THEDEVELOPMENTGRANTFACILITY (DGF) FY04 DGFANNUAL REVIEW AND FY05 BUDGET May 28,2004 ACRONYMS ACBF African CapacityBuildingFoundation ADEA Associationfor DevelopmentofEducation inAfrica AFUR Africa Forum for Utility Regulators AFR Africa Region APOC African Programfor OnchocerciasisControl AVU African Virtual University CA Cities Alliance CAS Country Assistance Strategy CEPF Critical EcosystemPartnershipFund CFP ConcessionalFinanceandGlobalPartnerships CASM Communitiesand Small-scale Mining CGAP The ConsultativeGroup to Assist the Poorest CGIAR ConsultativeGroup on International Agricultural Research CPI Child ProtectionInitiative DGF DevelopmentGrantFacility ECDCI Early Child DevelopmentCapacity-Building Initiative EAP East Asia andPacific ECA EuropeandCentral Asia EFA Educationfor All ESSD Environmentally and Socially SustainableDevelopment EU EuropeanUnion EITI Extractive Industry TransparencyInitiative FA0 FoodandAgriculture Organization FIRST Financial Sector Reformand StrengtheningInitiative FPP ForestPartnershipsProgram FRESH FocusResources on Effective School Health FSE Financial Sector FTI FastTrack Initiative GISP Global Invasive Species Program GFMP Global FinancialManagementPartnerships GFHR Global Forum for Health Research GFIP Global Fundfor IndigenousPeoples GPP Global Programs andPartnerships GRI Global Reporting Initiative HDN HumanDevelopmentNetwork HNP Health,Nutrition, andPopulation HRP SpecialProgrammeof Research, Development, andReseal*chTraining in Human Reproduction IAD Internal Audit Department ICP InternationalComparisonProgramme ICRW InternationalCenter for Researchon Women IDF Institutional Development Fund IFC International Finance Corporation IIEP InternationalInstitute for Educational Planning ILO InternationalLabour Organisation IMF International Monetary Fund INF Infrastructure IOPS InternationalOrganization of PensionSupervisors infoDev Information for Development Program ISG Information Solutions Group IUCN The World ConservationUnion LAC LatinAmerica andCaribbean LEG Legal Department MDG MillenniumDevelopmentGoals MENA Middle East andNorthAfrica NGO Nongovernmentalorganization OCP OnchocerciasisControl Program OECD Organisationfor Economic CooperationandDevelopment OED OperationsEvaluationDepartment OPCS OperationalPolicy and Country Services PACT Partnershipfor African Capacity Building PATS PartnershipApproval and Tracking System PCD Partnershipfor Child Development PCF Post-Conflict Fund PES Programfor EducationStatistics PPIAF The Public-Private InfrastructureAdvisory Facility PREM PovertyReductionandEconomic Management PRH PopulationandReproductiveHealthCapacity-Building Program PSD Private Sector Development RBM Roll Back Malaria REF RomaEducationFund SAFIR SouthAsia Forumfor InfrastructureRegulation SFRM Strategy, Financeand RiskManagement SmGP Small Grants Program STDF StandardandTrade DevelopmentFacility SGBI StrengtheningGrassrootsBusinesses Initiative SSA Sub-SaharanAfrica TAP TechnicalAdvisory Panel TB Tuberculosis TDR SpecialProgramfor Researchand Training inTropical Diseases ucwI1 UnderstandingChildren's Work -Phase I1 UNAIDS Joint UnitedNations Programson HIV/AIDS UNDP UnitedNations DevelopmentProgramme UNESCO UnitedNations Educational, Scientific, andCultural Organization UNICEF UnitedNations Children's Fund UNSCN UNStandingCommittee onNutrition WHO World HealthOrganization WRI World Resources Institute WTO World Trade Organization WWF World Wide Fundfor Nature ZFHE Zambezi Forum on Higher Education TABLE CONTENTS OF Page No . 1. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION .............................................................................. 1 DGF ObjectivesandApproach ........................................................................... 1 Frameworkfor ManagingGlobalProgramsandPartnerships 2 StrengtheningResultsinGrant-Making ............................................................ ........................... -3 ChallengesofManagingDemandwithina ConstrainedBudget ....................... 3 The ProposedFY05 Budget ............................................................................... 4 Recommendation ............................................................................................... - 5 I1 FY05DGFBUDGET . ...................................................................................................... 9 KeyFeaturesofFY05DGFAllocationProcess .............................................. 10 AllocationHighlightsbyNetwork ................................................................... 13 DGFProgramActivities by Region ................................................................. 17 LeveragingResources ....................................................................................... 18 BudgetOutlook for FY06............................................................................... 18 111 STRENGTHENINGRESULTSGRANT . IN MAKING ......................................................... 21 .................................................................................. 21 B The DGFApproachto Monitoring. ReportingandEvaluation............................ A. EnsuringQuality At Entry., . 27 IV CONCLUSION . ............................................................................................................... 33 Listof Boxes Box 1: DGFObjectivesandEligibility Criteria ................................................................... 1 Box 2: FY00-05DevelopmentGrantFacilityBudget .......................................................... 5 Box 3: The DGFTwoWindowFundingApproach............................................................ 11 Box 4: Major PartnersinDGF-SupportedPrograms ......................................................... Box 5: Sector Strategy PapersRelevantto DGF Programs................................................ 19 23 Box 6: ExamplesofDGFLinksto Country Operations 24 Box 7: PerformanceIndicators........................................................................................... .................................................... Box 8: DGFIndependentEvaluationGuidelines............................................................... 26 28 ListofTablesinthe Text Table 1: FY05 DGFBudgetAllocations byNetworkand Sector......................................... 6 Table 2: FY05DGFBudgetSourcesandUses of Available Funds ..................................... 7 Table 3: FY05 DGFProgramsbyMillenniumDevelopmentGoals ..................................... 8 Table 4: DGFProgramActivitiesby Region...................................................................... 18 Table 5: ProgramsDisengagingfrom DGF ......................................................................... 20 Table 6: Timetable ofIndependentProgramEvaluations................................................... Table 7: KeyFindingsfrom FY04Evaluations................................................................... 29 30 List of Figures Figure 1:DGF GovernanceStructure ................................................................................... 22 List of Charts 1. FY05DGFBudget-By Network..................................................................................... 9 2 FY05DGFBudget-By MajorPrograms . ......................................................................... 9 Listof Annexes 37 2. FY05 DGFBudgetAllocationsbyWindows 1and2......................................................... 1. DGF GrantAllocationsFY98-05........................................................................................... 41 44 4 List of DGF Council Members............................................................................................... 3. DGFEligibility Criteria........................................................................................................... 5.. 45 6. DGFProgramLinks to Sector Strategies.............................................................................. GPP FundingGuidelines......................................................................................................... 46 47 7 ExamplesofDGFProgramPerformanceIndicators........................................................... 52 8. DGFProgramIndependentEvaluationTemplate................................................................ . 53 9 Summariesof IndependentEvaluations................................................................................ . 10. Summariesof ProposedFY05 DGFPrograms.................................................................... 55 70 DEVELOPMENTGRANT FACILITY FY04DGFANNUAL REVIEWAND FY05BUDGET I.SUMMARYANDRECOMMENDATION 1.1 The Development Grant Facility is the Bank's instrument for financing grants to global programs and partnerships(GPPs) to promote collective action addressing important global and regional development challenges. GPPs have become an increasingly significant form of engagement for the Bank in tackling difficult global health problems such as AIDS and malaria, building networks to spread innovative ideas in education, funding agricultural research and promoting environmental sustainability, and improving the climate for trade, finance and investment. Recognition has grown that coordinatedinvolvement of key partners from the public and private sectors, as well as civil society, can increase effectiveness inaddressingdevelopment challenges. The Bank's participation in GPPs, including through DGF funding, has a catalytic role inbuilding alliances, forging consensus and mobilizing funding from other donors. DGF Objectives andApproach 1.2 The DGF was created in FY1998 to integrate the overall strategy, allocations and management of Bank grant-making activities into a single umbrella mechanism. The DGF establishes grant-making as an integral part of the Bank's work with developmentpartners and as an important complement to its lending and advisory services. DGF grants are intended to encourage innovation, catalyze partnerships, and broaden the scope of Bank services. Programs seekingDGF funding are assessedagainst eight DGF eligibility criteria (see Box 1). Box 1: DGFOBJECTIVESAND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA Encouraging innovation... through seed moneyand cutting-edgeapproaches Catalyzingpartnerships ... through conveningand buildingcoalitions and raisingfunds Broadening Bank services...by increasingthe effectiveness of country programs/projects DGFprogramsshould: Not compete with regular Bank instruments Have a distinctcomparativeadvantage Encompass multi-countrybenefits Providesignificantleverage(DGFUS$ < 15%) Have a granteewith a recordof achievementand financialprobity Maintainan arm's-length relationshipwith the Bank's regular programs Have an explicit disengagement strategy Reinforcepartnerships Notes: The DGFobjectives and eligibility criteria were approvedby the Board inJuly 1998. See The Development Grant Facility: FY98 DGF Annual Reviewand ProposedFY99 DGF Budget(R98-258), October 28, 1998. See Annex 3 for a full descriptiono f DGF eligibility criteria. 1.3 Complementing Country Operations. DGF funding is targeted at initiatives supporting high-value activities that cannot be assisted adequately through country operations alone. DGF- funded programscan focus at the global or regional level on advocacy, standard setting, research, knowledge management and donor coordination. Some DGF programs also work at the country level to disseminate knowledge and build capacity when smaller targeted interventions can be undertaken more efficiently through a global program than through regular Bank lending operations. For programs to receive DGF funding, they must be closely aligned with sector strategies. 1.4 Two-Window Approach. The DGF operates under a two-window funding approach, introduced inFY02, to ensure that resources are made available on an annual basis for addressing emerging priorities. Window One programs provide funding to sustain the Bank's commitment to tackle long-term development challenges (e.g., protection of environmental commons, combating communicable diseases, access to finance). The allocation of about US$30 million annually through Window Two enables the Bank to support initiatives that provide seed money, pilot new approaches and test new ideas. The three-year maximum duration of Window Two funding ensures that an average of about US$10 million is freed up annually for funding new initiatives. Frameworkfor Managing GlobalPrograms and Partnerships 1.5 Based on the recommendations of a Bank-wide review group, in FY04 Management establisheda Global Programsand PartnershipCouncil (GPP Council) and a GPP Group. These steps took into account the findings of the 2002 OperationsEvaluation Department (OED) Phase 1 evaluation of the Bank's management of global programs, which recommendedthat the Bank should standardize its approach to global programs in order to improve strategic priority setting andassure quality.' 1.6 The GPP Council, chaired by two Managing Directors, with members including a wide range of Network, Regional, and central Vice Presidents, is the management committee overseeing the strategic framework and operational policies for Bank involvement in GPPs. Intended to strengthen corporate strategic oversight and selectivity, it sets the Bank's vision and priorities for its engagement in GPPs, reviews VPU portfolios and the Bank's institutional partnerships, and sets and oversees criteria for selection and evaluation of GPPs, including governancestructures, risk management, exit strategies, andbest practice. 1.7 The GPP Group was created in FY04 within the Concessional Finance and Global ProgramsVice Presidency, by combining staff ofthe PartnershipCouncil secretariatandthe DGF secretariat. The GPP Group supports the GPP Council in order to strengthen analysis of the Bank`s role in GPPs and to increase the coherence, focus and management of this important segment of the Bank's operations. The GPP Group is currently working with VPUs with substantialengagement inglobal programs andpartnershipsto review their GPP portfolios as part ofthis objective. 1.8 Guidance provided by the GPP Council benefitedthis year's DGF allocation process and contributedto modifications inthe Two-Window approach. The allocation process also benefited from closer linkage between the concept review with MDs for new GPPs seeking DGF funding and the subsequent review of proposals by the DGF Council. Building on the GPP portfolio reviews undertaken in VPUs, the GPP Group will be working toward the development of an ' The WorldBank's Approach to Global Programs: An IndependentEvaluation-Phase I (CODE2002- 002). 2 improved framework for management of Bank GPPs, including DGF-supported programs. As part of this process it will consider recommendations made in the recently-circulated second phase OED report on global programs.2 1.9 Work has also been undertakento rationalizethe Bank's approachto funding GPPs. The Strategy, Finance and RiskManagementVice Presidencyrecently issuedguidelines for funding of global programs(see Annex 5). These rules determinewhich funding sources are appropriate for a global programdependingon the type of governance arrangements utilized. The guidelines clarify that DGF funds must flow to entities outsidethe Bank, while permitting Bank budget to be usedto support Bank staff participation inglobalprogramsand partnerships. This approachhas beenappliedto all new programsproposedunder the FY05 DGF budget. Strengthening Results in Grant-Making 1.10 Attention to achieving results inDGF grant-making occurs both through ensuringquality at entry during the review of grant applications for new and ongoing programs, and through regular monitoring and evaluation during program implementation. The DGF continues to strengthen the process for review of grant applications in order to ensure adherence to DGF eligibility criteria, strengthenalignment with Bank strategiesand objectives, identify and manage risks, and promote sound program design and implementationarrangements. Attention to these aspects results in better selectivity in allocating DGF funds and higher quality at entry. At the same time, progressis also being made in improving monitoring and evaluation processes, which include annual progress reporting and financial reporting as well as periodic independent evaluation. 1.11 Sector Boards review applications for technical quality, alignment with sector objectives and conformity with the DGF eligibility criteria set by the Board. Networks cleared all new partnerships with the appropriate Managing Director and often reallocatedfunds across sectors to address emerging priorities. The DGF Council vetted funding proposals against the institutional priorities defined by the MDGs and against corporate targets. This year, particular emphasis has been put on the development of performance indicators for DGF-supported programs. The inclusion of indicators in DGF applications are of value at the review stage because they make more apparent the merit and feasibility of program objectives, define responsibilities and better clarify the timetable for implementation. Programs receiving US$300,000 or more annually in DGF funding must undertake independent evaluations every three to five years, particularly for considerationoffunding under Window One. Throughoutthe process, special attentionwas paid to the results of independent program evaluations in moving proposals forward and in making allocation decisions. Challengesof Managing Demand within a ConstrainedBudget 1.12 This year, Networks vetted, prioritized and recommended to the DGF Council some 67 proposals requesting US$204.0 million from the FY05 DGF budget. The Council endorsed allocations on the understandingthat the FY05 DGF budget, excluding PACT, would be the same size as in FY04. The largest challenge for the Council was inWindow One, where 23 proposals sought US$139.1 million compared to 16 programs in FY04 that received US$116.4 million. In Window Two, 18 ongoing proposals sought an increase of US$6.4 million, while 24 new DGF proposalssoughtUS$16.2 million infunding. Addressing the Challenges of Globalization: An Independent Evaluation of the World Bank's Approach to GlobalPrograms-Phase 2 Report (forthcoming). 1.13 Inconsideringproposalsfor Window One funding from programsdue to exit which are seeking longer-term funding, the DGF Council took into account both Management's proposed approach as outlined in the midyear Board paper and guidance received from the GPP Council. The DGFCouncil endorsedthe migrationto Window One of three programs:Roll Back Malaria, Stop TBand Global Financial ManagementPartnerships. The Council agreedthat the remaining programs should exit, but endorsed extensions of one year in Window Two for the following programs in order to allow more time to explore alternate funding sources or to permit smoother disengagementfrom DGF: e Forest Partnerships Program e Public Private Infiastructure Advisory Facility e CitiesAlliance (CA) e Programfor Educational Statistics e MENA Gender Program e Development GatewayFoundation 1.14 Basedon guidance from the GPP Council, the Two-Window approachhas beenmodified to mitigate the build-up of unrealistic expectations of programs for long term funding from Window One. New programs that may be expected to seek long term support are considered under Window One at the outset to address difficult funding trade-offs before they are launched. Window Two will continue to provide seed funding but careful management of expectations about future supportwill be emphasizedboth internally and with partners. 1.15 The GPP Council also stressed that the merit of continuing DGF support for programs in Window One at current levels should be subject to continuing scrutiny. The allocation process for Window One programs should not be constrainedby expectationsthat established initiatives receiving long term funding will have indefinite and unchanging entitlement. Instead, Window One allocations should focus more closely on results and on addressing emerging institutional priorities. Where Bank country operations increasingly include activities that are complementary and supportive of programobjectives, DGF contributions should be reducedwhile demonstrating to partners that overall Bank support for these objectives is being maintained or indeed strengthened, albeit ina differentform. Phasingdown or endingallocations for some programs in Window One would allow more room within the DGF budget for important new programs meriting longer term supportto enter Window One. The Proposed FY05 Budget 1.16 For FY05, we are submitting for Board considerationa budget of US$174.2 million for 58 programs(see Table 1on page 6; descriptions ofprogram activities and achievements are in Annex 10). This budget is US$4.0 million below the FY04 level, accountedfor by a lower allocation to the Partnershipfor Afiican Capacity Building (PACT), as expected. The US$26.0 million contribution to PACT would complete the Bank's planned allocation of US$150.0 million. Box 2 on page 5 provides details on recent DGF budgets. 1.17 Fundswere made availablefor emergingpriorities from eight exiting programs (US$7.16 million) and reductions in ongoing programs (US$8.47 million), allowing the Council to allocate important amounts for key efforts in environmental sustainability, health and education, good governance, small business, infrastructure and finance (see Table 2 on page 7). Seventeen relatively small new programs have been endorsed for short-term funding totaling US$lO.1 million, while eight ongoing programs were endorsed for expanded funding of US$5.5 million. Applications from seven other proposednew programswere rejected. Ofthe 10 programs due to 4 exit from Window Two seeking longer-term funding (nine programshighlighted inthe mid-year DGF Board paper3andDevelopmentGateway), three are recommendedfor migration to Window One for longer-term funding and six others are proposed to receive special one-year extensions under Window Two, following which they will exit from DGF. BOX2: FY00-05DEVELOPMENT GRANT FACILITY BUDGET (US$m) Core DGF budget 125 146 146 147 147 147 Plus PACT 30 23 30 0 28 26 African VirtualUniversity(AVU) (under PACT) 7 4 2 EastTimor 5 DGFadministration 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total 156 177 177 157 178 174 Recommendation 1.18 It is recommendedthat the Executive Directors approve the proposed FY05 budget of US$174.2 million. Development Grant Facility: Approach to Programs Due to Exit from DGF Funding (SecM2004- 0114). This paper outlinedManagement's proposedapproachunder which, with the Board's guidance in mind, and basedon the relativepriorities identifiedby DGF Councilmembers, Managementwould consider only three ofthe nine programs for longer-term finding (Roll Back Malaria, Stop TB andthe Global Financial Management Partnership), while the others would be expected to exit from DGF support. 5 Table 1: FY05DGFBUDGET ALLOCATIONS BY NETWORKAND SECTOR (US174.22 million, 58 programs) Rural Development 51.05 Urbannnfrastructure 1.70 ConsultativeGroup on Int'l Agricultural Research(CGIAR) 50.00 The CitiesAlliance 1.70 StandardsandTrade DevelopmentFacility 0.30 Financial /Private Sector 10.53 int? Assessment of Agricultural Science and Tech.for Dev. 0.50 ConsultativeGroupto Assistthe Poorest(CGAP) 5.53 Millennium Project Hunger TaskForce 0.25 GuarantCo 3.OO Environment 8.75 Public-PrivateInfrastructureAdvisory Facility (PPIAF) 1.50 Critical EcosystemPartnership Fund 4.00 Extractive industry Transparency initiative 0.50 ForestPartnershipsProgram 0.75 Energy, Mining& Telecoms 3.08 Global InvasiveSpecies Program(GISP) 0.60 Information for Development(infoDev) 2.50 Global ReportingInitiative (GRI) 0.30 Global Gas FlaringReductionPublic-PrivatePartnership 0.30 AFR -Africa Stockpiles Program 1.50 Communities and Small-Scale Minim 0.28 Researchand Capacity Building -- Coral Reef Management 1.00 1.§o LAC - Connectivity between Biological & GeospatialInfo. 