofgiant clams in fish reserves and of lost fish aggregating devises.

26

(b) Strengthening the agricultural sector's capacity for disaster preparednessand response and climate change adaptation and mitigation. The project would:support technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of the sector to respond moreeffectively to future natural disasters, through training programs to assist farmersprotect their assets when extreme events are forecast; establish improved systems forthe regular collection and updating of agricultural production information; supportenhancing MAF's ability to assess damages and losses following a natural disasterand target support to those most affected; develop systems for assessing the biologicaland ecosystem impact of natural calamities on fisheries and designing effectiverehabilitation programs; and support the construction of a boat ramp and theprocurement of a boat trailer to facilitate speedy removal of alias (local catamarans)at the Apia boat ramp to replace the current slow, labor intensive method. Trainingprograms under the project would be designed to ensure gender inclusiveness.

19. Component 4: Project Coordination and Management. This component will supportimplementation and management of the project, including: (i) provision of technical assistance,necessary for coordination and implementation of the project; (ii) procurement of vehicles andprovision of adequate work facilities for MAF; and (iii) design and implementation of an MISsystem for the Voucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme, and enhancing MAFmonitoring and evaluation systems to track implementation progress and results.

20. This component will support effective implementation and management of the projectthrough:

(a) Staff and technical assistance. Engagement of incremental staff (consultants)needed to coordinate and implement the project effectively, including a full-timeProject Manager, a Financial Management Officer, a Finance Assistant, three ProjectOfficers, and short-term advisers in information technology, procurement, financialmanagement and environment and social safeguards. The Voucher Program will useelectronic payment systems as far as possible in order to reduce logistical effort andcost, and will be based on local banking and technology platforms. An experiencedpayment systems operator would be recruited to implement the system. Additionalsupport on procurement and safeguards would be provided by the PCG.

(b) Equipment and operating costs. Procurement of up to two four-wheel drivevehicles for the project and the provision of adequate work facilities and operatingexpenditure (including vehicle hire, where necessary) for MAF to maximizeoperational effectiveness. Operational costs for MWCSD are to be financed throughthe GoS's allocation to MWCSD for the recovery program.

(c) Monitoring and evaluation. Designing and implementing an MIS system for theVoucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme, and enhancing MAF M&Esystems to track implementation progress and results. In order to assess changes inagricultural production due to project activities, a small household survey will beundertaken by the Crops Divisions with support from the PMU and PPCD six monthsprior to project closing. The Fruit and Vegetable Baseline Survey and Cattle Censusfrom SACEP will be used to provide baseline indicators.

27

Annex 3: Implementation Arrangements


Project Institutional and Implementation Arrangements

Project administration mechanisms

1. Several agencies are expected to be involved in project implementation, including theMinistry of Finance (MOF), Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAF), Ministry of NaturalResources and Environment (MNRE), Disaster Management Office (DMO) and Ministry ofWomen, Community and Social Development (MWCSD). Project management support wouldbe provided to oversee implementation and coordinate the activities of implementing agencies.General oversight of implementation would be provided by a Project Steering Committee(PSC), and for the proposed project, this work would be undertaken by a newly formed sub-committee of the existing SACEP Steering Committee. The PSC would guide the overalldirection of the project, review annual work programs, resolve implementation bottlenecksoutside the control of MAF, assess the potential of the project to achieve the expecteddevelopment impact at the national level, and adjust project activities, if necessary, in pursuit ofthe project development objective. Project management support would be provided to overseeimplementation and coordinate the activities of implementing agencies.

2. MAF Executive Management Team. Comprised of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)and all Divisional Assistant CEOs (ACEOs), the AFCRP Project Manager and the SACEPProject Coordinator (also the Sector Coordinator), the MAF Executive Management Teamreview annual work programs, budgets and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) results, andresolve implementation bottlenecks within MAF's control.

3. Project Coordination. A Project Management Unit (PMU) would be formed forAFCRP, headed by a dedicated AFCRP Project Manager (PM), based in MAF and engaged forthe period of the project. The PM would coordinate all project activities and monitor thedevelopment impact of the project. The PM would be supported by five staff - a FinanceManagement Officer, a Finance Assistant and three Project Officers. The PMU would besupported by short-term TA on information technology, financial management, procurement,environment and social safeguards. Procurement would be handled by the relevant staff of theSACEP PCG. The SACEP Environmental and Social Safeguards Specialist would also providesupport to the AFCRP PMU. The three Project Officers would be responsible for social andenvironmental screening and monitoring, facilitating implementation of the voucher program,and recovery grants and results monitoring.

4. Project Implementation. In a similar arrangement to SACEP, day to day activitiesinvolving interaction with subsistence and commercial farmer and fisher beneficiaries and thedevelopment and implementation of new methodologies to strengthen disaster preparedness inthe sector would be the direct responsibility of the ACEOs of the Crops Division (CD), AnimalProduction and Health Division (APHD) and Fisheries Division (FD) - working in conjunctionwith their counterparts from MWCSD for subsistence households.

28

Financial Management, Disbursements and Procurement

Financial Management.

5. The Financial Management Assessment determined that oversight for this project will bethrough a minimum of six monthly implementation reviews by the designated World BankFinancial Management Specialist. In addition, quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) will berequired to be submitted to the Bank within 45 days of the end of each calendar quarter andannual audits of the project to be furnished to the Bank within 6 months of the end of each fiscalyear.

6. The main risks relating to this project are the breakdown of the electronic VoucherProgram, misuse of the vouchers, or failure to keep the appropriate records given that the processwill be new to all staff. The mitigating measures to be implemented to reduce the risksassociated with the current Financial Management System are: (1) the establishment of a numberof controls for the Voucher Program to enable the efficient distribution of funds for the affectedsubsistence farmers and fishers; (2) monthly reconciliation of project accounts to the governmentrecords and reconciliations of the vouchers as required; (3) appointment of dedicated financialmanagement staff, including a part-time Finance Advisor, a full-time Financial ManagementOfficer, and an additional Finance Assistant; and (4) adoption of the Project ImplementationManual, with specific guidance for the beneficiaries, suppliers and project management.

7. Budgeting Arrangements. The detailed budget for the life of the project (2 years) hasbeen prepared during preparation. The budget will be reviewed by the Finance Advisor andsubject to an annual review. The budget will be consistent with the procurement plan but willinclude additional expenditure not covered in the procurement plan. The Financial ManagementOfficer will monitor the budget throughout the life of the project and financial reporting willrequire expenditure to budget comparisons. Budgeting will be on an activity basis summarizedby component and category.

8. Accounting. The PMU will prepare the accounting documentation for transactions andremit to the MOF for payment. MOF will make the payment and record the information intoGOFAR (Government Finance and Reporting System) which uses Finance One accountingsoftware. As the GOFAR records project expenditure under only one line, the project will berequired to maintain parallel records to enable dissection of information for reporting purposes.On a monthly basis, MOF will provide the project with a project transaction listing which theproject will be required to reconcile to its own records. Copies of the reconciliation should bemaintained by the project and be available for review by the Bank.

9. Internal Controls. The GoS accounting processes ensure authorization and paymentprocesses are clearly segregated. All payment vouchers will be prepared by the PMU, authorizedby MAF (responsible ACEOs/CEO), and reviewed by the Aid Co-ordination Unit (ACU) ofMOF before payment is processed through MOF.

10. Vouchers. The electronic voucher system will both reduce transaction processing effortat MAF and provide more information for audit and monitoring purposes than a manual, paper-based system. The following controls will be implemented at a minimum:

29

(i) MAF will create and maintain the primary database of beneficiaries, including theircategorization (i.e., fisher/farmer, severely or moderately affected), formal identitydetails, phone and/or other contact information, voucher amounts issued and used,and types of goods purchased.

(ii) Payment to beneficiaries will be based on lists supplied from the MAF database.Suppliers will record purchases based on the same data. The reconciliation ofperiodic statements will ensure that errors in allocation of benefits are easilyidentified.

(iii) A similar process will identify any misuse - i.e., purchase of unapproved goods - asgoods sold will be listed in supplier statements. Additional mitigating measuresinclude: provision of a list of eligible items that can be purchased to both suppliersand beneficiaries, who will be required to confirm that they understand theirobligations (suppliers will sign an MOU and beneficiaries will sign anacknowledgement at the time of registration); and the employment of a full-timeFinance Officer to review the transaction listing provided for purchases from thevoucher system. There will also be a regular audit, based on random samplereviews, by the Financial Management Officer, the Finance Advisor and WorldBank Financial Management Specialist.

(iv) Funds disbursed under the project for vouchers and recovery grants will be depositedin a trust account or special purpose account by the payment systems operator untilbeneficiaries draw down on their allocation. There will be separate reporting on theactivities of the trust/special purpose account, which will also be monitored by theCentral Bank. Expenditure from the trust/special purpose account will initially bereconciled to the transaction lists provided by the suppliers to ensure that nounforeseen errors have occurred in the automatic recording of the payments.