0.40 EXT - COM+: Communicatorsfor Sustainable Development 0.20 Social Development 11.40 FinancialSectorReform& Strengthening Initiative (FIRST) 0.60 Post Conflict Program(PCF) 8.00 SupportingInsuranceSupervision 0.20 Small GrantsProgram 2.80 Gender 0.36 Health, Nutrition & Population 24.04 MENA Gender ResearchandTraining Network 0.36 Global Forumfor HealthResearch 6.78 Poverty Reduction 5.60 UNAIDS & RegionalInitiatives 4.00 GlobalDevelopmentNetwork Core Program - 4.00 African Programmefor Oncho Control(APOC) 3.27 InternationalComparisonProgramme 1.oo Population& ReproductiveHealthCapacityBuilding 2.20 GlobalGovemance andDevelopingCountryVoice 0.60 ResearchandTraining inTropicalDiseases(TDR) 2.00 Public Sector 0.23 Research& DevelopmentinHumanReproduction 2.00 Good Governance Comm Mobilization To Combat7Corruption b. m--.t9 2, 0 23 Roll BackMalaria 1.00 Opet!atioos:PoJky'& Co-u~t&',~efik&~Netyo~k OPCS 19.55 Stop TB Initiative 0.70 Quality Promotion 19.00 NutritionandGender 0.50 InstitutionalDevelopmentFund(IDF) 19.00 UNStandingCommitteeonNutrition 0.10 Financial Management 0.55 Health Equity Fund 1.50 Global FinancialManagementPartnershim 0.55 Education 5.96 Partnershipfor Child Development 1.50 DevelopmentGatewayFoundation 1.oo Program for EducationStatistics 1.20 CapacityBuilding for EducationalPlanning& Mgmt. (IIEP) 1.00 Special Programs 26.00 Developmentof EducationinAfrica (ADEA) 0.35 Partnership for African CapacityBuilding(PACT) 26.00 Roma Education Fund 1.00 TheAsia-Pacific Quality Network 0.36 Early Child Development Capacity-BuildingInitiative 0.35 Zambezi Forum on Higher Education (ZFHE) 0.20 DGF Administration 1.18 Social Protection 1.44 MENA ChildProtectionInitiative (CPI) 1.05 UnderstandingChildren'sWork PhaseI1 - 0.10 Global Partnershipfor Disability and Development 0.29 BudgetTotal 174.22 Notes: Annex 10providesdetaileddescriptions o f eachprogramincludingobjectives,achievementsandpartnershiparrangements. Italics indicatenewprogramsin FY05. 6 Table 2: FY05 DGF BUDGET: SOURCES AND USES OF AVAILABLE FUNDS Sources of Available Funds (US$ millions) Uses of Available Funds Summary 8 ProgramsExiting from DGF 7.16 17NewPrograms 10.12 14 OngoingPrograms Reductions - 8.47 8 OngoingPrograms ExpandedFunding Total - - 5.52 15.63 Total - 15.62 Details ExitingPrograms 7.16 New Programs 10.1; HD ESSD Assessment ofStudentAchievement 2.08 Int?Assess. of Agri. Sci, and Tech.for Dev. 0.50 World Links 1.51 Millennium Project Hunger TaskForce 0.25 Forumfor African WomenEducationalists 0.40 AFR Afiica StockpilesProgram - 1.50 The West AfricanMulti-diseaseSurvey 0.30 Research & Cap. Build.,for Coral Reef Mgmt. 1.00 INF LAC - Connect.Biological. and Geosp.Info. 0.40 Solar DevelopmentGroup 0.50 EXT- COM+: Alliance of Communicators 0.20 PREM HD ForgingPartnershipsfor GoodGovernance 0.85Health Equity Fund 1.50 IntegratedFrameworkFor Trade 0.80 Roma Education Fund 1.00 OPCS TheAsia-Pacijk Quality Network 0.36 CaribbeanRegionalTech. AssistanceCenter 0.73 Early ChildDev. Capacity-Building Initiative 0.35 Zambezi Forum on Higher Education 0.20 Global Partnershipfor Disability and Dev. 0.29 OnPoingPrograms Reductions - 8.47 INF ESSD Extractive Industries TransparencyInitiative 0.56 PostConflictProgram 1.22 Communities and Small-ScaleMining 0.25 Forest Partnerships Program 0.05 PSD HD Strengthening Grassroots BusinessesInit. 1.51 The GlobalForumfor HealthResearch 0.68 FSE ResearchandTraininginTrop. Diseases 0.50 Int? Organization of PensionSupervisors 0.07 Roll Back Malaria 0.50 PREM Cap. Buildingfor Education.Plan. andMgmt 0.42 Good Gov: Mobiliz. To Combat Corruption 0.22 Programfor Education Statistics (PES) 0.23 OngoinP ProPrams ExpandedFunding - 5.5; EducationResearchComponentinGDN 1.18 ESSD INF Small GrantsProgram 0.3( CGAP 0.80 GlobalInvasiveSpecies Programme 0.3( InfoDev 0.15 HD GuarantCo 0.70 Partnershipfor ChildDevelopment 0.1: PPIAF 0.50 MENA ChildProtectionInitiative 0.41 PREM INF GlobalDevelopmentNetwork 0.45 GlobalGas FlaringReductionPartnership 0.0 OPCS FSE GlobalFinancial Management Partnerships 0.10 FinancialSector Reformand Strength.(FIRST) 0.2( ISG PREM Development Gateway Foundation 1.oo GlobalGov. & Strength.Dev. Country Voice 0.1~ OPCS InstitutionalDevelopmentFund 4.0( Total 15.63 Total 15.6 7 I - 1 I 1 I 8 11. FY05DGFBUDGET 2.1 Summury. An FY05 budget ofUS$174.2 millionfor 58 programs is proposedfor Board consideration, including US$147.0 million for DGF programs and an allocation of US$26.0 million for PACT. This compares to an FY04 budget of US$178.2 million supporting 49 programs, including US$30.0 million for PACT. The Bank's planned allocationto PACT of US$150.0 million would be completed inFY05. Seventeenrelatively small new programs have been endorsed for short term funding for atotal of US$10.1 million. Of the 10programs due to exit from Window Two seeking longer-termfunding (nine programs highlightedinthe mid-year DGF Boardpaper andDevelopmentGateway), three are recommendedfor migrationto Window One for longer-term funding and six others are proposed to receive special one-year extensions underWindow Two. Itis expectedthat 20 programswill exit DGFat the endofFY05. 2.2 The recenthistory ofDGF funding is shown inBox 2 on page 5. Detailedallocationsare showninTable 1onpage6, andinCharts 1and2 below. Chart 1: FYOSDGFBudget byNetwork -- ESSD(incl HD PACT OPCS INF PREM PSDFSE ISG CGIAR) Chart 2: FY05DGFBudget by Major Programs -- 9 Key Features of FY05 DGFAllocation Process 2.3 Demand for DGF remains high. This year, Networks vetted, prioritized and recommendedto the DGF Councilsome 67 proposalsrequestingUS$204million from the FY05 DGFbudget. The Councilendorsedallocationsonthe understandingthat the FY05 DGFbudget, excludingPACT, would bethe same size as inFY04. The largest challenge for the Councilwas inWindow One, where 23 proposalssoughtUS$139.1millioncomparedto 16programsinFY04 that received US$116.4 million. This increase was partly due to funding requests for 10 of 16 programs scheduled to exit from DGF Window Two after three years of support; in addition, some ongoing programs sought increases. In Window Two, 18 ongoing proposals sought an increase of US$6.4 million, while 24 new DGFproposalssought US$16.2million infunding. 2.4 GPP Council guidance on Two-Window approach. The GPP Council discussed the DGF Two-Window approach at a meeting in March 2004. Members recognized the challenge posedby high demand versus limitedfunds and by the proposals for Window One funding from programs dueto exit from DGF. The Counciladvisedthat: 0 Rigorous application of DGF eligibility criteria is needed in considering funding applications. 0 The merit of continuing DGF support for programs in Window One at current levels should be examined carefully. Reducingor ending allocations for some programs in Window Onewouldallowmore roomto support emergingpriorities. e New programs that may be expected to seek long term support should be considered under Window One at the outset to address difficult funding trade-offs before new programs are launched and to avoidthe build-up of unrealisticexpectations for Window One funding. 0 Window Two makes sense as a source of seed funding but careful management of expectationsabout future support is necessarybothinternally and with partners. DGF's Two-Windowapproachis describedinBox 3. 2.5 Ensuring flexibility in Window One. For programs receiving long-term funding, the DGF must apply careful scrutiny each year to ensure that, as new priorities emerge, there is capacity to switchresources from well established entities and avoidbeingoverly constrainedby expectations that these programs will have indefiniteand unchanging entitlement. In particular, this scrutiny wouldfocus on: 0 program achievements, as demonstrated by annual progress reports and independent evaluations; 0 the extent to which the program remains a top priority for the sector and the institution; and 0 how sustainable the programwould be without the DGF's financial support, recognizing that, in some cases, Bank country operations include activities that are complementary anddirectlysupportiveofprogramobjectives. 10 Planned reductions in funding are occurring with CGAP and CEPF (which is expected to exit from DGF in FY06). Looking forward, infoDev may be another example where DGF funding could be phased out over time taking into account that Bank operations may be incorporating information and communication technology components more regularly. Likewise, as the Bank extends more support for agricultural research institutions in developing countries and for "take- up" o f CGIAR research, gradual reductions in DGF funding for CGIAR may also be contemplated. Where Bank country operations increasingly include activities that are complementary and supportive o f program objectives, DGF contributions should be reduced while demonstrating to partnersthat overall Bank support for these objectives is beingmaintained or indeedstrengthened, albeit ina different form. 2.6 DGF Council deliberufions. Inreviewingthis year's proposals, DGF Council members adhered closely to the guidance provided by the GPP Council. The DGF Council looked closely at Window One programs to identify where allocations could be reduced and DGF support phased out. The Council considered carefully whether new programs might more appropriately fit inWindow One and provided guidance to deter several programs from seeking Window One funding in the future. In this context, several programs were given one-year "seed funding." Program related issues or problems meetingthe DGF eligibility criteria were generally more of a factor than budgetary constraints in reducing allocations below requests or in rejecting new proposals. BOX3: THE DGFTWO-WINDOWFUNDINGAPPROACH In FY02, the DGF introduceda two-window approach to grant making in order to allocate resources within a tight budget and to more clearly differentiate between programs to be supported through grants in the medium and long term from those to be supported for a limited time. The approach requires a restriction on the number and cost of programs Jnanced in the medium to long term in order to ensure that suficient funds are available for emerging priorities. It also enables Network managersand staff to consider new partnership opportunities for DGF grant financing with the assurance that some new funds will be available annually. The principle that DGF support from the outset will be for a defined period continues and will be applied to both windows. Programs in each window require a different disengagementstrategy: 0 Window I is reserved for medium and longer-term programs whose prospects for disengagement are reviewed in the context of progress being made. It includes: (a) established programs with long-term development objectives, track records of success and strong partnership backing for extended DGF grant support; (b) priority programs with specific funding requirements that extend beyond three years; and (c) new programs with aspirations for medium- or longer-term support, which will be considered at the outset for Window One funding. These programs do not generally have a defined exit strategy. However, independent evaluations are requiredapproximatelyevery three years as a basis for decisions on future DGF funding. In interim years, DGF allocations are basedon annualprogressreporting. 0 Window 2 is reserved for funding programs for no more than three years. It includes the following: (a) established programs with long-term development objectives and clear plans for achievingsustainability; (b) new programs with an initial start-up phase of up to three years; and (c) innovativeprograms that need seed capital for one to three years for testing new ideas. 11 2.7 Approach for programs due to exit Window Two seeking longer-term funding. In considering proposals for Window One funding from the nine programs due to exit seeking longer-term funding (and Development Gateway), the DGF Council took into account both Management's proposed approach as outlined in the mid-year DGF Board paper and the GPP Council's guidance. e The DGFCouncil endorsedthe migration to Window One ofthree programs. Roll Back Malaria and Stop TB are successful, high priority programs in which the Bank's continued participation through DGF is seen as increasingly important for meeting the MDGs in health. The work of the Global Financial Management Partnerships is closely in line with the Bank's enhanced focus on improvements in accounting and auditing practicesand public standards of financial accountability inits client countries. 0 The Council agreed that the remaining programs should exit, but endorsed special one- year extensions in Window Two for the following programs in order to allow more time to explorealternate funding sources or to permit smoother disengagement from DGF. 9 ForestPartnershipsProgram. Theextensionwill helpthethree initiatives under the programto become sustainable without DGF funding. 9 Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility. A final year of DGF funding will smooth the transition to reliance inFY06 on administrativebudget resources for the Bank's contribution. 9 CitiesAlliance. The extension will provide the project sponsors with a year to arrange alternate funding sources, including greater reliance on trust funds and Bank budget. 9 Programfor EducationalStatistics. A last year of DGF funding will bridge a timing gap untilreplacementdonor funds become available. 9 MENA GenderProgram.Theextensionwill smoothdisengagement fromDGF. 9 Development Gateway Foundation. The one-year extension will provide time for the initiative to refocus and explore alternate funding sources. e One program, Forum for African Women Educationalists,was expected to be able to continuewithout DGF support andwas not endorsedfor additional funding. 2.8 Little supportfor significant expansions of ongoingprograms. Most ongoing programs were endorsed close to FY04 levels but requests for significant increases generally were not accommodated. 0 ESSD requested US$12.0 million for the Post Conflict Fund but the DGF Council endorsed funding of US$8.0 million, taking into account the availability of US$25 million underthe LICUS Trust Fundfor an overlapping set of countries. e INF sought increased funding for infoDev and GuarantCo, but actual funding was reducedmodestly for both for program-relatedreasons. 12 One exception was the Institutional Development Fund, where the Council endorsed funding of US$19.0 million, US$4.0 million over the FY04 level, but US$6.0 million less than the amount requested. Also, the MENA Child Protection Initiative was endorsed for US$l.lmillion, US$0.45 million more than in FY04. In sum, eight ongoing programs were endorsed for increases amountingto US$5.5 million, while 14ongoingprograms receiveddecreases infunding of US$8.5 million. 2.9 Seventeen new programs supported with availablefunds. Funds were made available for emerging priorities from eight exiting programs and net reductions in ongoing programs. These funds allowed the Council to allocate important amounts for key efforts in environmental sustainability, health and education, good governance, small business, infrastructure and finance. Out of a total of 24 new initiatives considered for FY05 DGF funding, the Council endorsed 17 small, short-termnew Window Two programsfor atotal ofUS$10.1million. 0 An allocation of US$1.5 million was endorsed for theAFR- and ESSD-sponsoredAfrica StockpilesProgram to deal with disposalofhazardous wastes. 0 An allocation of US$1.5 million was endorsed for the Health Equity Fund to spreadbest practices inhealth initiatives. 0 An allocation ofUS$1.5 million as a one-time grant was endorsed for the PSD sponsored Strengthening Grassroots Businesses Initiative to scale up grassroots business organizations. 0 Grants of US$1 million each were endorsed for the ESSD-sponsoredTargeted Research and Capacity Building for Coral Reef Management and the HD-sponsored Roma EducationFund. 0 Grants of less than US$1.O million are proposedunder Window Two as seed funding for 13 other new programs. 2.10 Balance between Window One and Window Two. Window One will be US$3.8 million larger than last year at US$120.2 million, while Window Two will be correspondingly smaller at US$26.9 million. This is somewhat below the target minimum level of US$30 million for Window Two. However, at the end of FY05, 20 programs will exit Window Two, including 14 Window Two programs and six programs receiving one-year extensions. These exits will make available US$14.0 million for emerging priorities in FY06. Moreover, reductions in the size of several Window One programs in FY06 will facilitate an increase in Window Two back toward the target ofUS$30million. Allocation Highlights by Network 2.11 The allocations by Network for some key new and ongoing programs are described below. Detailed information on all proposedprograms is provided inAnnex 10. ESSDNetwork CGUR. The US$50.0 million request was endorsed. The Council noted Management's plans to enhance Bank oversight of CGIAR and requested reporting on progress on the uptake of CGIARresearchat the country level. 13 Post Conflict Fund. DGF Council endorsed funding of US$8.0 million, lower than the US$12.0 million requested and the US$9.2 million approved in FY04, taking into account the availability o f US$25.0 million under the LICUS trust fund for an overlapping set of countries. Forest Partnerships Program. A one-year extension in Window Two at US$0.75 million was endorsed for the three initiatives that comprise the Forest PartnershipsProgram to ensure that this work, which supports the Bank's forest strategy, can be put on a sustainable footing. Six new initiativeswereendorsedfor Window Twofunding: 9 Targeted Research and Capacity Building for Coral Reef Management (US$l.O million) will establish a global network of coral reef research institutions and target research to fill gaps in understanding factors affecting the health o f coral reef systems. 9 TheAfrica StockpilesProgram (US$1.5 million) will help eliminate stockpiles o f obsolete pesticides in Africa and disseminate lessons learned in pesticide management. 9 The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (US$0.5 million) is intended to build consensus among governments, UN agencies, NGOs and the private sector on the current state o f science on the controversial issue o f genetically modified foods and recommend policy options for the use o f science and technology infood production. > The MDG Hunger Task Force (US$0.25 million one time grant) program will facilitate the Bank's work with this UNtask force to develop an action plan to halve world hunger by 2015. 9 Developing Connectivity between Biological and Geospatial Information in Latin America (US$0.4 million) will develop and promote standards for collecting biological information in the Americas in order to enhance the contributiono fthis information to development efforts. 9 The Alliance of Communicators for Sustainable Development (COM+) (US$0.2 million one time grant) is a communications initiative between the Bank and 11 other partners to build a network and develop a joint communications program on sustainable development. HDNetwork Two HD programs were approvedfor longer-termfunding under Window One. Roll Back Malaria was endorsed for US$l.O million and Stop TB was endorsed for US$0.7 million. Roll Back Malaria and Stop TB are successful, high-priority programs in which the Bank's continued participation through DGF is seen as increasingly important for meetingthe MDGs inhealth. Ten other ongoing Window One and Window Two programs were endorsed for continuedfunding, the largest of which are the Global Forum for Health Research 14 (US$6.78 million) and UNAIDS (US$4.0 million). Other key programs endorsed for funding include the African Programfor Onchocerciasis Control (US$3.3 million), Population and Reproductive Health (US$2.2 million), Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (US$2.0 million), Research and Development in Human Reproduction (US$2.0 million), the Partnership for Child Development (US$1.5 million) and Capacity Buildingfor Educational Planning and Management (US$1.O million). Six new programs were endorsedfor Window Twofunding, of which three are one- time "seedmoney" grants. > The Health Equity Program (US$1.5 million) will provide seed money to catalyze innovation and spreadbest practices inexisting health initiatives. > The Asia Pacific Quality Network (US$0.36 million) is expected to strengthen the growth and the development of tertiary education systems in Asia through improvements inaccreditation. > The Early Child Development Capacity-BuildingInitiative (US$0.35 million) aims to strengthen regional capacity for children's initiatives inthe Middle East and North Africa. > The Roma Education Fund (one-time grant o f US$l.O million) aims to provide initial fundingto build a partnership to reduce the gap in access to quality education between Roma and non-Roma populations inSouthern and Eastern Europe. > The Zambezi Forum on Higher Education (one-time grant o f US$0.2 million) will create a regional (African) capacity buildingnetwork to improve leadership capacity o f chancellors and other senior managersof higher education institutions. > The GlobalPartnershipfor Disability and Development (one-time grant of US$0.29 million) is a collaboration with the UNand other partners to improve the availability o f disability statistics for developing countries. The Programfor Education Statistics was endorsed for one-year transitional funding of US$1.2 million to ease the Bank's exit from the program, pending commitment o f new donor funds to UNESCO anticipated inthe coming year. A one-year extension for the Forumfor African Women Educationalistswas rejected taking into account that the programwould be able to continue without DGF support. INFNetwork The Public Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPUF) and Cities Alliance requested US$2.0 million and US$1.7 million respectively and to move to Window One. Both are recognized as well-performing programs that merit continued Bank support. A one-year extension in Window Two was endorsed for each: US$1.5 million for PPIAF; and US$1.7 million for Cities Alliance, taking into account overall DGF budget constraints. For PPIAF, a final year o f DGF funding will smooth the transition to reliance in FY06 on budget resources for the Bank's contribution. For Cities Alliance, 15 the extension will provide the project sponsors with a year to arrange alternate finding sources, including greater reliance on trust funds and Bank budget. Funding was endorsed at the requested level of US$5.53 million for the Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest, taking into account the program's continued leadership on micro-finance issues and the US$0.8 million reduction inthe fundingrequest from FY04. The Information for Development Program (infoDev) was endorsed at US$2.5 million, a slight decrease from FY04, with guidance to INF to consider a near-term exit strategy for DGF assistance. GuarantCo, which helps structure municipal level private infrastructure projects, was endorsed for US$3.0 million in funding. The Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnershipwas endorsedfor US$0.3 million. Twonew Window TwoDGFprograms were endorsed: > The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (US$0.5 million) will assist countries to evaluate transparency in reporting revenues from extractive industries. > Communitiesand Small-Scale Mining (US$0.28 million) will build knowledge on practices to improve conditions for small scale and artisanal miners. PSDNetwork Strengthening Grassroots Businesses Initiative, which will provide a group o f grassroots business organizations with technical assistance and "patient investment" to scale up their operations, was endorsed for US$1.5 million as a one-year "seed money" grant to prove out the concept, which has the potential to significantly enhance the Bank Group's contribution to providing economic opportunities to the poorest. Subsequent Window One funding is not envisaged. FSENetwork Financial Reform and Strengthening Initiative (FIRST) was endorsed for US$0.6 million, the final contribution o f the Bank's commitment. Supporting Insurance Supervisionreceived US$0.2 million. A new Window Two proposal-International Organization of Pension Supervisors (Z0PS)-was endorsed for US$0.065 million. The Bank's involvement will assist the IOPSto develop guidelinesfor supervisiono f pensionfunds invested infinancial markets that take into account developing country circumstances. PREMNetwork Global Development Network. The Council endorsed a US$4.0 million allocation, recognizing the important objective o f building up research capacity in developing countries on development issues. 16 MENA Gender Network was endorsed for US$0.36 million as a one-year extension in Window Two. The third year o f funding for the International Comparison Program was approved at the full request o f US$1 million; exit from DGF is expected after FY05. Global Governance and Strengthening Developing Country Voice was endorsed for US$0.6 million. A new Window Two program-Good Governance and Community Mobilization to Combat Corruption - was endorsed for a one-time grant of US$0.23 million. The program will provide small grants to organizations engaging in anti-corruption and governance work at the grassroots level, complementing the work on governance by the Bank and Transparency International. OPCSNetwork The Institutional Development Fund (IDF) requested US$25.0 million but received endorsement for US$19.0 million to sustain its level of operations at US$20 million annually, taking into account projected uncommitted trust fund balances at fiscal year end. The Global Financial Management Partnerships (GFMP) was approved for longer- term funding under Window One (US$0.55 million). GFMP is closely aligned with the Bank's focus on promoting improvements in accounting and auditing in its client countries. InformationSystemsGroup The Development Gateway Foundation applied for Window One funding, but the DGF Council did not consider this in the absence o f completion of an independent evaluation. For FY05 an amount o f US$l.O million was endorsed for the program as a one-year extension inWindow Two. Partnershipfor African CapacityBuilding The Partnership for African Capacity Building (PACT) aims to build sustainable economic policy analysis and development management capacity for growth, poverty reduction and good governance in Africa. FY05 is the final year o f DGF funding for PACT under the original plan for the Bank to provide US$l50 million over 5 years. PACT is making good progress in following through on the recommendations made last year by the independent evaluation and of the DGF to improve focus and strengthen the project pipeline. The crucial challenge for the future is ensuring financial sustainability and continuity beyond 2006. On this issue, the program is now actively engaged in consultations with donors andAfrican governments. DGF ProgramActivitiesby Region 2.12 DGF programs endorsed for funding in FY05 are active in all Bank regions. Table 4 below shows the number o f programs with activities ineach Region. Inaddition, many programs also carry out activities that have benefits at a global level, including advocacy and research. 17 Table 4: DGFPROGRAMACTIVITIES BY REGION Regions No. of Programs Africa 32 SouthAsia 23 EastAsia andPacific 24 LatinAmerica and Caribbean 26 Easternand Central Asia 25 Middle EastandNorthAfrica 23 LeveragingResources 2.13 DGFwill have providedUS$1.3 billioninsupport of 117priority programsby the end of FY05. However, partners look to the Bank not only for a share of program funding, but also for intellectual contribution, convening power, selectivity, quality control, knowledge of country operations and influence at the national level. This explains why the Bank's DGF grants help catalyze and leverage substantial additional resources from other donors, enabling the Bank to play a more significant role in support of global initiatives than the volume of DGF grant assistance would suggest. Intotal, the typical DGF contribution of about 15 percent of the total budgets of global programs helps mobilize more than US$l billion annually from international organizations, bilateral donors, developing country governments, NGOs, foundations and the private sector (see Box 4). Budget Outlookfor FY06 2.14 With the adjustments inthe Two-Window approachand six programs receiving one-year extensions, more funding will be available to support emerging priorities in FY06 than was anticipated last year. Seven programs exiting after two or three years of DGF funding will free up US$3.8 million; six programs receiving one-year extensions in Window Two will free up US$6.5 million while seven programs receiving one time grants in Window Two will make available an additional US$3.7 million. Insum, 20 programswill exit Window Two at the end of FY05 freeing up US$14.0 million (see Table 5). Moreover, reductions in the size of several Window One programs in FY06 would facilitate an increase in Window Two back toward the target of US$30 million. The actual amount of funds becoming available after FY06 and FY07 may be greater than shown in Table 5 given modifications in the Two-Window approach, including more utilization of one-time grants and greater focus on reducing allocations to Window One programs. 18 BOX4: MAJORPARTNERSINDGF-SUPPORTEDPROGRAMS Multilateral. AFDB, Arab Urban DevelopmentInstitute,ADB, DANIDA, EBRD, EC, EIB, EU, FAO, Fondo Indigene, GEF, IADB, IFAD, IFC, IFPRI, IICA, IMF, ILO, IntemationalAssociationof Insurance Supervisors, IslamicDevelopmentBank, IUCN, IWMI, OAS, OECD, PanAmericanHealthOrganizations, UNAIDS, UNCHS, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCHR, UNICEF, UNCTAD, WFP, WTO, UN Statistical Division, UN CTC, UN GPML, UNECA, UNIFEM, UNECE (UN Economic Commission for Europe), UNECLAC, UNESCAP, UNESCWA, UNFPA, UN-Habitat, UNIDO, UNIFEM, UNOPS, WHO, World MeteorologicalOrganization. BilateraL Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Cuba, Czech, Denmark, Egypt, El Salvador, Finland, France, Gambia, Gabon, Greece, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States. Foundations. Accenture Foundation, AGFUND, Arab Competitiveness Fund, Argidius, Ford, Gates, Hariri Foundation Lebanon, Hewlett Foundation, International Cooperation and Development Fund, JPMorganChase, Kellogg, McArthur, Moore Foundation, OPEC Fund, Rockdale, Rockefeller Brother Fund, Schlumberger, Stichting Triodos Funds, SURDNA Foundation, The Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, Tinker Foundation, Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation, UN Foundation, United States National Science Foundation, Wallace GlobalFund, Wellcome Trust, Whitehead Foundation, World Space, World Wide Fundfor nature (WWF) Intemational. Other (e.g., private sector, NGOs, universities). Advance Africa, Aga Khan University, ATP Fellowships, Bot Engineering, BP, Commonwealth Secretariat, Cordaid, Creative Associates, Daimler-Chrysler, Deutsche Bank, DHL, Equal Access, ESA, European Observatory on Health Care Systems, Globescad2020 Global Alliance, Guinness, Goldman Sachs, Halliburton, Heineken, Hewlett- Packard, Homeless Intemational, Homeless International, HR Wallingford Ltd, ICs Charitable Contributions (for Kenya), IUCN, Mac Holdings, Merck & Co. Inc., Microsoft, Millennium Fund, NIH,NSF, OXFAM Quebec, Shell, Space CheckerN.V., TransnationalComputer Technology, Univ. Calif. SF, Univ. of Queensland, WFP, World Association of Cities and,Local Authorities Coordination (WACLAC), WWF US, WWF-International, Young EntrepreneursAssociation. 19 Table 5: PROGRAMSDISENGAGINGFROMDGF Title of Partnership Amounts (in US$m) YO5 13.98 1 CitiesAlliance 1.70 2 Public-PrivateInfrastructureAdvisory Facility (PPIAF) 1.50 3 StrengtheningGrassrootsBusinessesInitiative (SGBI) 1.50 4 Programfor EducationStatistics (PES) 1.20 5 CapacityBuilding for EducationalPlanningandManagement 1.00 6 DevelopmentGatewayFoundation 1.oo 7 InternationalComparisonProgram 1.oo 8 RomaEducationFund 1.oo 9 Forest PartnershipsProgram 0.75 10 FinancialSectorReformand Strengthening(FIRST) Initiative 0..60 11 Nutritionand Gender 0.50 12 MENA GenderResearchandTraining Network 0.36 13 GlobalReportingInitiative 0.30 14 StandardsandTrade DevelopmentFacility 0.30 15 GlobalPartnership for Disability andDevelopment 0.29 16 Millennium ProjectHunger Task Force 0.25 17 GoodGovernance: CommunityMobil. To Combat Corruption 0.23 18 EXT - COM+ :Alliance ofCommunicators for SustainableDev. 0.20 19 ZambeziForumon Higher Education(ZFHE) 0.20 20 UN StandingCommitteeonNutrition 0.10 YO6 6.35 1 GuarantCo 3.00 2 MENA Child ProtectionInitiative (CPI) 1.05 3 GlobalGas FlaringReductionPublic-PrivatePartnership 0.30 4 GlobalGovernanceand StrengtheningDevelopingCountryVoice 0.60 5 Global InvasiveSpeciesProgramme(GISP) 0.60 6 ExtractiveIndustryTransparencyInitiative 0.50 7 SupportingInsurance Supervision 0.20 8 UnderstandingChildren'sWork - PhaseI1 0.10 'YO7 7.55 1 AFR Africa StockpilesProgram - 1.50 2 HealthEquity Fund 1.50 3 Critical EcosystemPartnershipFund(CEPF) 1.oo 4 TargetedResearchand CapacityBuilding for CoralReefMgmt 1,oo 5 GlobalFundfor IndigenousPeoples(GFIP) 0.60 6 Int'lAssessment ofAgricultural Science andTechnologyfor Dev. 0.50 7 LAC - Dev. ConnectivitybetweenBiological andGeospatialInfo. 0.40 8 The Asia-Pacific Quality Network 0.36 9 Early Child DevelopmentCapacity-Building Initiative (ECDCI)) 0.35 10 Communitiesand Small-scaleMining 0.28 11 InternationalOrganizationof PensionSupervisors (IOPS) 0.07 de. FY06 andFY07 amounts are assumedat the FY05 levelof funding exceptCEPF. 20 111. STRENGTHENINGRESULTSGRANT IN MAKING 3.1 Attention to achieving results in DGF grant-making occurs at two levels: (a) ensuring quality-at-entry during the review of grant applications for new and ongoing programs; and (b) regular monitoring and evaluation duringprogram implementation. This chapter explains the DGFapproach for both. 3.2 Consistent with the Bank's increased focus on managing for results4 and taking into account OED's recommendations regarding global programsY5the DGF continues to strengthen its processfor review o f grant applications. The aim is to: (a) ensure adherenceto DGF eligibility criteria; (b) strengthen alignment, i.e., with the Bank's sector strategies, corporate objectives, the MDGs and country operations; (c) identify and manage risks; and (d) promote sound program design and implementation arrangements. Attention to these aspects results inbetter selectivity in allocating DGF funds and higher quality at entry. At the same time, progress is also beingmade in improving monitoring and evaluation processes which are building up an appreciation for learningand accountability inthe use of grants. 3.3 This year, particular emphasis has been put on the development of performance indicators for DGF-supported programs (see Box 7). The inclusion of indicators in DGF applications are of value at the review stage because they make more apparent the merit and feasibility o f program objectives, define responsibilities and better clarify the timetable for implementation. They also serve to identify inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts against which downstream progress can be monitored and programs evaluated. A. Ensuring Quality At Entry 3.4 The DGFvettingand rioritization process andresponsibilitiesfor management oversight are described in OPBP 8.45. Programs requestingDGF grants must be sponsored by a unit in t the Bank. Sector Boards and Networks have primary responsibility for: (a) vetting grant proposals for quality and consistency with sector objectives; and (b) prioritizing them for funding within a restricted budget. The DGF Council, comprised o f representatives from Networks, Regions, and central units, is responsible for vettingprograms against DGFeligibility criteria (see Annex 4) and institutional priorities and for recommending allocations to senior management for consideration by the Bank's Board. The DGF Secretariat provides advice to the DGF Council on program quality. It also provides guidance to Sector Boards and programs on the preparation of proposals and on good practice in areas such as governance, evaluation, and resource mobilization. The DGF governance structure is illustrated inFigure 1. Better Measuring, Monitoring and Managing for Development Results: Implementation Action Plan, ' OPCS, January22,2003. The World Bank's Approach to Global Programs: An IndependentEvaluation-Phase I (CODE2002- 002). Addressing the Challenges of Globalization: An Independent Evaluation of the World Bank's Approach to Global Programs-Phase 2 Report (forthcoming). OPBP 8.45 can be found in The Development Grant Facility: FY99 DGF Annual Review and ProposedFYOO DGF Budget, July 26, 1999 (R99-150). 21 Figure 1: DGFGovernance Structure . BOARD Approves 4 SENIOR MANAGEMENT Recommends ProvidesGuidance 1 Reviews & Endorses 4 SECTORBOARD/ Vets & Prioritizes (and obtains MD's NETWORKCOUNCIL concept clearance for new partnerships) Sponsors Supervises Evaluates nt Implements Grant fundedActivities 1 a/ The DGFCouncil currently consists of representatives from five Networks, regions, LEG, SFRM, and CFP. It is chaired by the Vice President of CFP and is supported by a small DGF Secretariat 3.5 Quality Assurance and Alignment By Sector Boards. Primary responsibility for the review o f proposals for technical quality and alignment with sector strategies, MDGs and overall institutional goals lies with Sector Boards. They also ensure that grants meet DGF eligibility criteria7and have institutional "buy-in" from the Regions, particularly where initiatives may have operational linkages to the Bank's country programs. Sector Boards are exercising greater discipline in this role, turning away applications for funding or requiring improvements before further consideration. Box 5 shows sector strategies relevant to DGF programs. Linkages between DGF programs and sector strategies are shown in Annex 6. Box 6 illustrates examples of how DGF-supported programs support Bankcountry operations. Programs proposed for FY05 funding were found to meet the eight eligibility criteria agreed by the Board, except for a few programs establishedbeforethe creationo fthe DGF which were not expected to do so. These include: CGAP, CGIAR, the Post-Conflict Program, Small Grants Program, APOC and the Institutional DevelopmentFund. In particular, they do not meet the DGF "arm's-length" or leveragecriteria. 22 I Box 5: SECTOR STRATEGY PAPERSRELEVANTTO DGFPROGRAMS EducationSector Strategy Environment and Energy(Fuelfor Thought) Strategy for EnvironmentalSustainability Financial Sector Strategy Gender Sector Strategy Health,Nutrition, andPopulationSector Strategy InformationandCommunicationsTechnology Strategy Private Sector DevelopmentStrategy Public Sector Strategy Social Protection UrbanandLocalGovernment RuralDevelopment: Reachingthe RuralPoor ForestStrategy Water ResourcesStrategy Social Development Strategy(for Boardconsideration inFY05) 3.6 Sector Boards are also giving greater attention to program results and sustainability, recognizing the need for demonstrable progress towards meeting objectives, particularly when partnershipsintendto continue after exit from DGF funding. DGF secretariat staff participate in Sector Boardmeetingsto explain DGF criteria andpromotea results-basedapproach. Eachyear, the quality ofapplicationssubmittedto Network Councils andthe DGFhas steadily improved. 3.7 The oversightof DGF-supportedprogramsby Sector Boards will be further strengthened with the inception of GPP portfolio reviews, which are being carriedout collaboratively by VPUs and the GPP Group. These reviews are intendedto leadto more systematic management of GPPs by providing comparable information on overall characteristicsof GPPs, strategy and alignment with corporate objectives, risk profiles and results orientation. This information will enable Sector Boards to take a more strategic approach in reviewing DGF (and other GPP) applications by identifying gaps and improving complementarityamong andbetweenprograms and with Bank country operations. 3.8 Prioritization By Network Councils. DGF grant applications received from Sector Boards are prioritized by Network Councils, taking into account overall DGF budget constraints and indicating where adjustments could be made in budgets if more or less funding were available. Networks also adjust funding requests across sectors to address emerging priorities. Some Networks prepare strategy notes for the DGF Council explaining how the proposedgrants serve to meet Network goals.8 Finally, in accordance with the oversight and selectivity criteria introduced for new partnerships a few years ago, Networks are responsible for clearing all new initiatives with the appropriateManagingDirector. * This year, ESSD, HD and INF providedoverviews of their DGF grant packages. With information yieldedfromthe ongoingGPP portfolioreview exercise, this process will be further strengthened. 23 Box 6: EXAMPLESOF DGFLINKS TO COUNTRY OPERATIONS The Partnershipfor Child Development (PCD). Ill-health and the HIV/AIDS epidemic increasingly prevent schoolchildren, particularly the poor and girls, from taking advantage of opportunities for education. In responding to this challenge, the PCD has taken a technical lead in knowledge creation and networking among academic institutions, NGOs and local partners worldwide. They are partners in the multi-agency effort to Focus Resources on Effective School Health (FRESH). PCD has provided the FRESH partnership with the enabling environment and technical basis to ensure that more than 25 World Bank projects have been prepared or planned with FRESH components. For example, in Chad, helping create an education sector geographical information system to target the poorest schools and neediest children; in Sri Lanka, supporting an innovative cross-sectoralanalysis to reform child developmentacross the social sectors; and inZambia, benchmarkingthe links betweenill-health and academic achievementto retarget programmatic lending. PCD has also been the main source of technical guidance to an Africa Region effort that has increaseddisbursementfor HIV/AIDS under educationprograms. Roll Back Malaria (XBM). RBMwas launchedjointly by the World Bank, WHO, UNICEF, and UNDP in 1998. RollBack Malariaaims to accelerate progresstoward the health-relatedMillennium Development Goals by halving the number of deaths from malaria by 2010. RBMaims to achievethis by strengthening national health systems, mobilizing social movements to support malaria control, evaluating results and monitoring progress, and developing new tools. RBM is not a financing mechanism, but rather supports countries through their implementing agencies to ensure they have effective access to information, technology and financial resources required to reduce the burden of disease. The Bank supports malaria control inmore than 40 projects in35 countries. It is leading the RBMPartnershipinitiative to ensure that malaria control activities are highly prioritized in countries undergoing health sector reforms and are employing sector-wide approaches. It is also working to integrate malaria control into programmatic operations. The Bank's RBMteam, formed in 1998, has worked with Bank operations inEcuador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Nigeria, Pakistan, Rwanda, Senegal, SierraLeone, Tanzania, andUganda. The Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility (PPUF). PPIAF helps developing countries to improve the quality of their infrastructure through private sector involvement. All PPIAF activities are designedto complement and reinforce those of the World Bank and other PPIAF donors, and such linkages are an explicit consideration inthe project approval process. Examples include the following: Country Framework Reports. These studies identify opportunities and constraints for private sector involvement in infrastructure in individual countries. Studies undertaken or underway ir countries including Angola, Bangladesh, Honduras, Lesotho, Philippines, Rwanda, Senegal, an6 Vietnam have assisted in clarifying opportunities for Bank lending operations and in influencing their design. Identification and Dissemination of Best Practices. PPIAF-sponsored "toolkits" have beer prepared on subjects such as port reform, labor issues and infrastructure reform, update o f the water toolkit, risk management tools for clean infrastructure projects and a global mapping initiative for private participation in infrastructure. In addition, PPIAF has sponsored majoi conferenceson subjects like the challenges facing private participation in infrastructure in Kenyr and will sponsor similar events inLesotho and Rwanda. These have helped to identify emerging notions of best practice that are influencing the design and implementation o f country strategiesa: well as Bank lending operations ina rangeo f infrastructure sectors and countries. Capacity Building Activities. PPIAF continues to sponsor capacity-building initiatives foi infrastructure regulators inSouth Asia (SAFIR) and AJi.ica (AFUR) and Latin America, primarilj inthe water sector. Inaddition, PPIAF fUndedthe exploration ofaffiliations for regulators inEas Asia as well as in Central Asia that would help ensure the sustainability o f reforms promoted or supported by Bank lending. The multi-country focus o f these initiatives facilitates cross-country learning and fills a niche not accessible through traditional Bank lending. 24 3.9 Institutional Review By The DGF Council. ,Chaired by the ConcessionalFinance and Global Partnerships (CFP) Vice President and comprised of representatives from Regions, Networks and central VPUs, the DGF Council vets programs against DGF eligibility criteria and recommends to Senior Management allocations that reflect institutional priorities within the overall constraints on the DGF budget. In the last few years, the Council has maintainedthe viability of the DGF Two-Window approach by constraining the share of budget allocated to long-term programs so that sufficient funds can become available each year from exiting programsto supporthigh-priority new initiatives. 3.10 Process Management and Quality Enhancement By The DGF Secretariat. The DGF Council is supportedby the DGFsecretariat inits review of grant applications. More broadly, the secretariatprovides assistance by: Giving upstream guidance to proposed and ongoing programs to help ensure they incorporate good governance practices, have robust partnership arrangements, are adequately costed, mitigate against risks to the Bank, consider links to the Bank's strategic agenda and Bank operations where appropriate, and have defined implementationplans basedon sound performance indicators(see Box 7). Arranging for external peer reviews of new proposals. These reviews inform allocation decisions and are a source of advice for program managers on the viability of project design and ways to improve programimplementation. Providing continuing guidance on grant policy, DGF eligibility criteria and requirements and good practice inmonitoring andevaluation. Ensuringthat grant letters of agreement and disbursementsconform with agreed purposes. Producingtechnical notes in such areas as global-local engagement, program governance and evaluation. Taking part inprogram supervision missions across which assessments can be made and goodpractice shared. 