(v) The payment systems operator will ensure that funds made available as e-vouchersto beneficiaries may only be used to make purchases at approved suppliers. Thesystem will prevent them either from being encashed or used for other purchases,including for example, phone calls.

(vi) Any funds remaining unused in beneficiary accounts will be returned to MOF andre-deposited into the DA at the end of the project. Any interest accrued in thetrust/special purpose account will be used at the discretion of GoS.

(vii) Electronic vouchers will have an expiry date at least 6 months prior to the closing ofthe project. The scoping and development of the e-vouchers would be done underretroactive financing to reduce the risk of delays in the implementation of the e-voucher system.

11. To minimize the risk of failure of the various electronic systems and processes, a smallpilot will be conducted prior to the launch to identify and rectify errors. The ProjectImplementation Manual will outline the obligations/responsibilities/procedures of the VoucherProgram. This manual would include sections for the beneficiary, for suppliers, and for the

30

project staff. No disbursements will take place for the Voucher Program, and the RecoveryGrant Scheme until the manual has been adopted.

12. Flows of Funds. A Designated Account (DA) will be opened at the Central Bank ofSamoa and will be managed by MOF (ACU) and the PMU. The government account will bereimbursed from the DA on a monthly basis.

13. For larger payments, Direct Payments may be used by the project and hence funds willflow directly from the Bank to the supplier. Such payments must still be incorporated into theproject accounts.

14. For electronic vouchers, funds will flow from the Designated Account into theTrust/Special Purpose Account(s) and payments to suppliers will be made directly from theTrust/Special Purpose Account(s). As funds are expended from the Trust/Special PurposeAccount(s) these amounts can then be submitted in Withdrawal Applications for documentationonly.

15. Financial Reporting. Expenditures will be reported by component and sub-componentby quarter and year to date, with a comparison to budget summary; a spreadsheet will be used tomonitor and record commitments. In addition, a worksheet will provide a breakdown of thevoucher transactions, both by the amount advanced and the amount expended from theTrust/Special Purpose Account(s).

16. The project will be required to prepare quarterly Interim Financial Reports (IFRs) in aformat agreed with the Bank. The IFRs will be required to be submitted not later than 45 daysafter the end of the reporting period. The IFRs will be prepared by the PMU in consultation withMOF.

17. External Audit. Samoa Audit Office (SAO) will conduct an annual audit of the projectaccounts and furnish them to the Bank within 6 months of the end of each of the reportingperiods.

Disbursements

18. The project will use three Disbursement Methods: Advance, Reimbursement, and DirectPayment.

19. A DA will be opened to enable the Bank to advance funds to the project. The DA will beopened at the Central Bank. The documentation required for the replenishment of the advancewill be by Statement of Expenditure; the project will retain such documentation for audit andreview by the Bank. To satisfy replenishment requirements, evidence will need to be providedthat any advanced funds through the vouchers or grants have been expended. The MOF andMAF will comprise the authorizing officers.

20. The PMU will prepare all Withdrawal Applications and will send them, along withaccompanying documentation, to the ACU at MOF, for submission to the Bank.

31

21. The project will have three disbursement categories and the amounts are outlined in thetable below.

Category Amount of Financing Percentage ofAllocated (expressed in Expenditures to be

SDR) Financed(inclusive of Taxes)

(1) Goods, works, non-consulting services, 1,080,000 100%consultants' services, Training and OperatingCosts for Parts 3 and 4 of the project.

(2) Subsistence farmer grants and subsistence 2,030,000 100%fisher grants under Part 1 of the Project.

(3) Commercial farmer grants and commercial 190,000 100%fisher grants under Part 2 of the Project.

TOTAL AMOUNT 3,300,000

22. Up to SDR 660,000 can be utilized for retroactive financing for payments for eligibleexpenditures under Category 1 made between December 13, 2012 and the date of signing of theFinancing Agreement.

Procurement

23. Applicable Guidelines. Procurement activities to be financed under the project will becarried out in accordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loansand IDA Credits," dated January 2011 (Procurement Guidelines), "Guidelines: Selection andEmployment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers," dated January 2011 (ConsultantGuidelines), and the provisions stipulated in the Financing Agreement. Procurement under theVoucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme would be in compliance with proceduresagreed with the Bank.