25 In consultation with the OPCS Results Secretariat, the DGF has made changes in its application to emphasizethe need for programs to develop indicators of program inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts.' These are reviewed throughout the DGF process to ensure that programs have concrete objectives, specific implementation schedules, well-defined responsibility for implementation, and defined outcomes. They also are an important tool for measuring progress and for independentprogram evaluation. Performance indicators for FY05 DGF applications are mixed in terms of their quality reflecting the variation in programs at this early stage of emphasis." However, all programs are giving greater consideration to the use o f indicators. One notable example is the CGIAR: As part of CGIAR's reform effort, DGF allocations to its Research Centers are now made against detailed performance benchmarks, including work program deliverablesthat are overseenby the new CGIAR Executive Committee. An example ofrecently-developed indicators is found inESSD's proposednew TargetedResearch CapaciQ Building Program for Coral Reef Management, shown below. The program aims to establish a global network of coral reef research institutions and fill gaps in global understanding of the health of coral reef systems. Research will be designed to be of value to policy makers and managers of coral reef communities. OutcomeIndicators For TheProposedCoralReef ManagementProgram" a Formerly fragmented coral reef research efforts are coordinated and targeted for the first time around key sustainability themes. A coalition of scientists and research institutions from developedand developing countries is built to supportthis effort. Major partners from different sectors are aligned with this initiative, building momentumtoward a critical mass of resourcesto sustainthe effort over sufficient time and spatial scales. Researchresults are peer reviewed, synthesizedand disseminatedwidely. Institutional and humancapacity for science-based management of coral reefs is built. Coral reef managers are empowered with knowledge and tools to make better decisions. A new generationof scientists is trained to undertakelarge-scaleecological research. Policies to protect coral reefs or mitigate impacts from key stressors are strengthenedas a result of new and reliable information. Findings are mainstreamedinto Bank country dialogue and assistance strategies. BanWpartners'investmentsin coral reefmanagement incorporate findings inproject design. Other examples o fhow programsare incorporating performanceindicators are found inAnnex 7. I Inputs, outputs, outcomes and impacts can be considered "direct" indicators. "Indirect" measures of performancemight include indicators for risk, efficiency, effectivenessand sustainability. lo OED has notedthat "as a managementstrategy focusing on performance and achievementsof outputs, outcomes and impacts, result-based management ...has only recently been fully incorporated into the business practices of the Bank. Therefore, (its) low frequency in global programs should not be surprising." (OED Phase2, para4.11) I` What is shown is a set of broad indicators. The Coral Reefs program has disaggregated these over shortertime periods that show more specific outputs. 26 B. The DGFApproach to Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation 3.11 DGF-supported programs undertake three sets of monitoring and evaluation activities: (a) progress reporting; (b) financial reporting; and(c) independentevaluation. 3.12 Progress And Financial Reporting. Bank task managers are responsible for providing annual progress reports as part of the DGF application. They also have responsibility for ensuringthe provision and quality of annualaudited financial statements from grantees (the status o f financial reporting is included in the DGF application and is reviewed as part of the vetting process).12 Task managers are required to provide a grant completion report within six months after the close ofthe grant.13 3.13 Independent Program Evaluation. Independent program evaluations are required every three to five years, depending on program circumstances and timing preferences of partners. DGF staff work with programsto develop evaluationterms of reference and agree on selection of consultants. Sector Boards, Networks and the DGF Council take evaluationresults into account in decisions regarding future support. Evaluations are an especially important basis on which DGF Council decisions are made to continue support for Window 1 programs. A timetable for independentevaluationsis showninTable 6. 3.14 The DGF has developed guidelines for independent evaluation of programs in consultation with OED. OED has recognized the influence of the DGF evaluation requirement and guidelines in encouraging an appreciation for learning and accountability for results among partners and the "noticeable improvement in the number and quality of evaluation^".'^ Box 8 provides a summary of the DGF evaluation guidelines. ,Annex 8 shows the key issues and questionsthat comprisethe DGF evaluationtemplate. 3.15 Results of FY04 Independent Evaluations. Sixteen independent evaluation findings were considered in FY05 DGF funding decisions. Evaluations of established programs such as CGIAR and the River Blindness programs have, in OED's view, produced "evidence of unquestionably high return^."'^ Independentevaluationsconductedover the last year demonstrate that DGF-supportedprograms are achieving results, and that newer initiatives are on a learning curve as program impact is realized after a 3-5 year launch period. Table 7 provides excerpts from FY04 evaluationfindings. Full evaluationsummariesare found inAnnex 9. DGF-supportedprograms may be audited by the Bank's Internal Audit Department. The results are reportedto the Bank's Senior Managementandthe Audit Committeeofthe Board. l3 Compliancewith this requirementis unevenbut improving:ofthe 50 programsthat have exitedDGF since FY98, and for which completionreports are due, eight are notyet completed. l4 OED Phase2, para4.4. l5 OED Phase2 Report,para.4.46 27 Box 8: DGFINDEPENDENT EVALUATIONGUIDELINES Evaluationsshould: review measurable indicators of performance-including outputs, outcomes and impacts- andassist programsto develop improvedindicators. be conducted every three to five years (for programs that receive DGF funding of >US$300,000). be owned and utilized by all partners and not be driven solely by the needs o f the Bank. Therefore,timingandcoverageshouldtake intoaccountpartner preferences. be overseen by theprogram's governing body and conducted with the assistance of program management. Evaluatorsshouldreportto the governingbody, notto management. be conducted by individuals or companies that have been at "arm's-length" from the initiative. report on outputs,outcomesand impacts. address theperformance of thegoverning body as well as of management. make recommendationsfor financial sustainabilityas well as programdelivery. be discussed by the relevantBank Sector Board and usedbythem as the basis for considering DGFfundingrequests. have terms of reference and selection of consultants cleared with the DGF Secretariat. The DGF grant cancover a part of evaluationcosts whichshouldalsobeborneby other partners. 28 Table6: TIMETABLEOFINDEPENDENTPROGRAMEVALUATION r I FY06 v be ~616s APOC X TDR PopandRepHealth X X R&D inHumanRep. X X RollBackMalaria X X StopTuberculosis Partnership Partnershipfor ChildDev. X ADEA I INP: CGAP 1 --- FY06 FY07 FY08 StandardsandTrade X GlobalFundsfor IndigenousPeoples X GlobalInvasiveSpeciesProgram X Target. Res. & Cap.Build. for CoralReefMgmt (New) X InrlAssessm't ofAgricult.Science& TechnologyforDev.(New) X MillenniumProjectHungerTask Force(New) NA Africa StockpilesProgram(New) X Dev.Connectivitybet. Biological& GeospatialInformation(New) X COM+: Allianm-ofCommu&ators for SustainableDev. (New) WD: Nuuiticmand Cmder UN StandineCommittee on Nutrition 1 HealthEquhFund(New) X Capacity Buildfor Education X Programfor EducationStatistics X RomaEducationFund(New) X The Asia-Pacific QualityNetwork (New) X EarlyChild Dev.Capacity-BuildingInitiative(New) X ZambeziForumon HigherEducation(New) NA MENAChildProtectionInitiative X UnderstandingChildren's Work-I1 X GlobalPartner.for Disability & Development(New) INF OuamK'e I ! GlobalGasFlaringReductionPartnership PPIAF Cities Alliance X ExtractiveIndustrvTransuarencvInitiative(New) . . . , X Communitiesand Small-Scale Mining(New) I PSD: SwcngthcniagijPassro0ts Bu~inaseslnhiatlvr(New) I I I,FSE: FIRST SupportingInsuranceSupervision I I I I I GlobalForum& Dev.CountryVoice X GoodGovernance: CommunityMob. To CombatCorruption I I I I NA 29 Table7: KEY FINDINGS FROMFY04 EVALUATIONS Results Roll Back Malaria RBM's strategy of global advocacyhas succeeded inbringingattention to the malaria challenges, achieving consensus in how to tackle it, and mobilizing substantial resources. At the country level, progress has been slower than anticipatedandthere are few systems inplaceto ensure rapidprogress. Stop TB Achievements include buildingkustaining partnerships, heightening political commitment and marshaling widespread support for a global plan to stop TB and making significant progress against TB. Challenges include stepping up implementation efforts inorder to meettargets on time. Research and Training Resultsnot publicly available, in TropicalDiseases Programfor Education All DGF-funded projects were well-managed and objectives have been met. Statistics Longer-term success depends on strengthening the program's sphere of influence to improve the quality of national data collections and increase the use o f international data inprogram administration and policy development. Partnershipfor Child The technical innovations of the partnership have transformed the cost- Development effectiveness o f school health programs, and are central to the success of the inter-agency approach to school health, The partnership toolkit for program designis the field standard. Forumfor African The program has had a positive impact on girls' access to, retention in, anc WomenEducationalists performance inhigh-quality educationalprograms. Centersof Excellence have emerged as a best practice in providing quality education for girls, and the "speak out" girls' clubs are empowering girls byraisingself-esteem. ~ CitiesAlliance The program has had significant political and operational impacts. Globally the Cities Without Slums target o f improving the lives o f 100 million slun dwellers was adopted as an MDG target. Locally, the CA approach is being usedto support city-level poverty reduction and economic development. Public-Private PPIAF offers high-quality, cost-effective products, expertise in disseminatinj Infrastructure Facili@ global best practice and lessons learned, and customizing global practices tc country-specific situations. The program should do more to help establisl consensus and increase national capacity to facilitate implementation. Centerfor Arab Women Successes include progressinadvocacy; accumulating knowledge on the statu for Training and o f Arab women, establishing relationships, and gaining donor and Aral Research (MENA confidence. Disseminatiodnetworking suffer because o f insufficient funding Gender) and poor awareness about and opennessto gender issuesinthe region. 30 Program ForgingPartnerships The project is ambitious and hugely challenging and has achieved much, first for Good Governance inrelationto the projectbutalso for other similar projects. Itprovides valuable lessons on which to buildand, by focusing onthe findings ofthis evaluation, is more likely to deliver what is really needed. Global Financial The program has made an effective contribution to global public sector Management financial reporting. Composition and balance o f the work program are appropriate, and most aspects o f its governance are sound. Stakeholder support ofactivities has nottranslated into funding neededfor sustainability. ForestPartnership FPP's benefits have been substantial, while costs have been small and tightly Program controlled. DGF support has helped leverage significant investment for major initiatives. Follow-up activities are likely to catalyze shifts in private investmenttowards more sustainablepracticesinkey forest areas. CriticalEcosystem CEPF has gotten off to a satisfactory start. While the Bank sees CEPF as an PartnershipFund instrumentable to act more quickly and flexibly with civil society, CEPFneeds to do more to capitalize on the Bank's experience inpolicy reform. Small GrantsProgram The report recommends strengthening in three areas: focused learning activities; enhanced grassroots activities; and streamlined grant-making processes. It concludes by recognizing that the program makes a vital contribution to the creation o f critical civil society buildingblocks. Post Conflict Fund Given the high-risk circumstances and innovative character o f many o f the field projects, one might expect an overall rate of "satisfactory" project outcomes that is lower than that of normal Bank/IL)A operations. In fact, the PCF satisfactory rate is o f the same order as the Bank's 1990s norm. In addition, in many cases the expectations that "watching briefs," Transitional Support Strategy activities, and pilot scale grants would establish an effective basis for Bank follow-on financing havebeenfulfilled. GlobalDevelopment GDN's programsmeet a clear demandfor development-relatedknowledge and Network build research capacity. However, there is disagreement among stakeholders on objectives. A "stocktaking" is needed to launch the next phase, with unambiguousactionableobjectives that can be translatedinto specific activities and measurabletargets. 31 32 IV. CONCLUSION 4.1 The Development Grant Facility continues to play a central role infacilitating the Bank's involvement in and support for key global programs and partnerships. In this respect, it helps enable the Bank to forge links with key external partners in high priority areas for the Bank's engagement, serving as avaluable complement to the Bank's country operations. 4.2 The results-based framework for the DGF allocation process was enhanced this year in several key respects. Guidance from the GPP Council led to a modification inthe Two-Window approach as well as a highly rigorous review by DGF Council members o f proposals from both ongoing and new programs. Monitoringo f program quality and achievements will be enhanced by the introductiono fperformance indicators andprogressreports into the application process. 4.3. With the establishment o fthe GPP Council and GPP Group, there is now an institutional structure in place to further strengthen the strategic focus and the management o f the Bank's involvement in GPPs, including PGF-supported programs. This should contribute to improved selectivity in the DGF allocation process, which will continue to operate within tight budget constraints. 33 ANNEXES 35 36 Annex 1 DGFGrantAllocationsFY98-05 fy05 PROGRAMS BY NETWORKAND SECTOR FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl FY02 FY03 FY04 Proposed ________Amountsin$ Million -------- Environmentallyand Socially Surtsiaablc Dev. Network ESBD - 64.48 62.50 62.40 7131 68.26 68.92 68.02 71.20 RuralDeveloament 52.52 51.50 50.70 50.95 50.30 50.50 50.30 51.25 ConsultativeGroupon Int'l Agr. Research(CGIAR) 50.09 50.30 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 StandardsandTrade DevelopmentFacility 0.30 0.30 0.30 int'l Assessment of Agr. Scienceand Tech.for Dev. 0.so ~ille~inii~naPrqject Hunger Task Force 0.25 EXT - COM+ :Alliance af Conimunicatorsfor Sustizinabr'eDev. 0.20 RegionalInitiativefor DrylandManagement 0.40 0.30 0.20 The WorldCommissionon Dams 0.80 0.30 SpecialProg.for AfricanAgr. Research(SPAAR) a/ 0.63 0.70 0.70 0.25 Empow.Communitiesto EnhanceAccessto Res. (IFAD) 1.00 0.50 Environment 2.26 2.70 1.90 8.06 7.55 6.60 5.40 8.55 CriticalEcosystemPartnershipFund 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 ForestPartnershipsProgram 0.48 0.37 0.47 0.75 0.80 0.80 0.75 GlobalInvasiveSpeciesProg. (GISP) 0.30 0.60 GlobalReportingInitiative(GRI) 0.30 0.30 0.30 AFR - Africa Stockpiles Program 1.50 TargetedRes. and Cap. Build.for Coral Reef Mgmt 1.00 LAC Dev. Connect.between Biolo. and GeospatiaIinfo. 0.40 I UNConventionto CombatDesertification(CCD) 1.25 1.25 1.25 WorldResources2002-2003: LivinginEcosystems 0.15 0.25 The GlobalWater Partnership 1.00 1.43 0.80 0.84 0.40 The MilleniumEcosystemConditionAssessment 0.50 Reg. Env. CapacityBuildinginthe Mediterranean(METAP) 0.96 0.80 0.73 EarthCouncil Strategy 0.30 SocialDeveloument 9.70 8.30 9.80 12.50 10.41 11.82 12.32 11.40 PostConflictProgram(PCF) a/ 8.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 8.00 9.32 9.22 8.00 SmallGrantsProgram 0.70 1.80 1.80 2.50 2.41 2.50 2.50 2.80 GlobalFundfor IndigenousPeoples(GFIP) 0.60 0.60 1.00 0.50 Health,Nutrition & Poaulation 22.07 22.84 20.23 25.35 25.32 24.90 24.52 24.04 GlobalForumfor HealthResearch 2.50 2.84 3.13 6.00 6.93 7.15 7.45 6.78 UNAIDS & RegionalInitiatives 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 AfricanProgrammefor Oncho Control (APOC) b/ 1.92 2.75 2.55 2.70 2.76 2.85 3.27 3.27 Pop. & ReproductiveHealthCapacity BuildingProg. 2.10 2.10 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.20 2.20 ResearchandTraininginTropicalDiseases(TDR) 3.00 3.00 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.00 Research& Development inHumanReproduction 2.50 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 RollBackMalaria 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.oo StopTl3 Initiative 0.10 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 0.70 Nutritionand Gender 0.50 0.50 0.50 UNStandingCommitteeonNutrition 0.10 0.10 Healrh Equity Fund 1.50 The West African MultidiseaseSurveillanceCenter 0.30 37 Annex 1 DGFGrantAllocationsFY98-05 fy05 PROGRAMS BY NETWORKAND SECTOR FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl FY02 FY03 FY04 Proposed --------Amountsin $ Million ------- OnchocerciasisControl Programme(OCP) b/ 2.64 1.85 1.85 1.85 1.73 1.70 GlobalMicronutrient Initiative 1.20 2.00 1.20 1.20 1.20 EstablishingaCenter ofExcellencefor Nutrition 1.00 0.90 0.90 MalariaControlProgram(MCP) 0.50 0.40 EnsuringNew Vaccines for the Poorest 0.30 UNACC Sub-committeeonNutrition 0.10 0.10 GlobalDracunculiasis(Guinea Worm) Eradication 1.50 Network ImprovedReprod. & Health(NIARSH) 0.60 Children's Vaccine Initiative 0.40 15-NationStudyofEarly ChildhoodDev. Programs 0.10 Education 3.43 3.15 3.72 3.27 5.28 9.79 9.74 5.96 Partnershipfor ChildDevelopment 0.24 0.25 0.39 1.39 1.38 1.50 Programfor EducationStatistics 0.09 0.70 1.07 1.07 1.43 1.43 1-20 Capacity Building for Edu. Plan. & Mgmt (IIEP) c/ 1.43 1.42 1.oo DevelopmentofEducationinAfrica (ADEA) 0.08 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.35 0.35 RomaEducation Fund 1.00 TheAsia-Pacific Quality Network 0.36 Eur(v Child Dev. Capacity-Building Initiative (ECDCI)) 0.35 Zanibezi Form on Higher Education (ZFHE) 11.20 Programfor the Assess. of StudentAchievement 0.95 1.08 0.95 1.62 2.09 2.08 World Links for Development 0.67 0.55 0.75 1.52 1-51 GDN - EducationResearchComponent inGDN 0.75 1.19 1.18 Forumfor Afr. Women Educationalists(FAWE) 0.40 0.48 0.48 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 Educationfor All 2000-Assessment Activities 0.25 PromotingBasic Education 0.75 1.88 Early ChildhoodCareandDevelopment 0.10 0.18 Int'l Programfor Improving EducationalOutcomes 1.oo Task Forceon HigherEducationand Society 0.15 SocialProtection 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.60 0.60 0.40 0.70 1.44 MENA ChildProtectionInitiative (CPI) 0.60 1.05 UnderstandingChildren'sWork - PhaseI1 0.10 0.10 Global Parlnershipfor Disability and Development 0.29 AutonomiaFoundation 0.50 0.50 0.30 Povertyt SOC.WelfareMonitoring inECA 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 Urbadinfrastructure 0.63 2.58 1.68 2.25 2.03 2.73 1.70 1.70 The CitiesAlliance 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 1.70 The Nile BasinInitiative 0.70 Provention Consortium 0.35 0.33 0.33 Global Initiative onTransport Emissions 0.20 0.20 City Assistance StrategyProgram 0.83 0.83 Water Utility PartnershipWADE) 0.55 0.50 0.38 Capacity bldg for GlobalAppl. ofUrban Indicators 1.13 0.20 Int'l ProgramonHighwayDevelopment& Mgmt. 0.08 0.13 0.08 Financial / PrivateSector 3.30 9.55 10.99 12.10 10.38 10.18 12.03 10.53 ConsultativeGroupto Assist the Poorest(CGAP) 6.25 7.00 7.50 7.13 6.73 6.33 5.53 38 Annex 1 DGFGrantAllocationsFY98-05 FY05 PROGRAMSBY NETWORKAND SECTOR FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl FY02 FY03 FY04 Proposed --------Amounts in $ Million -------- GuarantCo 3.70 3.00 Pubfic-Priv.Infras. AdvisoryFacility(PPIAF) a/ 2.63 3.30 2.50 2.00 2.00 1.50 Extractive lnduslly TransparencyIniticrtive 0.50 ATMS/AMSCO CapacityBuildingProgram 1.80 1.50 0.15 1.20 GlobalCorporateGovernanceForum(GCGF) a/ 0.65 0.50 0.50 0.25 BusinessPartnersfor Development 0.65 1.20 0.50 0.25 EnterpriseNetworksinWest, East& SouthAfrica 0.30 0.26 0.15 Toronto Leadership Ctr. for FinancialSector Superv. 0.50 0.30 0.45 Businessas PartnersinDevelopmentProgram 0.35 Enerw, Mining& Telecoms 3.65 4.33 2.58 6.00 6.00 4.20 3.44 3.08 Informationfor Development(infoDev) 3.00 3.33 2.58 4.00 4.00 3.00 2.65 2.50 GlobalGasFlaringReductionPublic-PrivatePartnership 0.29 0.30 Conimunities and Small-Scirle Mining 0.3 SolarDevelopment Corporation 0.65 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.20 0.50 FinancialSectorReform& StrengtheningInitiative(FIRST) d/ 0.50 0.40 0.60 Supporting Insurance Supervision 0.20 0.20 IntemationuE OrPanizatinn ofPension Sziwervisors IIOPS) 0.07 a PovertyRcducfioaand EmnostieManagemeit Nchvork PREM - 2.92 3.92 4.51 5.79 7.23 7.33 7.92 6.19 EconomicPolicy 0.50 0.63 0.80 - IntegratedFrameworkfor Trade 0.50 0.63 0.80 Gender 0.22 0.22 0.51 0.28 0.63 0.18 0.36 0.36 MENA GenderResearchandTrainingNetwork 0.30 0.18 0.36 0.36 Gender& the RuralTraveland Transp.Policy(RTTP) 0.19 0.28 0.33 ActionAidREFLECTAdult LiteracyProgram 0.22 0.22 0.32 PovertvReduction 2.00 3.20 4.00 5.51 5.20 5.70 5.92 5.60 GlobalDevelopmentNetwork Core Program - 2.00 3.20 3.40 4.76 4.70 4.70 4.45 4.00 InternationalComparisonProgramme 1.00 1.00 1.oo GlobalGovernanceandDev.CountryVoice 0.47 0.60 Partnership inStatistics 0.75 0.50 PovertyAnalysisInitiative 0.60 PublicSector 0.70 0.50 0.90 0.83 0.85 0.23 Good Governunce: Community Mob. To Cornbar Corruption 0.23 Forg.Partner.for GoodGov. inPub.Exp.& Rec.Mgmt 0.90 0.83 0.85 LeadershipFundfor AfricanWomen 0.30 0.27 InternationalAnti-CorruptionConference 0.24 Afi-ican EconomicResearchConsortium(AERC) 0.40 InstitutionalDevelopment Fund(IDF) a/ 14.00 12.41 16.80 19.00 17.50 15.00 15.00 19.00 FinancialManagement 0.73 0.51 0.83 0.09 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.55 GlobalFinancialManagementPartnership 0.58 0.34 0.67 0.09 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.55 UNCTAD: BluePrintfor GreenAccounting 0.14 0.17 0.17 39 Annex 1 - DGFGrantAllocationsFY98-05 FY05 PROGRAMSBY NETWORKAND SECTOR FY98 FY99 FYOO FYOl FY02 FY03 FY04 Proposed --------Amounts in$ Million ------- Administrative & Client SUDDO~~ 0.73 0.73 0.73 CaribbeanReg. Tech. Assist. Center(CARTAC) - 0.73 0.73 0.73 Y Information Solutions Group ISC 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.oo DeveloumentGatewayFoundation 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.oo 0.75 0.70 0.60 InternationalDevelopmentLawInstitute(IDLI) 0.75 0.70 0.60 SDecialPrograms 0.65 1.50 30.57 30.00 30.00 9.00 30.00 26.00 EastTimor 5.00 Partnership for AfricanCapacityBuilding(PACT) el 30.00 23.00 30.00 28.00 26.00 AfricanVirtualUniversity(AVU) e/ 0.65 1.50 0.57 7.00 4.00 2.00 Returnto Institution 5.01 DGF Administration 0.40 0.93 0.93 0.93 1.40 1.18 1.18 1.18 BudgetTotal 122.10 125.00 155.93 176.88 176.86 157.00 178.21 174.22 al InFYOO, the BoardapprovedaDGF allocationto IDFof$19 million. Duringthe fiscal year, the DGF Council reallocated $2.2 million ofsurplus fund inthe IDFtrust fimdaccount. These amountsare includedinthe FYOO funding levelfor these programs: PCF, $1.O m.; SPAAR,$0.2 m.; Int'lAIDS Vaccine Institute (IAVI), $0.225 m.; PublicPrivateInfrastructure AdvisoryFacility(PPIAF), $0.625 m.; andGlobal CorporateGovernanceForum, $0.15 m. b/ Fundingfor FY03 OCP/APOCAdministrationwas reducedby $22,272 dueto itscostoverruninFY02. c/ Fundingfor Capacity Buildingfor EducationalPlanningandManagementinFY03 was reducedby $30,000 due to deferral ofits evaluationuntilFYO5/06. d/ The FIRSTprogram'sFY03 applicationwas deferredto FY04. Full uncommittedFY02balancewas carriedover to FY03, e/ InFYOO, PACTwas notpartofthe DGFbutreceivedaseparateallocationfromnet income. InFYOl the Boardapproved integrationofPACTintothe DGFafter it hadbeenallocated$30 million from net income. BeginningFYOl, the allocation to AVU is includedunderPACT. BeginningFY02, allocationfor PACT is includedunder the overall DGF budget, 40 Annex 2 FY05 DGFBudget Window One - ($ millions) FY04 FY05 Independent Title of Partnership Actual Proposed Evaluation WINDOW ONE TOTAL 116.37 120.17 ESSD 65.72 64.80 1 CGIAR 50.00 50.00 FY04 2 PostConflict Program 9.22 8.00 TBD 3 Critical EcosystemPartnershipFund 4.00 4.00 FY04 4 SmallGrants Program 2.50 2.80 FY08 HD 22.22 23.79 5 The GlobalForumfor HealthResearch 6.53 6.78 FY07 6 UNAIDSGlobalandRegionalActivities 4.00 4.00 FY08 7 The AfricanProg. for OnchocerciasisControl(APOC) 3.27 3.27 FY06 8 PopulationandReproductiveHealthCap, Build. Prog. 2.20 2.20 FY06 9 ResearchandTraining inTropical Diseases(TDR) 2.50 2.00 FY05-FY06 10 ResearchandDevelopmentinHumanReproduction 2.00 2.00 FY08 1IRollBackMalaria a/ 1.00 FY08 12 Stop TuberculosisPartnership a/ 0.70 TBD 13 Partnershipfor Child Development 1.38 1s o FY05 14 Asso. for the DevelopmentofEducationinAfrica 0.35 0.35 FY06 INF 8.98 8.03 15 Consultative Group to Assist the Poor 6.33 5.53 FY07 16 Informationfor DevelopmentProgram(infoDev) 2.65 2.50 FY07 PREM 4.45 4.00 17 GlobalDevelopmentNetwork 4.45 4.00 FY05 OPCS 15.00 19.55 18 InstitutionalDevelopmentFund 15.00 19.00 FY06 19 GlobalFinancial Management Partnerships a/ 0.55 FY05 Notes: Window 1 funds go to programsexpected to receiveDGF support for aperiodbeyondthree years. dProgramsmigratingfrom Window 2 afterthe FY04 DGF funding. 41 Annex 2 FY05DGFBudget Window Two - ($ millions) FY04 FYO5 Exit Year Indep. Title of Partnership Actual Proposed c/ Evaluation WINDOW TWO TOTAL 30.67 26.88 ESSD 1.50 5.65 20 GlobalFundfor IndigenousPeoples(GFIP) 0.60 0.60 FY07 FY07 21 GlobalInvasiveSpeciesProgramme(GISP) 0.30 0.60 FY06 FY07 22 StandardsandTrade DevelopmentFacility 0.30 0.30 FY05 FY06 23 GlobalReportingInitiative 0.30 0.30 FY05 FY06 2.1 TargetedRes. and Cap. Build for Coral Reef Mgml I.00 FY07 FYO8 25 lnt? Assessment of Agr. Scienceand Tech.for Dev. 0.50 FY07 FY08 26 Millenniztm Project Hunger Task Force 0.25 FYO5 NA ESSD Endorsed Sponsored by other VPUs - 27 AFR Africa SfockpilesProgram 1.50 FY07 FY08 28 LAC Dev. Conneci. between Biolo, and Geospatial Info. -- 0.40 FY07 FY08 29 EXT - COM+ :Alliance of Comniunicatars.for Siatainahle Dev. 0.20 FY05 NA HD 2.72 6.45 30 Nutrition andGender 0.50 0.50 FY05 FY06 31 UNStanding Committee onNutrition 0.10 0.10 FY05 FY07 32 IIealih Equip Fund 1.50 FY07 FY08 33 CapacityBuilding for Edu. Plan. and Mgmt 1.42 1.00 FY05 FY06 34 Rotnu Education Fttnd 1.00 FY05 FY08 35 TheAsin-Pac$c Quality Neiwork 0.36 FY07 FY08 36 Early Child Dev. Capcity-Birildirig Initiative (ECDCII) 0.35 FY07 FYO8 37 Zanibezi Forum on Higher Education (ZFHE) 0.20 FY05 NA 38 MENA Child ProtectionInitiative (CPI) 0.60 1.05 FY06 FY07 39 UnderstandingChildren's Work PhaseI1 - 0.10 0.10 FY06 FY07 10 GlobalParlnershQ.for Disability and Development 0.29 FY05 FY08 INF 3.99 4.08 41 GuarantCo 3.70 3.00 FY06 FY07 42 GlobalGas FlaringReductionPublic-PrivatePartnership 0.29 0.30 FY05 FY07 13 Extractive Industry Transparency 1nitiaih:e 0.50 FY06 FY08 44 Coninamities and Sniall-Scule Mining 0.28 FY07 FY08 PSD 1.50 15 Slrengthening GrassrootsBusinessesInitiaFNe (SGBI) 1.50 FY05 FY08 FSE 0.60 0.87 46 FinancialSectorReformand Strengthening(FIRST) Ini, 0.40 0.60 FY05 FY06 47 Supporting InsuranceSupervision 0.20 0.20 FY06 FY06 48 International Organization of Pension Supervisors (KIPS) 0.07 FY07 NA 42 Annex 2 FY05DGFBudget Window Two - ($ millions) FY04 FY05 ExitYear Indep. Title of Partnership Actual Proposed c/ Evaluation PREM 1.47 1.83 49 InternationalComparisonProgram 1.oo 1.00 FY05 FY06 50 GlobalGovernanceand StrengtheningDev. CountryVoice 0.47 0.60 FY06 FY07 5I GoodGovenzance: CommlritityMob. To Coinbar Corruption 0.23 FY05 NA One-Year ExtensioninWindow 2 in FY05 8.29 6.51 52 Cities Alliance 1.70 1.70 FY05 FY07 53 Public-PrivateInfrastructureAdvisory Facility (PPIAF) 2.00 1.50 FY05 TBD 54 Programfor EducationStatistics (PES) 1.43 1.20 FY05 FY05 55 DevelopmentGateway Foundation 2.00 1.00 FY05 FY06 56 ForestPartnershipsProgram 0.80 0.75 FY05 FY05 57 MENA Gender Researchand TrainingNetwork 0.36 0.36 FY05 FY05 11ProgramsexitingfromWindow 2 inN O 4 12.11 (3 are endorsedfor FY05 Window 1funding) Summarv OngoingPrograms(40 inFY05) 138.70 136.93 New Programs(17 inFY05) 10.12 Exiting Programs(8 inFY04Freeingup $8.34 m) 8.34 Total 147.04 147.04 PlusSPECIAL PROGRAMS 30.00 26.00 58 Partnershipfor Capacity BuildinginAfrica (PACT) b/ 28.00 26.00 FY04 African Virtual University ( A W ) 2.00 DGFAdministration 1.18 1.18 DGFBUDGET TOTAL 178.21 174.22 Notes: Window2 funds go to programsexpectedto receiveDGF support for 1,2, or 3 years only. Programsindicatedin italics are new FY05 DGF proposds. b/InFYOO,PACTwas not partofthe DGFbutreceivedaseparateallocationfrom net income. InFYOl the Boardapproved integrationof PACT into the DGF after it hadbeenallocated$30million from net income. BeginningFYOl,the allocation to AVU is includedunderPACT. Beginning FY02, allocationfor PACT is includedunderthe overall DGFbudget. c/Exityear: Lastyear ofDGF funding. 43 Annex 3 DGFEligibility Criteria These criteria were approved by the Board. [See The Development Grant Facility: FY98 DGF Annual Review and Proposed FY99DGF Budget (W8-258,October 28,1998)] 1. The program contributes to furthering the Bank's development and resource mobilization objectives infields basic to its operations, but it does not competewith or substitute for regularBank instruments. Special grants should address new or critical development problems, andshould be clearly distinguishable from the Bank's regular programs. 2. The Bank has a distinct comparative advantage inbeing associatedwith the grant program; it does not replicate the role o f other donors. The relevant operational strengths o f the Bank are in economic, policy, sector and project analysis, and management o f development activities. In administering special grants, the Bank has expertise in donor coordination, fund raising, and fund management. 3. The program encompasses multi-countrybenefits or activities which it would not be efficient, practical or appropriate to undertake at the country level. Informationaleconomies o f scale are important for research and technology work; and operations to control diseases or address environmental concerns (e.g., protect fragile ecosystems) might require a regional or global scope to be effective. Inthe case of grants directed to a single country, the program will encompass capacity-building activities where this is a significant part o f the Country Assistance Strategy and cannot be supported by other Bank instruments or by other donors. This will include, inparticular, programs funded under the IDF. Itwill also include programs related to initial post-conflict reconstruction efforts (for example, in countries or territories emergingfrom internal strife or instability). 4. The Bank's presence provides significant leverage for generating financial support from other donors. Bank involvement should provide assurance to other donors o f program effectiveness, as well as sound financial management and administration. Any single grant to a recipient should generally not exceed 15 percent o f expected funding over the life o f Bank funding to a given program, or over the rolling 3-year planperiod, whichever is shorter. Where grant programs belong to new areas o f activities (involving, for example, innovations, pilot projects, or seed-capital) some flexibility will be introducedto allow for the Bank's financial leverage to buildover time. The target for the Bank grant not to exceed 15 percent o f total expected funding will be pursued after allowing for an initial start-up phase (maximum 3 years). 5. The grant is normally given to an institution with a record of achievement inthe program area andfinancialprobity. A new institution may haveto be created where no suitable institutionexists. The quality of the activities implemented by the recipient institution (existing or new) and the competence of its management are important considerations. 6. The management o f the recipient institution is independent of the Bank Group. While an arm's length relationship with the Bank's regular programs is essential, the Bank may have a role in the governance o f the institution through membership in its governing Board or oversight committee. The arm's length relationship with the Bank's regular programs is appropriate in most cases, and will be maintained. Incases o f highly innovative or experimental programs, Bank involvement in supportingthe recipient to execute the program will be allowed. This will provide the Bank with an opportunity to benefit from the learning experience, andto buildoperational linksto increase its capacity to deliver more efficient services to client countries. 7. Grant programs are expected to incorporate an explicit disengagementstrategy. Inthe proposal, monitorable action steps should be outlined indicating milestones and targets for disengagement. The Bank's withdrawal shouldcause minimaldisruptionto anongoingprogramor activity. 8. A key element ofthe DGFis that programs andactivities financedunder itshouldpromote and reinforcepartnershipswith key players inthe development arena, e.g. multilateral development banks, UNagencies, foundations, bilateraldonors, professional associations,researchinstitutions, privatesector corporations, NGOs, andcivil society organizations. 44 Annex 4 DGFCouncilMembers CFP Geoffrey Lamb ESSD KevinCleaver KD RuthKagia/ RobertHecht OPCS JohnUnderwood PREM IndermitS. Gill/Nancy Pinto INF Anwar Ravat FSE/ PSD LarryPromiselIJaimeOlazo AFR JeffreyKatzI Alison Rosenberg SAR BarbaraKafka/ RichardAckermann MNA Aloysius Uche Ordu/Julia Devlin .I.. - " . ...."_.... . - ..... :+,: ,:, - I . . . . . ..,' -. . . . . . .." ... . . . . SFR JohnTodd/ Joelle Chassard LEG Thomas Duvall/ Sophie Eileen Smyth CFP Arif Zulfiqar I GregToulmin PaulHubbard(DGF Secretary) 45 Annex 5 GPPs-Rules for Source ofFunding Governance: Governance: Governance: All keydecisions on All keydecisions are taken All key decisions are taken program execution are jointly by the Bank andits by anentity externalto the takenbythe Bank. partners. Bank. Source of Funding: Source of Funding: Source of Funding: Primary sourceo ffunding Use o f BB resourcesis DGFisthe only sourceof i s BB. Trust funds and restrictedto funding o f Bankfunding. (BBfunding reimbursementsmay be in-house secretariat mustnotbeused, as Bankis usedbutdo not affect the costs. not accountable for Bank's roleas decision- Trust fundresourcesmay outputs.) maker. fund bothprogram costs andin-house secretariat costs. DGF grants mustflow to entities outside the Bank for fundingcosts o f externally managed activities. Accountability: Accountability: Accountability: Program outputs and Where BB fundingis used, Planning andmonitoring of outcomes should be program outputs and results handledas part of approved as parto fthe outcomes should be DGFbudgetprocess. budget process, approved as partofbudget Program outputs and processandspecified inthe outcomes should be UnitCompact as specified inthe Unit "partnership outputs." Compact. Source: SFRVPguidelines to VPUs on FY05-07business planning, December 2003. 46 Annex 6 DGF Programs: LinksTo BankSector Strategies (For FY05 New Initiatives) Environmentand Socially SustainableDevelopment Africa StockDiles Proaram(ASP) Multi-Sectoral;EnvironmentAnd Natural Resources - The ASP helps to ensure and improvequality of lifeand quality of growth and to protectthe quality of the regionaland global commons by contributingto protectingwater and soil resources from contamination, and preventingenvironmentalhealth problemscaused by exposureto toxics through water, soils and foods, especiallyfor poor people living in rural areas. The program also respondsto the Africa regional assistancestrategywhich recognizesthe environmentas being a substantive component of development. In implementingthe ASP, the World Bank is also engaging in further promotingand mainstreamingpolicies that include preventionas part of its development assistance programs and in Bank'scountry assistance strategies. AariculturalScienceAssessment -Rural Development;Agriculture, Fishingand Forestry The key objectiveof the Bank's Rural Developmentstrategy is to foster broad-basedruralgrowth. The strategy calls for placinghigh priorityon investments in science and technology, promotionof environmentallysustainable practices, optimizingwater use, enhancingfood safety, promoting domestic policy reform, strengtheningintellectual property rightsand enhancing sustainable managementof naturalresources;all of these areas would all beaddressedby the Assessment. The output would be directly relevantto national agriculturalstrategies and enhancingrelevant Bank analytic inputs to CASs. Taraeted Research Proaram For Coral Reef Manaaement - EnvironmentalSustainability; EnvironmentAnd Natural ResourceManagement The projectsupports two mainthrusts of the EnvironmentStrategy: (1) Improvingquality of life, and (2) Protectingthe Global Commons. Of the 184 member countrieswithin the World Bank, over 100 possess coral reefs within their nationalboundaries, and rely uponthem as natural assets. One quarter of these are among the least developed countries. The projectwill be working in 3 out of 4 of these poverty--reefhotspotsto identifythe short and long-term impactsof humanheefinteractions on reef ecosystemvulnerability, productivityand resilienceto environmentalchange, and what this means for reef-dependentcommunities.The Bank has a unique opportunity to help link the results of the project to The Bank's portfolio of ongoing and pipelinecoral reef projects, mostly in partnershipwith the GEF DeVelODinQConnectivitv BetweenBioloaicalAnd GeosDatial Information In LatinAmerica And The Caribbean - EnvironmentalSustainability; InformationTechnology, Land Management This initiativeprovidesa key elementto achieve the environment strategy and design sound environmental policies for regional biodiversityconservation: linkages betweengeospatialand biologicaldata to develop better environmental managementtools. . More specifically,the initiativedirectly relatesto two of the four StrategicActions of the LCR Strategy: Enabling Environmentand EquitableSolutionsto Regionaland Global Challenges.Withinthese actions the initiativewould promotethe developmentof moreeffective regionalenvironmentalpolicy instruments by providing the scientific information needed to design them. Millennium Proiect HunaerTask Force -Rural Development; Agriculture, FisheriesAnd Forestry The Bank's new Rural Developmentstrategyfully supportsthe MDGs through its overarching goal of accelerating broad-based ruralgrowth. The Hunger Task force is chargedwith developing a global action plan to meet the first MDG of eradicating extreme povertyand hunger. 47 Annex 6 Most of the RuralDevelopmentStrategy's objectives are also directedat this MDG.All of the Bank's regionaland country strategies support achievingthe MDGs, and this partnershiphasthe same objective,and its EarlyAction Partnershipswill directlysupport governments and stakeholders. COM+: Alliance Of CommunicatorsFor Sustainable DeveloDment- Environmental Sustainability. COM+ supports morethan one Sector Strategy Paper (Environment,Water Resources, Water and Sanitation,ForestsResources, RuralDevelopment, Energy, Social). The Alliance, through elevatingemblematic issuesof the sustainabledevelopment agenda contributesto the mainstreamingof those strategies at the country level in order to moveforward an agenda in which economic growth is coupledwith environmentaland socialresponsibility. Additionally, COM+ reinforcesthe Bank's role in fosteringand leadingpartnerships, and in knowledgesharing -with clients, development partners, and society at large. The Environment;Agriculture & Rural Development; andWater & Sanitation Sector Boards have allendorsed the program. Human Development HealthEauitvProclram (HEP) Health; HealthSystem Performance - HEPwill contributedirectlyto the first of the three priorities laidout inthe Bank's HNP Strategy : "To work with countriesto improve the health, nutrition,and populationoutcomes of theworld's poor." At present, HNP service programsare notcontributingnearly so effectivelyto this objectiveas they should, becauseof their inabilityto achievecoverage ratesamong the poor as highas attainedamong the better-off. The objectiveof HEP-supportedfield experimentation would beto find ways of correctingthis imbalance, thereby contributehelpingcountries improve the health, nutrition, population outcomes of their poor. The Asia PacificQualitv Network [APQNl- Tertiary Education; Educationfor the Knowledge Economy The Bank's support of APQN will helpit to play a crucial role in promotingthe type of policy dialogue, knowledge exchange and quality strengtheningthat are criticalto sound economic development and the improvement of higher educationinthe Asia Pacificregion.The 2002 Bank paper "Constructing Knowledge Societies: New Challengesfor Tertiary Education," emphasized that: i) socialand economic progress is achieved principallythrough the advancement and applicationof knowledge, ii) tertiaryeducationis necessary for the effectivecreation, dissemination,and applicationof knowledgeand for buildingtechnicaland professionalcapacity, and iii) developing and transitioncountriesare at riskof being further marginalizedin a highly competitiveworld economy because their tertiary educationsystems are not adequatelyprepared to capitalizeon the creation and useof knowledge. Global PartnershiDon Disabilitvand DeveloDment (GPDD1- Multi-Sectoral; PovertyStrategy Analysisand Monitoring The Bank's Social Protectionstrategyacknowledgesthat disabled peoplein developingcountries are underserved, laments theweak foundationof data and researchin the disability area,and points to the exclusion of the disabled in developingcountriesfrom educationand the workplace andtheir resultingdependent status. The strategy urgeswork on the causes and consequences of disability,and the disseminationof practicesto reduceits occurrence and to mitigateits effects. GPDDwould strengthen the capacityof NGOsto make the case in analytical,economicterms on 48 Annex 6 behalfof disabledpeople, and also strengthen the capacity of developingcountry governments and foreign assistanceagencies to serve disabled people better.In particular,GPDD's statistics component would strengthenthe factualfoundation of futuredisabilitywork. Futurecomponents of the GPDDwould helpto increase the enrollment of disabled children in schoolandto increase labor force participation,thereby increasing the independenceof the disabledin developing countries. The Roma EducationFund (REF) - Education; Education ForAll The REF aims to improvethe educational enrollment, completion, quality and achievement of Romathroughgreater inclusion.Though the overallMDGs for the target countriesare high, educationalattainment by Roma is poor by global standards and povertyrates arevery high. The REF responds and contributesto the education MDGand to the antipovertyMDG indirectly. The initiativewill focus on improvingthe educational enrollment, completion, qualityand achievement of Romathrough greater inclusion. Earlv Child DeveloDmentCaDacitv-BuildinaInitiative(ECDCI) Education; Education For All - Early child developmentis the first step toward EFA and the Millennium DevelopmentGoals, and it is identifiedas a priority inthe EducationSector Strategy paper. Earlychildhood interventionscontribute to EFA goals and the Millennium DevelopmentGoals by improvingchildren's abilities and readinessfor school and by improvingtheir chances of surviving primaryschool and moving into secondary school. The program intendsto: strengthen regionalcapacity for ECD initiativesindrab region (Middle East and North Africa) through productionand disseminationof ECD resourcesinArabic; provide support to the Asia Think Tank on ECD in Primary Care; and supportand strengthen the Early ChildhoodNetworks in Latin America. The activitieswill foster government awareness of the importanceof ECD, public demandfor ECD, and publicand privatesupportfor ECD. The initiativedirectly expands on the Bank's strategy and fills inthe gaps in ECDthat traditional lendinginstrumentsare unable to cover. The Zambezi Forumon HiqherEducation(ZFHE) - Education; Tertiary Education The Education Strategy Paper (1999)states that "Educationwill determinewho has the keys to the treasuresthe world can furnish. This is particularlyimportantfor the poor, who haveto rely on their human capital as the main, if notthe only, meansof escaping poverty." Sub-SaharanAfrica has the weakest recordin all aspectson education. In its vision statement,the paper further elaborates that improvementsin highereducation "must moveforward alongwith progress in basic education, if countriesare to succeed amidst the globalchangesnow taking place...". The development of focusedinstitutionalmanagementcapacity, the thrust of the ZFHR initiative, is indicatedas one five key factors for good educationaloutcomes. infrastructure ExtractiveIndustriesTransDarencv Initiative Public Sector Management - The ExtractiveIndustriesTransparencyInitiativeis aimed at increasingtransparencyby host governments over revenuesreceivedfrom companies engaged in oil, gas and mining production (El). Participationby countrieswill be voluntary, with 4-6 countriesto be evaluatedduringthe two year pilot phase. The Initiativefocuseson: capacity buildingthrough processesand incentives, working with committedgovernments, focusing on anti-corruption,empoweringcommunities, and 49 Annex 6 developingpartnerships. The Initiative,which is led in the Bank by INF becauseof its expertise in extractiveindustries,supportsthe Bank`s Public Sector Strategyand is consistent with the CAS for each of the proposed pilotcountries. Communities and SmallScale Mining - RuralDevelopment, PrivateSector . The Communitiesand Small Scale Mining (CASM) initiativeis an ongoing partnershipto coordinatework to address the challenges faced by artisanaland small-scaleminers and their communities.The initiativereflectsthe Rural DevelopmentStrategy's recognition of the importanceof fostering non-farm economic growth, of improvingsocialwell-being and reducing vulnerabilityand enhancingthe sustainabilityof naturalresourcemanagement.This initiativealso fits squarelywithin the Bank's PrivateSector DevelopmentStrategy which places emphasis on helpingpoor peoplerealizetheir own potentialto successfullyparticipatein the marketplace ("extending the reachof markets"). PrivateSectorDevelopment Strenathenina GrassrootsBusinesses Initiative PrivateSector - The StrengtheningGrassroots Businesses Initiativeis a new program to providea group of grassrootsbusinessorganizations(GBOs) with well-designedand carefullydeliveredprograms of TA, and in some cases "patient investment," to supportbusinessimprovement and scaling up. The SBGl buildson and is intended to expand earlierWBG involvementwith GBOs in country and regionalprograms. GBOs fit wellwith theWBG's povertyreductionand sustainable development agenda. GBOs can representan importantsourceofjobs, wealth creation,training, businessmentoring, and market/technicalinputs. Also, GBO-relatedcomponents are appearing in manyWBG linkageprograms, leadingto/complementingWBG activities;and generally enhancingthe development impact ofWBG operations. Finance InternationalOraanizationof Pension SuDervisors FinancialSector - The InternationalOrganizationof Pension Supervisors(IOPS)will be formed in July 2004 as a successor organizationto the InternationalNetwork of Pension Regulatorsand Supervisors (INPRS), which is currently housedat and supportedby the OECD. The Bank'sparticipationin and support for the IOPSis importantfor ensuringthat its supervisoryguidelines take into account the circumstancesof developingcountries,an increasingnumber of which have private pensionsystems. The FinancialSector Strategy callsfor the Bank to assistcountriesin strengtheningthe stability and development of financial systems. This requires that the Bank assist in strengtheningand assistingcountriesin implementingstandards and codes, and among them, pension fund regulationand supervision. The initiativealso linkscloselyto the Bank'swork on pensionreform. 