24. Goods and Works to be procured for the project include repairs to damaged structuresand accessories in farms and workshops owned and managed by MAF, replacement or repair ofequipment and goods owned by the MAF Fisheries Division (marker buoys, fish aggregatingdevices, giant clams etc), and procurement of goods for project coordination, and sector responseactivities. The payment systems operator for implementation of an IT-based payment system willbe procured under non-consulting services.

25. Consultant services under AFCRP include hiring of individual consultants for projectmanagement and coordination, financial management, IT, monitoring and disaster preparednessadvisory services.

26. Procurement under the Voucher Program will be carried out by the voucher beneficiaries(subsistence farmers and fishers). The registered list of suppliers would be prepared based on an

32

assessment (by the SACEP PCG) of retailers located in Apia, and updated monthly with pricelists.

27. Procurement-related Risk Assessment and Mitigation Actions. The alreadyestablished SACEP PCG will provide procurement support to AFCRP. SACEP is still in theearly stages of implementation, and there have only been a few procurement activities to date.The overall procurement-related risk is therefore rated substantial. The PCG has in place acompetent Procurement Advisor and two Procurement Officers, which is considered adequate forsupporting the additional procurement activities under AFCRP.

28. Procurement thresholds and prior review thresholds are detailed in the procurement plan.A summary procurement plan of key activities is presented in the table below.

Implementation Scheduling (Month/Year)

BankEst. Cost Review Proc./sele Procurement Process Contract

# Contract Description (US$ (Prior/ ction Invite Bids! Sign Completion

mil.) Post) Method Proposals Contract

Selection of Consultants

1 Project Manager 0.20 Prior IC JUL 13 SEP 13 DEC 15

2 FM & Project Officers (5) 0.24 Post IC SEP 13 NOV 13 OCT 15

3 Disaster Preparedness 0.11 Prior IC NOV 13 MAR 14 JUL 15Advisors (3)

4 IT Advisor 0.06 Prior IC SEP 13 OCT 14 DEC 14

5 IT services to amend 0.06 Prior IC SEP 13 NOV14 JUN 14supplier POS system

Procurement of Goods & Non-Consulting Services

Vehicles for PMU/MAF (2) 0.07 Post S OCT 13 DEC 13 NOV 131

2 Office furniture & 0.022 Post S OCT 13 DEC 13 NOV 13equipment

3 Payment System Services 0.10 Prior ICB SEP 13 DEC 13 DEC 15(NCS)

4 Replacement or repair of 0.228 Post S DEC14 MAR14 MAR 14damaged equipment andgoods (multi contracts)

Procurement of Works

1 Repair &/or replacement of 0.18 Post S JAN 14 FEB 14 MAY 14fisheries assets

2 Repair &/or replacement of 0.18 Post S NOV 13 DEC 13 MAR 14Crops Division assets

3 Rehabilitation of fruit farm 0.08 Post S/FA NOV 13 JAN 14 JUL 15- irrigation, drainage &revitalization

33

Environmental and Social (including safeguards)

60. In accordance with OP 4.01, an Environmental and Social Management Framework(ESMF) was prepared by the MAF. The ESMF analyses the positive and negative impacts of thedifferent types of activities that will be financed by the project. It also sets out the principles,procedures and guidelines for screening environmental and social impacts of farm and pondrehabilitation, mitigation measures, implementation arrangements, the monitoring plan andarrangements for training and capacity building. Overall the project is likely to have a positiveimpact on Samoan society by supporting farmers and fishers to recover from the impacts ofCyclone Evan.

29. The Pest Management Policy (OP 4.09) is triggered for this project. While the projectwill not finance pesticides for beneficiaries of the Voucher Program or the Recovery GrantScheme, there is a possibility that project activities may indirectly lead to increased use ofpesticides by farmers. MAF has developed an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Plan as part ofthe ESMF for the SACEP, in line with the standards and requirements set forth in OP4.09. TheSACEP IPM Plan will be used for this project.

30. The Natural Habitats Policy (OP 4.04) is also triggered because the recovery grants underComponent 2 would involve relocation of two or three poorly situated tilapia ponds. Therelocation sites of these ponds will be carefully screened to avoid sites that would encroach oradversely affect any natural habitats as defined in OP 4.04, or any sensitive environments. Otherproject activities are unlikely to affect any critical or non-critical natural habitats, as they will beundertaken within their existing sites.

31. The Indigenous Peoples Policy (OP/BP 4.10) has been triggered and the relevantsafeguards measures required under the policy have been applied to this project. The ethnicstructure in Samoa is predominantly ethnic Samoan (92.6 percent) with a minority of Europeansand biracial Europeans/Polynesians. Indigenous peoples in this context generally refer to allnative Samoans in project affected villages. Samoa's indigenous customs and traditions havelargely remained intact and are strongly reflected in their current political and economicinstitutions, particularly in the family and village socio-political structures, as well as in thecustomary land ownership system. Project preparation and design was guided by a SocialAssessment and free prior and informed consultations have been conducted for the project by theMAF in a sample of affected villages in accordance with cultural protocols. Strong stakeholdersupport has been demonstrated throughout these consultations, indicating broad communitysupport for the project. To minimize possible farmer/fisher perceptions of being unfairly left outin the beneficiary selection process, MAF has put in place measures to ensure transparency inbeneficiary selection, while taking into consideration the existing village decision makingprocess. There are no potential community impacts as the project will only provide grants toindividual households. A grievance redress mechanism has been established and is included inthe ESMF.

32. There will be no land acquisition, destruction of assets, displacement of dwellings orrestriction of access to livelihoods under this project. All civil works supported under the projectwould be confined within existing or original infrastructure sites and all rehabilitation activities,

34

including relocation of damaged fish ponds within private farms, will be carefully screened forthese impacts.

33. The key environmental and social safeguards measures for Component I have alreadybeen integrated in the implementation arrangements for the component. These include: (a)measures adopted to ensure transparency and cultural appropriateness of the process foridentification of Voucher Program beneficiaries; (b) pre-screening of eligible items to bepurchased using project vouchers in order to exclude environmentally hazardous items; and (c)the distribution of pamphlets on good farming and fishing practices, including Integrated PestManagement, to the voucher recipients by MAF. MAF will also provide relevant training ongood and environmentally sustainable farming/fishing practices and conduct random site visits ofvoucher recipient households to evaluate adoption of desired practices. Items eligible forpurchase using project vouchers have been pre-screened to exclude environmentally hazardousitems such as chemical pesticides and herbicides, gillnets, and underwater torch lights. Toprevent overfishing, replacement fishing equipment will only be financed in villages that have anexisting Community Based Fisheries Management Plan or a designated Marine Protected Area.

34. For infrastructure rehabilitation activities under Component 2 and 3, the AFCRPEnvironmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF) provides detailed processes andprocedures for screening, preparing additional documentary requirements - such as a PreliminaryEnvironmental Assessment Report (PEAR) and/or an Environmental and Social ManagementPlan (ESMP) if required, and the review and clearance of the safeguards aspects of proposedrehabilitation activities. For Component 2, the process will generally follow the existingarrangements under SACEP, where MAF Extension Officers/PMU Project Officers areresponsible for screening and preparing rehabilitation proposals. The proposal package,including the completed safeguards instruments (e.g., Screening Forms, PEAR and ESMP) willbe reviewed and cleared by the SACEP Environment and Social Management Officer (ESMO)before they are submitted to the GSSC for approval. For rehabilitation works under Component3, the concerned MAF unit will be responsible for the screening and preparation of documentaryrequirements, which will also be reviewed and cleared by the SACEP ESMO, before they areapproved for implementation by the PMU. The ESMO, together with the Project Officers, willdevelop a simple compliance monitoring protocol for infrastructure rehabilitation activities.

35. The current institutional capacity of MAF staff to implement most of the measuresoutlined in the ESMF is considered moderate. A full-time Environmental and SocialManagement Officer (ESMO) has been recruited in the SACEP PCG and will be responsible,together with the three AFCRP Project Officers, for overseeing the social and environmentalscreening, preparation of ESMPs, and monitoring the implementation of these plans. There isalso provision for part-time TA on social and environmental safeguards. The TA and ESMOwill support capacity building of the MAF to use the ESMF.

36. The main agency responsible for environmental protection in Samoa is the Planning andUrban Management Agency (PUMA), which is the regulatory agency within the Ministry ofNatural Resources and Environment (MNRE). MNRE is a well-organized agency with goodexperience in environmental impact assessment and environmental management plans, and isfamiliar with Bank environmental safeguards.