50 Annex 6 PREM Good Governanceand Community Mobilization- PubicAdministration; accountability,anti- corruption. Governance and anticorruptionactivitiesof the Bank have been increasingsteadilysince 1997. The proportionof Bank Operations that have hadpublicsector governance components increasedfrom 36.9 percent in FY 1997to 45.7 percent in FY2002. Considerableprogress has also been made in cuttingedge diagnostic work, resultingin greater awareness and understanding within countries andgloballyof the harmfuleffectson development of poor governanceand its manifestation -corruption. Butmuchstill hasto bedone, as required permanent and sustainablegovernance reforms remain elusive. The Bank, along with other donors, and reformersinclientcountries,continues to struggle with deeper underlyingissues amongwhich isthe needto enhance the demand pressures for reform from civil society. In many of the Bank's client countries, reformsin governance cannot be initiatedand/or sustainedwithout increasingdemand for changefrom the citizenry. Hence,at a one day Bank -Transparency lntemationalConferenceon Combating Corruption, which was hosted and chaired by Bank President Wolfensohnon March21,2003, the conferenceparticipants concurredthat therewas a criticalneedto establish non-partisanfunds throughwhich legitimatecivilsociety organizationsworking on governance and anti-corruption activities could be supported. The Partnershipfor Transparency Fundwas infact established in 2000with the above objectivein mind. The Conference concluded that the "way forward" on governance reforms requiredin large partthe strengtheningof demand for reforms in client countries. 51 Annex 7 DGF Examplesof ProgramPerformanceIndicators Global InvasiveSpeciesProgram Best practice studies andmethodologieson economicbenefits ofmanagemento f invasive alien species(IAS), including opportunities for employmentfor poor. Development of a generic training course on IAS integrating case studies, best practice manuals and web-site basedtechnical information. The course will cover legaland policy aspects as well as the technical side ofIASmanagement. Customization and piloting oftraining courses inat leastthree different regions. Best practice manualsandtoolkits for specific ecosystems(e.g. marine, freshwater) Publication ofguidelines to assist developmentassistanceorganizationsto reducethe potential for introduction ofinvasive species through their activities. National and regional workshops (tentatively China, Seychellesand Caribbeanin2004) aimedat developing national andregional strategiesand priorities. Technical support to key programson IAS (e.g. African weeds project; Seychellesintegrated environmental managementproject; Pacific IASprogram; GalapagosIAS program), including advice onthe planningand implementation ofdemonstrationprojects aimed at buildingcapacity inIASmanagementthrough hands-onexperience. Technical supportto developing countries for the implementation o fthe IASprovisions o fthe CBD, specifically through collaboration with CBD Secretariatinestablishmento fa Clearing HouseMechanism for the Convention on Biological Diversity. Informationdisseminationthrough website and awareness-raisingpublications and materials. For example, the recently completedbooklet "Africa Invaded" is intendedto be the first ina series of booklets highlightingIAS issues indifferent regions. CitiesAlliance ScalingUpSlum Upgrading: Number o fcities and/or countries with clearly articulated long-term slumupgradingprograms. Number o fcountries introducing measuresto remove constraints from urban land markets. Number o fcites andor countries introducing inclusive strategies to preventthe emergence ofnew slums. Number of cities and/or countries requestingassistance from Cities Alliance members. Amount o f investment inslumupgrading leveragedthrough Cities Alliance activities. City DevelopmentStrategies: Number o f CA membersintroducinglmodifyingtheir approach to urbandevelopment. Number o fcountries introducing CDS (Cities Development Strategies) as a planning tool. Number o f local governmentassociationspromotingCDS as a planningtool for urban development. Number o fcities and/or countries requestingassistancefrom Cities Alliance members. Amount of investment leveragedthrough CDS activities. SustainableFinancingStrategies: Work group of institutions interestedinhelpingcities mobilize domestic capital, established/functioning. Identifiedinnovations ineachregion ofsustainablefinancing structuresthat are competitive andwhich link city infrastructure needswith domestic capital markets. Methodology, criteria and standardsfor cities to access domestic capital for infrastructure investments. CDSs incorporating sustainablefinancing strategies. Cities accessing guaranteemechanismssupportedbyAlliance members (GuarantCo, DCA, etc.). Countriesmatching the needto finance infrastructure investmentsto improve the living conditions ofthe urbanpoor with the needo f domestic investors to diversify their investmentportfolios. 52 Annex 8 DGF KEY EVALUATION ISSUES AND QUESTIONS* GlobalRelevance 1. lntemationalconsensus:Towhat extent is there an internationalconsensus, eitherformal or informal,concerningglobalchallenges and concerns in the sector and that globalcollectiveaction is requiredto addressthese challenges and concerns? 2. Relevance:To what extent isthe program addressing globalchallenges and concerns in the sector, 0 consistentwith client countries' currentdevelopment priorities, consistentwith the missions and strategiesof partners? 3. Eligibilify criteria:To what extent isthe program 0 providingglobaland regionalpublicgoods, 0 supportinginternationaladvocacy to improve policiesat the nationallevel, 0 producingand deliveringcross-country, relevantlessons to client countries, 0 mobilizingsubstantialincremental resources? 4. Compatibility:To what extent do the activitiesof the program comptement, duplicateor compete with other development instruments? 5. Efficacy:To what extent has the program achieved or is it expectedto achieve its statedobjectives? 6. Valueadded:To what extent isthe program addingvalueto 0 what partnersare doing inthe sector, 0 what developingcountriesare doing in the sector in accordancewith their own priorities? 7. Sustainabilityof outcomesand impacts:How resilientare the outcomes and impactsof the program? 8. Monitoringand evaluation:To what extent does the program have 0 clear program and component objectiveswith verifiable indicators, 0 a structuredset of quantitativeor qualitativeindicators, 0 systematicand regular processes for data collectionand management, 0 independenceof program-level evaluations, 0 effectivefeed feedback from monitoringand evaluation? `Adapted from: OED, GlobalPublic Policies andPrograms'SrJdy BackgroundPaper,Annex A. October 8,2003. 53 Annex 8 Organization,Manage1 mt and Financing 9. Efficiency:To what extent has the program achieved or is it expected to achieve 0 efficientallocationof resources, 0 benefitsthat are more cost effectivethanthose that could be achieved by providingthe same serviceon a country-by-country basis, 0 Benefitsthat are more costeffectivethan those that could be achieved if individualcontributorsto the program actedalone? I O . Legitimacy: To what extent isthe authorityexercised by the global program Governanceand effectivelyderived from those with a legitimateinterestin the program (including management donors, developingand transitioncountries, clientsand other stakeholders) taking intoaccount their relativeimportance? 11. Govemanceandmanagement:To what extent isthe governance and management of the program transparentin providinginformationabout the program, 0 clear with respectto rolesand responsibilities, 0 fair to clients, 0 accountableto donors, clients,scientistslprofessionalsand other stakeholders? 12. Partnershipsandparticipation:To what extentdo developingand transition Partnershipsand country partners,clientsand beneficiariesparticipateand exerciseeffective participation voice inthe various aspectsof program design, governance, implementation, monitoringand evaluation? 12. Financing: To what extent isfunding positivelyor negativelyaffecting 0 the strategicfocus of the program, the governanceand managementof the program, Financing 0 0 the sustainabilityof the program? 14. Bank'spresence: To what extent hasthe Bank's presenceas a partner catalyzednon-Bank resourcesfor the program? Risksand risk 15. Risksandriskmanagement:To what extent have the risks associatedwith the programbeen identifiedand effectivelymanaged? management PartnerPerformance (a amplea given arefor the World Bank) 16. Comparativeadvantage: To what extentare partnersmaximizing their comparativeadvantages in supportof the program at the global level (global mandate and reach, conveningpower,mobilizing resources),and at the countrylevel (multi-sectorcapacity,analyticalexpertise,country-levelknowledge)? 17. Linkagesto countryoperations: To what extent are there effective and complementarylinkages,where needed, betweenglobal program activities and partnercountry activitiesto the mutualbenefitof each? 54 Annex 9 DGF EvaluationSummaries (For Window 1ProgramsandProgramsApprovedFor Single-Year Extensions) RollBackMalaria (RBM) RBMwas foundedin 1998 byWHO, UNICEF, theWorld Bank, andUNDPwiththeobjective ofhalvingthe malaria burdenworldwide by the year 2010. A DGF grant was utilizedto 1) strengthenthe RBMpartnercoordination managed by the RBMSecretariat; 2) support implementationofthe RBMstrategyat country andregional levels by both the RBMSecretariat inGenevaandthe RBMAfrica Secretariat; 3) mobilizetechnical assistanceto countriesto facilitate access to the GlobalFundfor AIDS, TB, andMalaria by the RBMSecretariatinGenevaand the RBM Africa Secretariat. Findings-An independentevaluationofRBM,undertakenin2002, found that duringPhase IofRBM(1998 to mid- 2002) there were enormous achievements.However, serious constraintshave slowed progressinPhaseIandwill continueto threatenprogress inPhase II(mid-2002 to 2007) ifnot quickly resolved. Continued lack o fprogresswill underminethe RBMpartnership's credibility andundercutfuture global initiatives. The evaluation found that: 0 RBM's strategyofglobal advocacyhasresultedingreater attentionto the problem ofmalariathanever before. 0 RBMachievedgreatsuccess inresourcemobilization-internationalexpendituresonmalariacontrol have doubled. 0 RBM'sconsensus-buildingeffortswere successful-there iswidespreadagreement onthe set ofpriority interventions requiredto makeprogressinmalaria control and prevention. 0 RBM's loosegovernancestructurehas ledto inefficiencies indecisionmakingandcontributedto alack of accountability withinthe partnership. 0 At the country level, progressinrollingbackmalariahas beenslower than anticipated andthere are few systems inplaceto ensurerapidprogressinPhase11. 0 Countries receive inadequateand sometimesinconsistenttechnical advice from RBMand its partners. 0 Inpractice,therehasbeeninsufficient attentiongiven to multi-sectoral approaches, particularly with regardsto private sector activity. Recommendations-The most urgentmessageofthe evaluation team was that the absoluteand overriding priority for RBMmust beto demonstratea significant reduction inthe global burdenof malaria by 2007. The evaluation emphasized the needto get activities clearly underwayat the country level inthe nextthree to five years. The evaluation recommendedthree major reforms to the RBMglobal architecture andtwo tactical changes. The team recommended: 0 Reorganizationo fthe RBMSecretariat. 0 Creationo fan independentgovernanceboard. 0 Reconstitution o fthe Technical Support Network. 0 Selectiono f 8-12 focus countriesthat show ahighdegree o fcommitment and can make rapidprogressinthe next three years. 0 Appointment o fCountry Championsto provide dynamic leadership inthese focus countries. Source: Final Report o fthe ExternalEvaluation ofRollBack Malaria, August 29,2002. 55 Annex 9 Stop TuberculosisPartnership The Global StopTB Partnershipwas createdto improve andcoordinateaction against the worsening global tuberculosis epidemic (nearly two milliondeaths and eight millionnew cases eachyear.) Ina very shorttime, the Partnershiphas establisheditselfas a widely respectedglobal healthmovement, acceleratingsocial andpolitical action to arrest the unnecessary spread o fTB. Findings-The 2004 independentevaluationofStop TB concludedthat the Partnershiphas clear, well-defined objectives and provides large healthbenefitscomparedto the costs involved. Ithas scoredsome major achievements, but also faces some major challenges. Key achievementsinclude: 1) building and sustainingabroad network ofpartners; 2) establishinga partnership architecturethat commandsbroad support; 3) heightening political commitment and marshaling widespread support for a global planto stop TB; 4) making significant progressagainstTB; 5) highlightingwork on new diagnostics, drugs, andvaccines; and6) establishinga committee for second-lineTB drugsand a complex facility for first-line drugs. Major challenges include: 1) steppingup implementation efforts inorder to meet targets ontime (currently only 16countrieshavereachedtargets for 2005); 2) more effectively handling advocacyandresourcemobilization, to cope with intensified competition for limited resources; and 3) becoming more business-likeandoperating with greatertransparency and openness. Recommendations The Global StopTB Partnershipis ayoung entitycurrently undergoingthetransition from start- - upto sustainableoperations. For this reason, the evaluation focusedprimarily ontheoptimal structureandfunctions ofthe Partnership, providing detailed recommendationsfor improvementsingovernanceand includedthe following recommendedsteps: The Board: 1) amendthe currentcomposition ofthe Board andensurethat the process for selectingmembersis timely, transparent, and fair; 2) define andclarify the Board's role, functions, procedures, and relationships with other entities; and3) establishan Executive Committee with defined authority for decision-making. Working Groups andTask Forces: 1) clearly define the division o fresponsibilities betweenWorking Groups and Task Forces; 2) establisha comprehensive,cohesivevision for coordinating the activities of various Working Groups; 3) raise the profile o f information, communications, and advocacyactivities; and 4) advocatefor research activities. Secretariat: 1) emphasize resourcemobilization, advocacy, and communications functions; 2) strengthen accountability mechanisms; 3) resolve the outstanding legal and administrative difficulties betweenthe Secretariatand WHO; 4) ensurethat the Secretariathas clear and effective leadership, a strategic approach, strong management, andeffective intemalcommunications, 6) develop a comprehensivehumanresources strategy as rapidly as possible; and 7) establisha more managerial culture. Partnershipprocesses: 1) establishclear andtransparentprocesses for all routine matters; 2) make more information available to partnersandthe generalpublic; 3) improve performance, financial managementand reporting; 4) adopt more realistic approachesto planning and budgeting, 5) establish a formal, results-oriented approachto monitoringprogressagainstthe five-year Global Plan; and 6) producea common performance management report for the Board, donors, andthe public. Source: IndependentExternalEvaluation ofthe Global Stop TB Partnership, 2004. Preparedbythe Institute for Health SectorDevelopment, London, UnitedKingdom 56 Annex 9 GlobalFinancialManagement Partnership The Public SectorCommittee (PSC) is astandingcommitteeofthe International FederationofAccountants(IFAC) withabroadmandateto developprogramsfor the improvementofpublic sector financial managementand accountability. Sincethe launch o fa StandardsProgramin 1996,the PSChas increasingly focused on fulfilling a role as a global financial reporting standard-setter for the public sector. To ensurethe viability ofthe Standards Program, the PSC has raisedfunds from external parties, includingthe World Bank. Findings-A recentindependentevaluation ofthe programfound that there is aneedfor an independentglobal standard-setter for the public sector andthat the PSC hasmade an effective contribution to global public sector financial reporting. The current composition and balanceofthe PSC's work program are appropriate, and most aspects of its governanceand due processare sound. While stakeholdersare supportive ofthe PSC's activities, this support has not translated into the levelo fexternal funding commitmentsneededto sustainthe Standards Program. Recommendations-The evaluation panelmadedetailedrecommendationsonthe role ofthe PSCandon governance, organizational, andbudgetaryissues. 0 The PSC should 1) focus its resources on financial reporting standard-setting;2) ensurethat the work programaddressespublic sector-specific issues, IFRShAS developments, andthe harmonizationof accounting andstatistical reporting; and3) reviewand strengthenits working practicesandprocedures. 0 The PSCshouldnotdevelop its own conceptualframework, but should consider interpretingthe IASB's existing framework for apublic sector context. 0 The PSCshouldcontinueto use steeringcommitteesas appropriateand should establishmore formal partneringarrangementswith selected national standard-setters. 0 The PSC shouldfulfill a commitment to reviewthe operationofthe cashstandardin2005. The IFACboard shouldconsiderways inwhich the organization as awhole canassist with practical implementation ofthe cash standard. 0 The PSCshouldextendits scopeto includethe private not-for-profit sector. 0 The WAC nominating committee should: 1) take into account its standard-settingfocus when making nominationsto the PSC; and 2) addressgeographicaland gender imbalances inthe composition ofthe PSC. 0 The PSCshould seek IFACboard approvalto renameitselfthe International Public SectorAccounting StandardsBoard. 0 The PSCshould: 1) introduce a limito fone technical advisor per member; 2) reviewthe composition and role o fobservers on an annual basis; and 3) continueto maintain a Consultative Group while clarifying its role, structure, andfocus. 0 The PSC shouldbringits approval processinto linewith that ofother IFACstandard-settingcommittees. 0 The PSC shouldresumefundraising activities as apriority. Source: Report ofthe Externally Chaired ReviewPanelonthe Governance, Role, and Organization o fthe International FederationofAccountants' Public Sector Committee, March2004. 57 Annex 9 SmallGrantsProgram(SmGP) The goalofthe SmGP to promotecivic engagementfor the empowermentofmarginalizedandvulnerable people. The SmGP supportsthis goal by: (1) engagingmarginalizedandvulnerablegroups; (2) strengtheningCivil Society Organizations(CSOs); (3) leveragingfunding; and(4) advancingthe field ofmobilizationfor civic engagement, The SmGP uses very small grants administeredbyCountry Offices(COS)to promotepartnershipsthroughgrassroots activities. Findings-An independentevaluationofthe program, carriedout in2003, found that the SmGP is makingvital contributionsto the developmentofcivil society. The evaluationfoundthat: SmGP activities increaseinteractionsbetweenmarginalizedgroupsor individuals and governments, as well as other key developmentstakeholders. SmGP activitiesstrengthenthecapacityofCSOsto empowermarginalizedgroupsand individuals, deepeningthe ties that binddisparatecitizensto commongoals. SmGP activities create accessto newresources. The "endorsement" of aSmGP awardoftenhelpsgrantees secure funding for complementaryactivities. SmGP activitiescommunicatethe importanceofcivic engagementto other donors, policymakers, andthe generalpublic.SmGP activitiesarenot intendedto "advance the field" ofcivic engagementingeneral, but rather to advancecivic engagement inparticularareasofconcern(e.g., women's legalempowerment, indigenousrights). The SmGP's benefitsto beneficiariesinclude: (i)increasedknowledgeabout issues andrights; (ii) experience participatingindialogue, debate, anddecision-making; and(iii) preparationfor future opportunities for civic engagement. The SmGP providesgrantees (CSOs) with: (i) adeeper understandingofthe conceptofcivic engagement; (ii) experiencemanaginggrant funds and implementingactivities; (iii)morepositive imageofthe Bankand its a commitmentto workingwith civilsociety; and(iv) linkageswith other CSOs and/or publicsector actors. The SmGP helpsCOSdevelop positiverelationshipswith CSOs, andimprovestheir understandingofcivic engagementandhow it supports developmentindifferent contexts. Oneofthe mainchallengesfacingthe SmGP is operationalizingcivic engagement inthe contextof its grant- makingactivities. Recommendations-Recommendationsfor strengtheningthe SmGP focus onincreasinglearningactivities, building onthe foundationofgrassrootsactivities, andstreamliningthe grant-makingprocess. Specific suggestionsinclude: Holdingworkshopsthat help operationalizedefinitions ofcivic engagement in country contexts. Definingacommonset ofrigorous indicatorsofsuccess, to help operationalizecivic engagement. Puttinginplace mechanismsto supportCSOs inthe process ofdesigningand implementingappropriateprojects. Sponsoringconferencesor round-tablesthat wouldalloworganizationswhichhave completedtheir grants to shareexperiencesand"lessons learned." e LinkingSmGPgranteesto other Bank funding mechanismsandto new donors, thus helpinggrantees buildon their work and allowingbeneficiariesto apply the skillsandexperiencethey gainthrough SmGP activities to morecomplex civic engagement challenges. e ConGder establishinggrant "streams" inpriority areas, to establishstronglinkageswith other Bankprogramsand help Bankprogramsbenefit from greater community input. e Insome countries, enhancerelationshipswith the publicsector to helpensure that beneficiariescontinue to engage incivic affairs after SmGPactivities end. e ConsidermaintainingSmGP's focus on civic engagementbutreducingthe emphasis empoweringmarginalized andvulnerablegroups. Source: Makinga LittleGo aLongWay: Howthe WorldBank's SmallGrantsProgramPromotesCivic Engagement; EducationDevelopmentCenter, inassociationwith Pact, Inc.; September, 2003. 58 Annex 9 Programfor EducationStatistics(PES) Hosted at the UNESCO Institute for Statistics(UIS), PES aimsto respondto the educationsector's urgentneedto updatethe quality andrelevanceof the dataand information neededfor moderneducationpolicy analysisand for governanceand managementof educationsystems. A DGF grant supportsthe three main priorities o fthe UIS: 1) enhancingmethodologies; 2) improvinganalysis and dissemination; and 3) improvingnational capacitiesfor statistical development. Findings- A recent independentevaluationofthe program assessedthe health, viability, and sustainability ofthe UIS projects funded bythe DGF, taking into account a previous assessment completedinMarch2002 and incorporating stakeholders' views. The evaluation found that: All the projects fundedbythe DGFwere well-managedandrelevantto the objectives ofthe UIS andto the international goals establishedby the Dakar commitment. TheUIShas, ingeneral, ensuredthatthe overall objectives ofthe projectsreceiving DGFgrantshavebeenmet. The shorter-termimpact on improvementsto questionnaireretwnsand leverageofnationalresources for statistical improvementswas evident. There are currently, however, no performancemeasuresthat assessthe longer-term retumsinoverallnational statistical capacity building. The UIS is beginning to meetthe challengeshighlighted bythe 2002 evaluation: 1) balancing the focus between developing internationally comparableeducation statisticsand supportingnational capacity development; 2) reducing the time lags inmakingdataavailable to users; 3) increasingthe useo f statisticsinpolicy-making at the national level; and4) makingglobal statistical tabulations more readily accessibleto analysts. The longer-term success ofthe UISdepends on its ability to strengthenits sphereofinfluenceto improvethe quality o fnational datacollections and increasethe use o f international data inprogram administration and policy development. The main riskto the sustainability ofthe projects, andto the sustainability ofthe UIS itself, is the lack oflong- termcore funding. Recommendations-The evaluation concurredwiththe 2002 assessment, which concludedthat "given its national and international importance, the task o f improving statisticson educationdeserves far more thanthe $US 8 million devotedto the UIS and its programsat present." Specifically, the evaluationrecommendedthat the UIS: 0 Continue to focus onthe three priority areas: 1) developing appropriatemethodology and standards; 2) analyzing and interpreting cross-nationaldata; and 3) capacity-building inthe collection and useo fstatistics. 0 Develop a longer-term strategy for expandingthe World Education Indicators(WEI) activities. 0 Explore methodologiesfor releasingspecialized sets o fmore timely data. e Develop aregionalization strategyfor analytic andnational capacity-building responsibilities. 0 Develop managerialtools for monitoringand assessing member countries' overall progress instatistical capacity development. Source: Improvement of the Quality ofInternational ComparableEducation Statistics, Project Evaluation Report, Kathleen Campbell, January 31,2004. 59 Annex 9 CitiesAlliance(CA) The CA was launchedin 1999bythe WorldBankandthe UnitedNationsCentrefor HumanSettlements(UNCHS) to marshalthe resources, experience, andknowledgeofthe internationaldevelopmentcommunity to improvethe livelihoods ofthe urbanpoor. The CitiesAlliance focuses onhelpingcities upgradeslumsandsquattersettlements, andon supportingCityDevelopmentStrategies(CDS), a processusedby localstakeholdersto definetheir visionfor their city, analyzeits economicprospects, andestablishdevelopmentstrategies. Findingsand Recommendations The 2002 independentevaluationofthe programconcludedthat, during its first - three years, the CitiesAlliancehashadsignificant politicalandoperationalimpacts. Globally, the CA's Cities Without Slums target ofimprovingthe livesof 100millionslumdwellerswas adoptedas a MillenniumDevelopment Target. Locally,the CA's approachto CDSs is increasinglybeingusedto support city-levelpoverty reductionand economic development. Specific findings andrecommendations,highlightedbelow, coveredfive categories. The LearningAlliance 1) The ConsultativeGroup (CG) shouldstrengthenits roleasthe centerfor learning, poolingvarious experiences, disseminatinglessons learned, aligning programs, anddrawingout lessonsfor replicationandscalingup. 2) Specific measuresshouldbetakento benefit fromthe full potentialofthe Local GovernmentAssociation(LGA) membersofthe CG. 3) The SteeringCommittee, whichhasprovento be effective, shouldincludeone smaller bilateraldonor inits membership.4) The Secretariatis runningwell. It shouldnowaccept fewer proposalswhile increasingthequalityofthoseaccepted. 5) Althoughthe value ofthe PolicyAdvisoryBoard's (PAB) serviceto the CG is unquestioned,its aimsshouldbe definedmorepreciselyand manageably. ProposalsandProjects 1) The processingofapplicationsworks well, althoughmore supportshouldbe providedto applications from poorer andother prioritycities. 2) Clientfeedbackhasprovento beusefuland important. The client feedbackformshouldbe strengthenedand, whenpossible, participatory evaluationswith clients andstakeholdersshouldbe conducted. 3) Theprinciplesfor approving funding for proposalshavebeen appliedfairly consistently.Theproceduresare complex, however, andshouldbesimplified, makingtrade-offs explicitto helpguide the Secretariat. 4) SlumUpgradingprojectsarewell-focusedonthe urbanpoor andthe alleviationofthe social impactsofpoverty.A keyrecommendationis to emphasizethe documentationand disseminationoflessons learnedfrom projectimplementation.5) Diverseformulae andaims havebeenemployed infollowingCDSs, andtherehasbeenlittleovertattentiontothe institutionalrequirementsfor sustainability. A majorevaluationis neededto assess accomplishmentsandconditions for sustainability. Non-CoreFunding Non-corefundingallowsdonorsto exploreprojects with far wider influenceover other donorsandoffersthe capacityto scale-upthroughcollaboration. Other Issues 1) The Secretariathasbeenworkingwith privatefinancialinstitutions, and maynow wishto exploreoptionsfor facilitatinglarge-scalecommerciallending. 2) The Secretariatshoulddevelopastrategyto encouragethe creationoflocalCAS,whichwould bringtogether in-countrydonors, localLGAs, andpossibly localNGOs.3) Thetargettotal of funds pledgedfor the currentperiodhasbeenexceeded. FutureEvaluations The CA needsto institutenew proceduresto facilitatemorecomprehensiveandrobust evaluations.A workshop shouldbeconvenedwhichwould resultinamonitoringframework againstwhich progresscanbe measuredand clarify who will beresponsiblefor gatheringthis data. Source: CitiesAlliance: Assessment ofthe FirstThree Years, DevelopmentPlanningUnit, UniversityCollege London, London, UnitedKingdom, November2002. 60 Annex 9 CriticalEcosystemPartnershipFund(CEPF) The CEPF promotesconservationinthe earth's richest centers ofbiodiversity,byprovidingstrategic assistanceto civil society andprivate-sector organizations engaged inprotectingand managingthese critical hotspots. Since its inceptionin2001, the CEPF hasdisbursedover $26.4 millionfor 162projects in 11critical eco-regions. Findings-An independentevaluation ofthe program, undertakenin2003, concludedthat the rationalefor creating the CEPFwas soundandwell-founded. The Fundis nowconsolidatingandtakingstock, drawingon lessonsfrom experienceto sharpen its focus and improve its operations. Key findings include: The CEPF has remainedwell-focused andoperationallyeffective. The DonorCouncilhasprovidedstrategic vision; timely, usefil reviewof ecosystemprofilesand investment plans; and productive support for fundraising. Ithasdemonstratedthat awell-designedalliance ofNGOs, developmentbanks, and foundations canwork effectively with civil society inthe field ofconservation. The managementteam has administeredthe CEPFprudentlyand learnedfrom experience, makingadjustmentsto vital proceduresand developingasolid basisfor future monitoringandevaluation. The team has also made a concertedeffort to maintaintransparency and autonomy. Managementis now focusing on improvinggrant makingand supervision inthe field, and onevaluating CEPF experience inthe three hotspots inwhich it beganits work. The strategic focus representedbythe ecosystemprofiling processhasprovedaneffectiveway to identify CEPF investmentprioritiesand mobilizealliances for conservationaction. The processcouldbe improvedby sharpeningpriority setting and establishingparticipatorymechanismsfor movingfrom priority settingto implementation. The CEPFhasreachedawide varietyofgrantrecipientsinatimely and agile manner.GrantDirectorshavedone a first-ratejob of developingthe pipelineand expandingthe number ofgrants disbursedwhile managingrisksand conformingto the Bank's safeguardpolicies. Recommendations-The evaluationmade the following recommendations: The CEPF should carefullyassess the grant-making and supervisionprocess,to clarify roles and strengthen capacity ingrantee orientationandtraining, proposaldevelopment, andsupervision. More decentralization would relieve Grant Directors' workloadand focus CoordinatingUnitsonthe coherenceand strategic impact ofthe in- countrygrantportfolios. The role ofConservationInternational(CI) needsto be clearly defined. CIshouldnotbe givenspecial considerationor exercise undueinfluenceover grant-making procedures. Future evaluations should focus onthe cumulative effects ofgrants inmeetingCEPF strategic priorities,and on strengtheningcoherenceandsynergy amonggrantrecipients. CEPF shouldreviewthe experience ofeachecosystemprofiling process inmovingfrom priority settingto program implementation, inorder to designa processthat tightens the linkagesbetweenthe them and leadsto more effective implementation. CEPF should reviewopportunities to support publiclprivateinitiatives, which couldinvolveprovidingmore support to policy reformactivitiescarriedoutbyNGOsor the privatesector. CEPF should develop avigorous public outreachstrategy, to capitalize on lessonslearnedand foster discussion, so that the CEPF can stimulate innovativethinking about conservation. CEPF managementandthe DonorCouncilshould beginto discussthe future ofthe CEPF. Conservationin critical ecosystemscannot be achievedinfive years, andthe CEPF modelis provingto be ofgreat worth. The evaluationsand stock-taking now underway should beusedto explore ways to extendthe life ofthe Fund. Source: Critical EcosystemsPartnershipFundMid-Term Review, Walter W. Arensberg `61 Annex 9 MENAGenderProgram The Center ofArab Womenfor TrainingandResearch(CAWTAR) is the only regionalinstitutioncommittedto promotingthe participationofArab women indevelopment. Establishedin 1993, itrepresentsnon-government organizations(NGOs) in22 Arab states. Duringthe last few years CAWTARhasfocusedonfour synergistic objectives: 1) raisingawarenessandbuildingcoalitions to addressgender inequality;2) strengtheningpolicymakers' capacityto analyze, design, andadvancegender-relatedpolicies;3) addressingregionalneedsfor gender- disaggregateddata; and4) buildinga networkofresearchinstitutionsandNGOsaroundspecificgender-relatedissues. Findings-In1997,CAWTARwas closedbecauseofpoorperformance,governance,andmanagement. Itwas reopenedin 1999withnew managementandstaff, operatingwithasharperfocus. Sincethen, CAWTARhasbuilta solid foundation. Itwill, however,haveto solveimmediatestructuralproblemsandscale up activities particularly - disseminationandnetworking-to effectively meetthe growingandpressingchallengesfacingthe gender agendain the region. Therecentevaluationo fthe programfoundthat: Since reopening, CAWTAR's successesinclude: 1)makingsignificant progressinadvocacy; 2) accumulating considerableknowledgeonthe status ofArabwomen; 3) establishingaweb ofrelationshipswithkeypartners;4) buildingacohesiveandcompetentteam; and5) regainingthe confidenceofthe donorcommunityandgender- relatedorganizationsinthe Arab world. CAWTARwas less successfulindisseminationandnetworking,becauseofoverburdenedsenior staff, insufficientdonor fundingfor thesetasks, andvaryingdegrees ofawarenessaboutandopennessto gender issues inthe region. A relatively lowsalarystructurehasforcedCAWTARto relyonconsultantsfor routinetasks andto overstretch staffmembers. Budgetproblemshavealsomeantthat many keyfunctions are notstaffedandare undertakenon anad-hocbasis. CAWTARis effectively athreeyear-old institutionoperatingwithabarebonesbudgetthat is inadequateto addressits mandate.The immediatepriorityis to put CAWTAR's finances onanevenkeelto help it develop into anindependent,sustainableinstitution. Recommendations The evaluationrecommendedremedialmeasuresto reducethe immediateorganizationalrisks - facing CAWTARandto ensure its sustainability. CAWTARshould: Includeon its Boarddistinguishedleaderswho canguidemanagementinmeetingnewchallenges, increase independencefromdominantpublic sectors, andimprovegovernance. Reviewits salarystructure, usingother regionalorganizationslocatedinTunisiaas a reference, andputinplacea seasoned, energeticcorestaffto handleresearch, knowledgemanagement,andsomenetworkingfunctions. Prepare a businessplanandcorrespondingresourcemobilizationplanto redress organizationalweaknesses.The mainobjective ofthe planshouldbeto convert, withinthe nextthree years, the predominantlyannualproject financing to multi-yearprogramfinancing, includinganendowmentfundthat would cover a significantpartof its corefinancingneeds. Source: Evaluationofthe Center ofArab Women for TrainingandResearch(CAWTAR), 2000-2003,Magdi Iskander,PhD, MINCConsulting,January2004. 62 Annex 9 ForestPartnership The World Bank`s Forest Strategy seeksto 1)harnessthe economicpotential o fforests to reducepoverty; 2) integrate forests into sustainableeconomic development; and 3) protect vital localand global values. Effective partnershipsare akeyelemento fthis strategy. To consolidate, expand, and increasecoordination, five existing partnershipshavebeen brought together as the ForestPartnershipProgram(FPP), with financial support from the DGF. The five partnerships are: 1) the World Bank-WWF Alliance for ForestConservationand SustainableUse; 2) ForestTrends; 3) the Amazon Network on Forests; 4) the World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (WBCSD) Forum on Forests; and 5) the Program onForests. Findings An independentevaluationo fthe programcarriedout in2003 found that: - The FPP has beenhighlyrelevant to the objectivesofthe Bankandthe existing partners, interms ofachieving more sustainableforest management and conservation. Substantialprogresshas been made, particularly through Alliance efforts to establishthe necessarypreconditions for sustainableforest managementand certification. ForestTrends is delivering innovative research and analysis on newconceptsandpolicy alternatives. Engagementwith forest industries and other globally important private- sector institutions through the WBCSD and CEOsForumhas increasedawareness and ledto practical innovations for sustainableforest managementand conservation. The FPP's benefits are believed to be very substantial, while the costs havebeenrelatively small and tightly controlled. DGF support for the Alliance has helped leveragesignificant investment support for major forest conservationinitiatives. Follow-up activities arisingfrom an investmentforum sponsoredbyvarious FPP partnersare likely to catalyzeshifts inprivate investmenttowards more sustainablepracticesinkey forest areas. Most FPP activities are technically soundand aim to maximize social and environmental gainsby increasingthe effectiveness and resilience o f local, national, and international institutions. All programs other than the Amazon Network on Forestsare attracting strong externalsupport from bilateral donors and other sources. Overall, bundlingthe five partnershipsintothe FPP has brought significant benefits. It has enabledthe Bank to gain more informationand influence outcomes over a wider array o ftopics and countries. A decisionto discontinue DGF funding for the FPPwould seriously impedethe delivery ofthe ForestStrategy.It could alsobe misunderstoodbyother international organizationsas a major vote o fno-confidencebythe Bank. Recommendations -The evaluation reachedthe following conclusions: FPP managersshould considerwhether there are other prospectivepartners with whom the Bankshouldengage, to maximizethe probabilityof achieving the Forest Strategy's objectives. Other ways of ensuringthat the FPP contributesto all Forest Strategyobjectives should also be considered. There are two possible areas for additional attention: slowingthe paceo f forest conversion, and encouraging more forest restorationhehabilitation. Either mayrequire additional partnershiprelationships. Inadditionto the activities ofeachpartnerorganization, the Bank should considerdeveloping its own strategyfor outreachand dissemination. The FPPclearly meetsDGF eligibility criteria inall respects. A strong case exists for continuing supportfor the next three to four years. Source: Extemal ProgramEvaluation o fthe World Bank's ForestPartnershipProgram, Dr.Neil Byron, Commissioner(Environment and SustainableDevelopment), The Productivity Commission, Australia, 2003. 63 Annex 9 Partnership for ChildDevelopment(PCD) The mainobjective ofthe PCD isto supportthe Bank`s Educationfor All (EFA) strategyandthe FastTrack Initiative (FTI), through more effective schoolhealthandnutrition (FRESH') programsandHIV/AIDSandeducation programs. All activities are undertakeninpartnershipwith other agenciesand stakeholders. It is difficult to determinewhich activities are fundedbyDGF and which are fundedby other sources. Findings The recentindependentevaluationofPCD found thatthe partnershiphasprovided leadershipandkey - technical support, focusing on research, networking, disseminationo fknowledge, and capacity building. PCD has leveragedsignificant resources for the educationsector. Keyfindings include: Strengths: PCD initiatives haveresultedina stronger evidencebase, andhencebetter technical documentsand tools. The educationsector's capacity to respondto the HIV/AIDSepidemic hasbeenimproved. PCD work has supportedstronger partnerships, andhas ledto consensus aboutcommon strategies andgoals as well as the developmento fnew national or provincial plans. Inthe case o fFRESH, PCD's work has already ledto increased programming and implementation. PCD's activities to strengthenschool healthresponses to HIV/AIDSare relevant, effective, high-quality, catalytic, and likelyto be sustainable. Challenges: PCD faces the following challenges:(i)Ensuringthat momentum is translated into country-level implementation ofeffective educationsector responseto school health and HIV/AIDS. (ii) Clarifying and strengtheningthe mechanismsto apply for or disbursefunding insome countries. (iii) Strengtheningassistanceto helpprovincialandregional educationdepartmentsandNGOsaccess available funds. Key solutions are to continue fostering strongpartnershipswith other agencies, and to place a stronger focus during workshops on understandingandovercoming potentialpitfalls inapplying for funds. (iv) Payingmore attentionduring workshopsto the particularities o fHIV/AIDS vulnerabilities and school health in localcultural contexts. Impact: Interms o f impact, it is too early to conclude whether the HIV/AIDSandeducation initiative - especiallythe country-level workshops-will havethe desiredimpact. Initialoutputssuggest a highlikelihood of success, becausePCD's approachis similar to the successfulone usedto strengthenschool healthprograms inthe FRESHpartnership. Recommendations: The evaluationmadethe following key recommendations: The DGFshould continueto support PCD's activities to enhance and scale up school health programsand HIVIAIDS and educationresponses. PCD-supported countries and programs should not accumulate-there shouldbe a processfor disengagement, ensuringthat localpartneragencies takethemon so that PCD can move onto new areas. Technical assistance should be continued where necessary in `old' areas. The successfulpartnershipapproachfor school healthand for HIVIAIDS and educationshould continue, but efforts to engage new international and localpartnersshould continue. The principlethat eachpartnershipagencyshould self-fund its participation hasmerit, but inspecial circumstancesPCD should be allowed to provide funding for other agencies' participation, especially ifthis increasesthe chances ofbringingthese agencies on board. PCD has worked in20 African and seven Asiancountries. Ithas the capacity to respondto needs inother parts o f the world, but currentfunding levels are only sufficient for Africa. DGFmaywish to considerexpandingfunding to PCD so that other regions(especially SouthAsia, Southeast Asia andChina, LatinAmerica andthe Caribbean, Central Asia, andthe Pacific, inthis order o fpriority) can be covered. Source: IndependentEvaluationof Partnershipfor Child Development (PCD) -DGF program; Sheldon Shaeffer and Jan Wijngaarden, UNESCO Asia Regional Office, April 2004. Focusing Resources on Effective School Health 64 Annex 9 GlobalDevelopmentNetwork(GDN) The objectivesofthe GDN, an associationofresearchandpolicy institutes, are: (i)to generatenew, development- relevant socioeconomicknowledge; (ii) to share that knowledgethrough networking and dissemination channels; (iii) to apply that knowledge to policy, primarily indeveloping and transition economiesbut also for developmentin general; and (iv) to raise funds to implement GDN's agenda. Findingsand Recommendations-An evaluationofGDNwas undertakenin2004, focusing on five areas: Programsand Activities 0 Findings: GDN's programsand activities meetaclear global demandfor development-relevantknowledge and build researchcapacity incountries where it is most needed. 0 Recommendations:(i)Introduce competition into the allocation o ffunds to RegionalNetwork Partners(RNPs) for RegionalResearchCompetitions, providinga financial incentive for RNPsto focus on GDNobjectives. (ii) Schedule GDN's global conferenceson a biennial or triennial basis; use the savings for other forms of South- Southnetworking. (iii) Make the GDNet website moreuser-friendlyandup-to-date. (iv) Follow up on the U.S. National Institutes o fHealth's suggestionsfor enhancingthe GDN/NIHcooperativeprogram. DisagreementOver GDNObjectives 0 Findings: There is disagreementamong important stakeholderson objectives. This makes it difficult to measure success inachieving those objectives andthus attract new long-term funding. 0 Recommendations:(i)Call a conferenceo fstakeholdersto "take stock" andto launchthe next phase inGDN's developmentwith unambiguous, actionableobjectivesthat can be translated into specific activities and measurable targets. (ii) Requirethe Governing Board (GB) to formally subscribeto the statementof mission and objectives.(iii) Ask the Secretariatto: (a) reviewcurrentactivities againstobjectives anddevelop future activities accordingly; and (b) reconsider whether current RNPs are well-suited to implement the activities GDN supports. Governance 0 Findings: (i)GDN's current structure reflects a commitment to policy-relevant, multi-disciplinarydevelopment researchwithout intervention from governmentsor donors, The GB's membership, however, does not reflect the entire developmentcommunity. (ii) GDN's governing bodies lack business-sectorfundraising experience, but effective oversight o fthe businessaspectsof GDN's operationaland financial managementis indispensable. 0 Recommendations:(i)Establisha BusinessBoardto ensure business-likeadministration o fGDN. (ii) Convert the GB into anAcademic Board to promoteresearchandhandlenon-businessaspects. (iii) Holdjoint yearly sessions o fthe BusinessandAcademic Boards. Financing 0 Findings: GDNmust attract greater support from donorsto achieve financial sustainability. Donors are likelyto respondto a GDNinitiative aimed atjointly launching the nextphase. 0 Recommendations: (i)Preparea long-term GDNoperatinghancialstrategy for discussionat the "stock-taking" conference. (ii) Ask donorsto findways to eliminate obstacles to multi-year funding commitments. (iii) Review the operating/financial strategy after the conference. (iv) Considerasking the World Bank Presidentto help raise a sizeable endowment. Management 0 Findings: The Secretariat's staff membersare enthusiastic and dedicated, but do not havethe business managementtraining or experienceneededbythe organization. 0 Recommendations:(i)Hire independent consultantsto assess whether recentrelocation and legal-statusdecisions satisfy critical success factors. (ii) Appoint a DeputyDirector/BusinessManager, who would report to the Business Board. Source: Global DevelopmentNetwork IndependentEvaluationReport; Dr.N.Peter Muthand Dr.Frederick H. Gerlach. March 16,2004. 65 Annex 9 Public-PrivateInfrastructureAdvisory Facility(PPIAF) PPIAF is a globaltechnical assistancefacility designed to help eliminate poverty and achievesustainabledevelopment indeveloping countriesbysupportingprivate sector involvement ininfiastructure. PPIAFactivities and achievements fall into two categories: 1) channelingtechnical assistanceto governmentsindeveloping countries, helpingthem tap the fillpotential for private sector involvement ininfrastructure, and2) identifying, disseminating, andpromoting bestpracticeson mattersrelatedto private sector involvement ininfrastructure. Findings The activities ofPPIAF are reviewedregularly by aTechnical Advisory Panel(TAP). Inits 2003 report, - the TAP continuesto be impressedwith the impact, quality, and value for the moneythat PPIAF is achieving across all sizes andtypes o f interventions, indicatingthe overall success o fthe program. The review o ffiscal year 2002 activities found that PPIAF is establishingitself as a niche player, offering: 1) high-quality, cost-effective products; 2) expertise inidentifyinganddisseminatingglobal bestpracticesand lessonslearnedfrom unsuccessfulprojects; and 3) anability to customize emerging global practicesto country-specific situations. The program is hasbeensuccessful in: 0 Addressing on-the-ground realities: The majority ofthe PPIAF activities reviewed took into account local constraintsand limitations. 0 Leveraging additional resources: The majority o fthe PPIAF activities reviewed generated significant co-funding from other partners. This not only providesadditional monetary resources, but also demonstrates commitment by other partners and governments. Achieving a highdegree o fprivate sector representation: Private sector representationand input into PPIAF activities remainshigh. Private participants' views were solicited inatransparentfashion, increasingthe credibility and legitimacy o fthe reform program. 