35

Monitoring & Evaluation

37. The project M&E system, including an MIS for the Voucher Program and the RecoveryGrant Scheme, would track the project Results Framework indicators to assess overall projectperformance. It would capture information on environmental and social indicators to assess theeffectiveness of environmental and social mitigation measures. Activities would involve randomvisits to beneficiary households to ensure compliance with safeguards and to monitor how inputsare used. The system would work both as a day-to-day management tool for implementingagencies, and as a mechanism for assessing project impact. The AFCRP Project Manager,supported by the PPCD, would be responsible for M&E activities and related reportingrequirements. Project data would be summarized on a bi-annual basis, and would be included inProgress Reports to be circulated to government authorities, the Bank and other interesteddevelopment partners. The M&E system will track the number of female headed householdsbenefiting from the project and whether they are fully availing themselves of project benefits. Inorder to assess changes in agricultural production due to project activities, a small householdsurvey will be undertaken by the Crops Divisions with support from the PMU and PPCD sixmonths prior to project closing. The Fruit and Vegetable Baseline Survey and Cattle Censusfrom SACEP will be used to provide baseline indicators.

Role of Partners

38. The main development partner supporting the post-cyclone recovery of the agriculturalsector is FAO, who are proposing a project entitled Emergency Livelihood Support to Small-scale farmers and Fishers Affected by TC Evan. The project cost is Euro 314,000 (approx.UD$420,000) to be disbursed over a 6 month period. The most vulnerable households would betargeted, with a target of 2,250 farming households receiving seeds, tools and agricultural inputs.It is likely that this project will start and finish before the proposed AFCRP is in full swing, andtherefore both initiatives would complement each other. Because of the flexibility of voucheruse, those households who have received benefits from the FAO project can elect to use theirvouchers for the purchase of other agricultural inputs/assets.

36

Annex 4: Operational Risk Assessment Framework (ORAF)

Samoa: Agriculture and Fisheries Cyclone Response Project

Prjc Stkhl Risk

Stakeholder Risk Rating Substantial

Risk Description: All eligible households might not Risk Management: The e-voucher program and recovery grants will be widelyparticipate in the project because they are unaware of the publicized. MAF and other relevant Ministries and civil society would be involved inproject, or because they are wrongly excluded from drawing up beneficiary lists, which would be made public (posted in churches andeligible beneficiary lists; and female participation might published in a national newspaper). Eligible beneficiaries that have been omitted frombe under represented. the lists will be able to make a submission to MAF regarding errors or omissions on the

list - within a period of two weeks from the time of posting and all such queries will beinvestigated by MAF and MWCSD. Beneficiary selection would be at the householdlevel, which would include all household members, including both women and youth.In addition, MWCSD representatives would participate in beneficiary selection, andensuring gender inclusiveness would be a feature of MAF training programs, with aspecific indicator in the project Results Framework.

Bank missions will carefully review participation of eligible households, in particularthe participation of women.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:

Client and Implementation F-] On-goingBank

Capacity Rating High

Risk Description: Lack of capacity to direct and manage Risk Management: A dedicated AFCRP Project Manager is expected to be in placethe implementation of the electronic voucher scheme; poor before project Effectiveness. A short-term IT adviser will be recruited soon for thecoordination between MAF and MWCSD (to prepare the electronic voucher scheme. AFCRP will finance up to two additional suitably qualifiedbeneficiary lists) and between MAF and participating FM staff and three Project Officers.input supplies may delay the implementation of theVoucher Program. Intensive Bank implementation support missions and training are planned to support the

PMU, particularly in the first six months following effectiveness.

37

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:

Client and On-going Implementation F 3/31/2014 As neededBank

Risk Description: Canvassing applications for assistancefrom commercial farmers/fishers and approving recoverygrants could prove difficult because of capacity Risk Management: A modified/simplified version of the procedures used under theconstraints. Experience gained from relevant SACEP Matching Grant Program of SACEP would be used.activities already underway could make adequate capacityavailable for this activity.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client Implementation Z On-going As needed

Risk Description: Delays in procurement decision- Risk Management: Procurement tracking system to be implemented; MAF will follow

making due to a multi-layered approval process. up with the Tenders Board and the Attorney General's office to agree on procedures forexpediting the approval process. Bank missions will monitor timely implementation ofthe Procurement Plan.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client and Not yet due Implementation I 3/31/2014 As neededBank.

s DRisk Management: Appointment of dedicated Financial Management staff, including a

Rapcisk Desc in:ster MhF lac f Prancamt part-time Finance Advisor, a full-time Financial Management Officer, and an additionalcapacity to administer the Voucher Program. Fiac. sssat

Finance Assistant.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client Not yet due Implementation I 3/31/2014 As needed

Governance Rating High

Risk Description: MAF often has difficulty prioritizing Risk Management: To facilitate coordination, the SACEP Project Coordinator, who isand coordinating different donor activities which may also the Sector Coordinator, will be part of the Project Steering Committee for thecreate implementation bottlenecks. AFCRP.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client Not yet due Implementation 2 3/31/2014 Continuous

38

Design Rating High

Risk Management: Voucher use rules would be detailed in a short pamphlet given toproject households and MOUs would be established between MAF and participatingsuppliers. There would be direct control through the payment technology to ensure that

Risk Description: Electronic voucher schemes may fail to restrictions on where the vouchers can be spent are enforced. Comprehensive reportingreplace lost production capacity of both subsistence and by both the payment systems operator and input suppliers will provide MAF withcommercial farmers and fishers. information to monitor fund use.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client Not yet due Implementation I 3/31/2014 Continuous

Social and Environmental Rating Moderate

Risk Description: An environmental and social Risk Management: Replacement fishing equipment will only be financed in villagesmanagement framework has been developed detailing the that have an existing Community Based Fisheries Management Plan or are designated asprocess and procedures for screening environmental and a Marine Protected Area. Only those commercial farm and aquaculture investmentssocial impacts for project activities, the measures to posing minimal risk would be approved for financing through the Recovery Grantaddress the impacts, if any; the pest management plan; and Scheme of Component 2. Bank missions will monitor compliance with Bank safeguardsinstitutional arrangements and capacity building, among policies.others. A grievance redress mechanism has beenestablished. Intensified agricultural activities couldnevertheless have some negative environmental or socialimpacts.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client and On-going Implementation V Effectiveness ContinuousBank

Program and Donor Rating Low

Description: The only significant donor activity in cyclone Risk Management: On-going liaison with FAO and any other potential donor wouldrecovery for the agriculture sector is an FAO program, continue to ensure complementarity between externally funded projects and any otherwhich complements activities planned under AFCRP. GOS program.

39

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client and Ongoing Implementation Appraisal ContinuousBank

Delivery Monitoring and Sustainability Rating High

Risk Description: Initial SACEP implementation Risk Management: Key staff such as the Project Manager will be recruited prior toexperience gained by the PCG will benefit the Effectiveness and provided adequate training. Three Project Officers, an FM Officer andimplementation of AFCRP. However, managing the Finance Assistant will also be recruited. The Bank will monitor effectiveeffective delivery of the Voucher Program and implementation of the project, including through missions and review of periodic M&Eimplementing the M&E system will be a challenge. reports.

Resp: Status: Stage: Recurrent: Due Date: Frequency:Client and Not yet due Implementation I 3/31/2014 ContinuousBank

Implementation Risk Rating: High

Risk Description: The overall implementation risk is rated as High. The high risk rating stems from the weak implementation capacity of MAF andthe limited experience it has in implementing Bank funded projects, especially involving disbursement of funds to beneficiaries through a VoucherProgram. There is a shortage of skilled technical and managerial staff in the sector and the existing MAF staff does not have all the necessary skillsrequired to implement planned project activities, especially in a cyclone recovery project where distribution of funds to beneficiary householdsneeds to be done as quickly as possible. The existence of a functioning PCG established in 2012 under SACEP, strengthened by selectiveinternational technical assistance will partially mitigate this risk, as will the appointment of a dedicated AFCRP Project Manager and extra staff tobolster the PCG's capacity in financial management and monitoring. Further mitigation will be through the substantial capacity development andtraining programs being provided by SACEP, by upgrading the institutional capacity of MAF and broadening the skills-base of MAF staff.

40

Annex 5: Implementation Support Plan

SAMOA: Agriculture and Fisheries Management Project

1. The implementation support strategy proposed for AFCRP will address the keyimplementation risks identified in the ORAF. Those risks considered to be "high" relate toimplementing agency capacity; design; and delivery monitoring and sustainability. Mitigationmeasures for these risks are integrated into various project design features and targeted technicalassistance and have been set out in Annex 3.

2. The engagement of a dedicated AFCRP Project Manager, supported by part-timeadvisors, is intended to mitigate the implementation capacity risk. Significant investments arecurrently being made in upgrading the institutional capacity of MAF and broadening the skill-base of MAF staff under SACEP, and AFCRP will benefit greatly from this institutionalstrengthening. The Bank will continue to provide support during project implementation, aselaborated below.

3. A Project Implementation Manual (PIM) is being prepared and outlines the processes tobe followed by MAF, MWCSD and others agencies and institutions involved in implementingthe project. The PIM will include detailed information on implementation arrangements andactivities, fiduciary aspects (including procurement and financial management), safeguards,implementation arrangements for the Voucher Program and the Recovery Grant Scheme, draftterms of reference for all additional staff to be attached to the PCG and key technical assistance;and the monitoring and evaluation arrangements.

Implementation Support Plan

4. The Bank task team in Sydney will provide implementation support for the day-to-dayoperations of the project through regular advice and guidance on technical matters, as well asprocurement and financial management, to MAF, MWCSD and other entities involved inimplementing the project. Safeguards support would be provided by consultants, with additionalsupport from Bank safeguards staff in the region or from Washington DC, as needed. The Bankwill hire specialized consultants to provide additional support on technical issues, and reviewtechnical documents. Formal missions will be conducted three times in the first year ofimplementation and then at least semi-annually thereafter. There will also be regular follow-upthrough the World Bank Liaison Office in Samoa.

5. The following support is anticipated to be required to facilitate timely implementation,ensure due diligence and provide technical inputs:

(a) Technical inputs. An IT specialist to assist with implementation support for the e-voucher program including reviewing technical specifications, as needed. Engineeringinputs are required to review construction plans, bid documents, and bid evaluationreports, for the various renovations to buildings and farm facilities. During constructionand commissioning, technical supervision will be provided to ensure that technicalcontractual obligations are met. Technical inputs will also be required from a fisheriesspecialist, an agricultural economist and an agricultural specialist.

41

(b) Fiduciary requirements and inputs. Training will be provided by the Bank's FinancialManagement Specialist and the Procurement Specialist (both based in Sydney) before thecommencement of project implementation. The team will also provide regular support tothe Financial Management Officer in the PMU and Procurement Officers in the SACEPPCG. Supervision of financial management and procurement matters will be carried outsemi-annually as part of the project supervision plan.

(c) Social and Environmental Safeguards. The Environmental Safeguards Specialist willensure that the environmental procedures followed are in line with Bank's policies andprocedures, as described in the ESMF. Other specialists will be involved, if required, toprovide guidance on environmental matters and on social and environmental safeguards.

6. The core staff skill mix required is summarized below.

Focus areas for implementation supportTime Focus Skills Needed Resource EstimateFirst twelve months * Review design of vouchers Livestock Specialist $150,000

and voucher manual andMOU with input suppliers Agricultural Specialist

* Review arrangement topromote the project and Fisheries Specialistcanvass applications for therecovery grant scheme Environmental & Social

* Training on environmental Safeguardssafeguards for MAF staff

* Engineering inputs for Legaltechnical review ofprocurement documents Procurementrelated to repairs to MAFbuildings and farm Financial Managementinfrastructure

* Procurement and Financial IT SpecialistManagement

* Review of communications,outreach and trainingprograms related to therecovery grant program

* Overall implementationsupport

12-24 months 0 Review of Livestock Specialist $150,000implementation of the Agricultural SpecialistVoucher Program Fisheries Specialist

* Review of operation of Environmental Safeguardsthe Recovery Grant Social safeguardsScheme Legal

* Overall implement Procurementsupport Financial Management

* Monitoring of project IT Specialistimpact Agricultural Economist

42

Skills Mix RequiredTime Core Skills Needed Number of Number of Trips Comments

Staff Weeks AnnuallyPer Year

First twelve monthsTask Team Leader 8 3 Sydney basedFinancial Management 2 2 Sydney basedSpecialistProcurement Specialist 2 2 Sydney basedSafeguards Specialist 3 2 Manila based/Environmental SafeguardsSafeguards Specialist /Social 2 1 ManilaSafeguards based/ConsultantIT Specialist 6 3 ConsultantTechnical Specialists 12 As required ConsultantsLivestockAgriculturalFisheries

Operations Support 3 As required Sydney based

12-48 monthsTask Team Leader 6 2 trips Sydney basedFinancial Management 2 2 Sydney basedSpecialistProcurement Specialist 1 2 Sydney basedSafeguards Specialist 2 2 Manila based/Environmental SafeguardsSafeguards Specialist /Social 1 1 Manila basedSafeguardsCommunications Specialist 1 As required Sydney basedTechnical Specialists 10 As required ConsultantsLivestockAgriculturalFisheriesITM&EOperations Support 4 As required Sydney based

43

World Bank Document · 2016. 7. 12. · document of the world bank for official use only report no:...

Documents

Transcript of World Bank Document · 2016. 7. 12. · document of the world bank for official use only report no:...