0 Itcantakea longtime for governmentsto reachadecisionon issuesthat are oftenpolitically sensitive. Oncea decision is made, limitedtechnical skills and capacity for implementation often inhibitand delay the realization o fpotential benefits. Recommendations-The TAP recommendsthat PPIAF: 0 Directly address constraintsthat hamper decision-making and implementation. Specifically, PPIAF should be more proactive in 1)helping[governments?] establishconsensus, and 2) helpingincrease capacity to facilitate implementation. 0 Considerproviding regulatory support. While PPIAF should be wary o f long-term commitments, follow-up support is often neededfor infantregulatory agencies. PPIAFhas good experiencewith regulatory initiatives in Africa and SouthAsia, and may wish to look into adaptingthese programs inother regions. 0 Explore "step-by-step" approaches ina more systematic manner. Insome cases, immediateneed, political realities, and other constraints inhibitthe achievemento fgoals such as increasing capacity, Insuch instances, P P W should consider taking step-by-step actions inthe rightdirection as a better alternative than doing nothing. Source: Review ofPPIAF Activities CompletedDuring Fiscal Year 2002, preparedbythe Technical Advisory Panel, April 2003, 66 Annex 9 Forumfor AfricanWomen Educationalists(FAWE) FAWE is the leadingorganization inAfrica that directlyaddressesissuesrelatingto girls' education. FAWEworks at the continental, national, and locallevelsto promotepositiveattitudes, policies, andpractices oneducationfor girls. FAWE, supported inpartbythe DGF, hashadconsiderablesuccessinimprovinggirls' accessto, retention in, and performanceingood-qualityeducationalprograms. Findings-The evaluationcarried out in2003 ofFAWEandthe DGF-supportedprogramfound the following: The program's DGF-supportedobjectiveswere achievedand implementedwithin the context ofthe FAWE strategic planfor 2002-2006. The programhas beeneffectivelymanaged; there is a systeminplace for continuousmonitoring. The programhasprovidedvalue to the intended beneficiaries: girls, teachers, schoolmanagement,parents, communitymembers, and educationalpolicy makers andplanners. There is potentialfor sustainability, giventhe extentto whichparticipants haveassumed ownership ofthe program. DGF supporthascontributed significantlyto buildingthe organizationalcapacityofFAWE's NationalChapters (NCs) and Regional Secretariat. All the stakeholders, butespeciallythe girl beneficiaries, havevery highregardfor FAWE. FAWE is seenas providingauthorityon issues relatedto girls' education. The programhashada positive impact ongirls' accessto, retention in, and performance inhigh-quality educationalprograms. Two elementshaveprovenparticularlyeffective: 1) the innovativeCentresofExcellence (COEs), which haveemergedas a bestpractice inprovidingqualityeducation for girls, and2) the "Tuseme" speak out girls' clubs, which empower girls by raisingself-esteemandconfidence and by providing life skills to protectagainst gender violence and HIVIAIDS. Despitethe addedvalue DGF hasprovidedto FAWE, severalchallengesremain: 1) mainstreaminggender into educationalpoliciesand plans is movingslowly; 2) the highlevelofgender awareness at MOEsdoes not necessarilytranslate into actionon the ground; 3) movingfrom advocatingawareness ofthe importanceofgirls' educationto advocatingactiononthe ground has provento be difficult; 4) the demandfor bursariesis increasing, due to risingpovertylevelsand growingnumbers ofHIV/AIDSorphans; and 5) thegreat demand for life skills to protect against HIV/AIDSand genderviolenceis notbeingfully met. Recommendations-The evaluator concludedthat FAWEshould: Work together with other education stakeholdersto devise moreeffectivestrategiesfor acceleratingthe paceof gender mainstreaming. Document, package,and disseminateinformationabout the impact ofCOEs, inorder to scale up this innovative program. Focuson movingfrom advocacyfor awarenessto advocacyfor action onthe ground; enhancethe grassroots- leveladvocacyskills o fNC members. ExpandFAWE's HN/AIDS interventions to reachmoregirls; extendthe Tuseme modelto many more schools. Continueto supportthe NC capacity-buildingprogram, giventhe NCs' considerable success deliveringprograms to improvegirls' educationandthe fact thatthe sustainabilityofFAWEwill dependonthe strengthofthe NCs. Source: FAWE Evaluationreport, January2003, Stella Manda, Consultant 67 Annex 9 The Post-Conflict Fund(PCF) The PCF was establishedin 1997 "to enhancethe Bank's ability to support countries intransition from conflict to sustainablepeace and economic development.". The PCF provides grantsfor projects from $25,000 to a cap of $1 million in any oneyear. Grantsare opento a wider range o frecipientdimplementer agencies than is the case for regular Bank/IDA loans and credits. Morethan 90 grants, totaling $40 millionto date, have funded field projects, conferences, and studiesin32 countries Findings The independentevaluation ofPCF conductedin2002statedthat "given the high-riskcircumstancesand - innovative charactero fmanyo fthe field projects, one might expect an overall rate of `satisfactory' project outcomes that is lower than that o fnormalB a n W A operations. Infact, our tentative conclusion, drawn from the 30 field projects that havebeenconcludedto date, is that the PCF satisfactoryrate is ofthe same order as the Bank's 1990s norm. Inaddition, inmany cases the expectationsthat `watching briefs,' Transitional Support Strategyactivities, and pilot scale grants would establish an effective basis for Bankfollow-on financing havebeenfulfilled." Recommendations Giventhe growth inthe importanceofconflict for the Bank, the likely increase inthe demand - for PCF grants, andthe needto exploitthe knowledge generationand disseminationpotential ofthe PCF, the evaluation identifieda numberof areas that needstrengthening: Implementationmonitoringneeds strengthening.Suggestedoptions for an improved management model where anon-site TM is not feasible: hiringlocal co-managers; detailing the monitoringto aU.N.partner agencythat has localpresence; and inthe proposal stage, requiringa monitoringstatementfrom the sponsoringcountry team, includinga monitoring-supplementation fallback ifsuchbecomesnecessary. Some ideas for strengtheningthe incentives for monitoring are suggested. To meet new conditions, the PCF may needto shift from an essentiallydemanddrivenmodel to one more proactive interms o fthe distribution and contento f its project portfolio. At current fundinglevels, demand for PCF supporthas begunto exceed the fund's resource supply.Ratherthan continue its largelyfirst-come, first- served allocation model, the PCF should consider adopting selectioncriteria, apartfrom geographic allocation, that would help strike a balancebetweenrespondingto ad hoc proposals from operational units, on the one hand, and supporting a prioritized agenda, on the other. Knowledge generationandmanagementneedsignificant strengthening. Through internal andexpert consultation, the PCF should identify innovative areas addressedby its portfolio where significant new knowledge generation payoffwould be likelyfrom additional projects.Ina proactive mode, the PCF should encourage proposalsfor projects alongthese lines. The PCF may havegreaterpotential as achannelfor bilateral donorsthan has beenrealized thus far. Donors are clearly more interestednow inconflict prevention and amelioration, andpost-conflict recovery. With the Bank's intellectual and operational resourcesbehind it, and a programmatic approachthat combinesrapidad hoc responseand proactive innovation and knowledge generation, the PCF would have comparativeadvantagesthat could serve awider range oftrust fund donors. To serve the above objectives, the PCF needsto strengthenits managementinformationsystem. Provisions shouldbe made for more systematic implementation reporting to the PCF, especially on projects experiencing implementation difficulties. Source: DevelopmentAlternatives, Inc, 2002. 68 Annex 9 ForgingPartnershipsFor Good Governance inPublic Expenditure and RecordsManagement The GlobalFinancialManagementPartnershipaimsto strengthen donor and recipient ability to diagnosethe condition ofpublic expenditure and financialaccountability ofcountry financial systems andproposea practicalsequence of reformand capacitybuilding. The 2004 evaluationreport, Evidence Based Governance in the Electronic Age project, focusedonthe InternationalRecordsManagementTrust(IRMT), the recordsmanagementcomponentofthe program. Key findings and recommendations: The evaluation foundthat: 0 the projectis meetinganeedwhich is acknowledgedbythe rangeofstakeholdersinvolvedinevidence-based governance inthe electronic age 0 IRMT's reputationand expertisehavebeenkeyelements indevelopingthe proposal, securingunding, involving a wide range ofparticipants andexecutingprojectphasesto date 0 theWorld Bank's involvementhasengagedinterest andsupport for the projectingovernmentcirclesacross the world the projectto datehasachievedthe involvement andactive participationofa largenumber ofcountries, both largeand small, developing anddeveloped 0 the projecthas establishednetworks within andacrossdifferentstakeholdergroupsthrough the videoconferences 0 thetools identifiedasprojectdeliverables arerecognisedas importantbybothsponsorsandparticipants butthere is some concernthat they maybe over complex andthat other types o f aids are necessaryto build capacityand providethe practicalhelp needed the initialassessments tools were over complex but they havefulfilledan importantrole as stepping stones inthe developmentofthe software tool the RMCAStool isahighly imaginativeand potentiallyhugelypowerfultool, but.itmustbecompletedand sustained the TrainingResourcesdatabase is an important facility and againpotentiallyvery useful but it will be very resourceintensiveto maintainand without maintenanceits value will diminish. the evaluationfound, inconclusion, that the project is ambitious andhugelychallenging, andhas achievedso much, first inrelationto the project inhandbutalso for other similar projects. Itprovidesvaluable lessonson which to build and, by focusing onthe findings ofthis evaluation, is more likelyto deliverwhat is really required. Source: FinalEvaluationReport, March2004. preparedby BluebellResearchLtd. 69 Annex 10 Summaries ofProposedFY05DGFPrograms' Environmentallyand SociallySustainableDevelopment ESSD . ConsultativeGroup for International Agricultural Research 72 PostConflict Program ....................................................................................................................... ............................................................ 74 Critical EcosystemPartnershipFund ................................................................................................. 76 Small GrantsProgram ........................................................................................................................ 78 Global Fundfor IndigenousPeoples(GFIP) 80 GlobalInvasive Species Program(GISP) .......................................................................................... ..................................................................................... 82 StandardsandTrade DevelopmentFacility 84 Global Reporting Initiative ................................................................................................................ ....................................................................................... 86 ForestPartnershipProgram ................................................................................................................ 88 TargetedResearchandCapacityBuildingfor CoralReefManagement ........................................... 90 International Assessment ofAgricultural Science andTechnology for Development ...................... 92 MillenniumProjectHunger TaskForce ..................................................................................................... ............................................................................................. 94 Africa StockpilesProgram(AFR) 96 DevelopingConnectivity betweenBiological 8z GeospatialInformation inLatin America andthe Caribbean ......................................................................................................... 98 COM+ Alliance of Communicatorsfor SustainableDevelopment ................................................... 100 HumanDevelopment Network HD . GlobalForum for HealthResearch .................................................................................................... 102 UNAIDSGlobal andRegionalActivities for IntensifiedResponseto HIV/AIDS ............................................................................... ..................... 104 African Programmefor OnchocerciasisControl 106 PopulationandReproductiveHealth CapacityBuildingProgram .................................................... 108 SpecialProgramfor ResearchandTraining inTropical Diseases 110 ResearchandDevelopment inHumanReproduction ........................................................................ .................................................... 112 Roll Back Malaria .............................................................................................................................. 114 Stop TuberculosisInitiative ............................................................................................................... 116 Partnershipfor ChildDevelopment ................................................................................................... 118 Association for the Development ofEducation inAfrica 120 Nutrition andGender ......................................................................................................................... .................................................................. 122 UNStandingCommitteeonNutrition 124 HealthEquity Fund ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................... 126 Capacity Buildingfor Educational Planning andManagement .............................................................................................. ......................................................... 128 Programfor Education Statistics(PES) 130 RomaEducationFund., ...................................................................................................................... 132 Early ChildDev.Capacity-Building Initiative(ECDCI) The Asia-Pacific Quality Network ..................................................................................................... ................................................................... 134 136 ZambeziForumofHigher Education(ZFHE) 138 MENA-ChildProtection Initiative(CPI) ............................................................................................ .................................................................................... 140 UnderstandingChildren's Work- PhaseI1 ......................................................................................... 142 Global Partnershipfor Disability andDevelopment .......................................................................... 144 * These.programsummariesare basedon informationprovidedbytask managers inapplications for FY05 DGF finding 70 Annex 10 Infrastructure Consultative Group to Assist the Poorest .......................................................................................... 146 Information for DevelopmentProgram(infoDev) ............................................................................. 148 GuarantCo .......................................................................................................................................... 150 GlobalGas FlaringReductionPartnership ........................................................................................ 152 Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility 154 Cities Alliance .................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................. 156 Extractive Industry TransparencyInitiative ....................................................................................... 158 Communities and Small-ScaleMining .............................................................................................. 160 PrivateSector Development PSD . StrengtheningGrassrootsBusinesses Initiative(SGB1) ..................................................................... 162 FinancialSector .FSE Financial Sector ReformandStrengtheningInitiative 164 SupportingInsuranceSupervision ..................................................................................................... ....................................................................... 166 InternationalOrganizational ofPensionSupervisors ......................................................................... 168 OperationalPolicy and CountryServices.OPCS InstitutionalDevelopmentFund........................................................................................................ 170 Global Financial ManagementPartnerships ...................................................................................... 172 Poverty Reductionand EconomicManagement PREM . Global DevelopmentNetwork ........................................................................................................... 174 InternationalComparisonProgramme ............................................................................................... 176 Global Governance andDevelopingCountry Voice 178 MENA Gender ResearchandTraining Network ............................................................................... ......................................................................... Good Governance: Community Mob.To Combat Corruption ......................................................... 180 182 InformationSolutionsGroup ISG . DevelopmentGateway Foundation .................................................................................................... 184 SpecialSituation Partnershipfor CapacityBuilding inAfrica (PACT) ........................................................................ 186 71 Annex 10 ConsultativeGroup on InternationalAgricultural Research Bank Contact: FranciscoJ. ReifschneiderJ202-473-8918 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ESSD RuralDevelopment - RecipientAgency: CGIAR Web Address: http://www.cgiar.org FinancialArrangementsfor FYOS(Amount inUS$ Million) I Total Budget: $375 DGF FundingRequest: $50.00 DGF Percentage: 13% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes The ConsultativeGroup on InternationalAgriculturalResearch(CGIAR) is a strategicalliancebetween63 countries& I institutions.CGIAR contributesto food security & povertyeradicationbyfosteringagriculturalgrowthin developingcountries& by promotingsustainableagriculturaldevelopment based on environmentallysound managementof naturalresources. CGIAR complementsthe Bank's efforts to enabledevelopingcountriesto realizetheirfull potentialin agriculturaltechnology & production. MainComponents (i) CGIAR objectivesare achieved through research, contributionsto internationalrule-setting, and internationaladvocacy. (ii) CGIAR has in-houseresearchexpertiseat 15 InternationalCenterswhose activitiesspan over 100countries. (iii) CGIAR contributesto internationaldeliberationson topicalissuesof agriculture,forestry, fisheries,livestock,food policy, and sustainabledevelopmentthroughanalyticalwork, participationin scientificforums, provisionof scientificadvice,and fostering discussionon food policy. PerformancelndlC8tOr~ (i) CGIAR researchoutputsare globaland regionalpublicgoods. Outputsincludenewcropvarietiesand animalstrains, improvedtechnologiesand productionmanagementtools, servicesto NARS, and policy work. Giventhe longerterm natureof CGIAR research,most ofthe quantitativemeasuresof annualprogress can only be describedin terms of intermediateproducts. These are listedin the annualprogramsof work for each Center. A consolidatedlistingfor budget year 2005will be availablein October2004. A comprehensive assessmentof the impactof CGIAR's naturalresource managementwork is underway bythe CGIAR's ScienceCouncil; resultsshouldbe availableby 2005. (ii) CGIAR advocacy and internationalrule-settingoutputscan be measuredby its scientificand policycontributions. Recent examplesare the InternationalTreatyon PlantGeneticResources, GeneticResourcesand IP issuesduringtheWTO roundin Doha,World FoodSummit, NEPAD,WSSD, the WorldWater Forum,TICAD Ill. Forecastedincreasesinfunding for CGIAR in 2003/05 reflectthe higherprofileof agricultureand agriculturaltechnology. Progressand Achievements FY04 has been a year of concreteaccomplishmentsas CGIAR completedestablishingthe four initialpillarsof the Reform Program[ExecutiveCouncil, Challenge Programs,Science Counciland SystemOffice]launchedin November2001to enhance its effectiveness,efficiencyand relevanceto the MDGs. Duringthe year, the third ChallengeProgram, UnlockingGenetic 72 Annex 10 Diversity, was launched and the first two, Water and Food, and Bio-fortificationof Crops,were implemented. The fourth, Sub- SaharanAfrica, is expectedto be launchedearly in FY05. A new ScienceCounciltook office on January 1,2004 to guide CGIAR's science and ensure its quality. The Executive Councilhas beenfunctioning well for over two years, in particular, facilitatingdifficult CGIAR decisions on CenterlProgramalignments. Early resultsfrom the Reformprogram are promising and go beyondthe initialpillars. The CPs havefulfilledthe expectation of focussing substantialresources and, as well, and bringing new partners, substantive andfinancial, to address developmental issuesthrough research. Forexample, newpartnershipshave beenestablishedwithin theWater and Nutritionfields with Nationalprograms,specialized entities while financial support has beenmobilizedfrom Governments of Netherlands,France and the Gates Foundation. InOctober2003, the CGIAR decidedto realign ISNARfrom an independentCenter to a programof IFPRIand relocatethe new programfrom the Netherlandsto Ethiopia. A task force was also establishedto seek opportunities for better serving CGIAR clients, initiallyinAfrica. Finally,CIMMYTand IRRI,two CGIARflagship Centers workingonWheat and Maize and Rice resp., announced plansto improve scientific coordinationincludinga merger if necessary. The Bank's financial support to CGlAR CenterslProgramshas beenmade strategic. A significant amount, $5 million, has been allocated to strengthen the IT infrastructurefollowing $17 million allocated in 03for upgradingCenter gene-banks. Furthermore, World Bank`s contributionto individual Centershas been linkedto Center performance. The methodologyfor these linkages draw on experience within the Bankand as well in Nationalsystems (for example in BrazilandAustralia). The Reform Program,althoughled by the Bank, enjoyswidespreadsupport from other CGIAR investors. This is demonstrated by announcements of additionalfinancial supportfrom key investors,e.g. Canada and UK who planto double their general support. Finally, during2003, CGIAR scientists receivedover 80 internationalawards and honors recognizingindividualand team excellenceina broad rangeof disciplines in agriculture,food, and environmentalsciences. Partners Twenty-one Part Icountries, 25 Part It Countries, private sector foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Kellogg, Syngenta),the Aftican DevelopmentBank,the Asian DevelopmentBank,the Arab Fund, EC,the FoodandAgriculture Organizationof the United Nations (FAO), GCC, Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank, IDRC,the InternationalFundfor Agricultural Development(IFAD), OPEC Fund, UNEP,the UnitedNations Development Program (UNDP) Oovemance and Management There are three key governing bodies: (i) a Committee of the Whole meetingat the Annual GeneralMeeting(AGM); (ii) a 21- Member Executive Council representingmembers, Centers, and partnersto prepareCGIAR decisions and act on behalfof the CGIAR on itemsdelegated to it by the AGM; and (iii) a Science Council to guardthe relevance and quality of science inthe CGIAR. As recommendedby the OED review, a CGIAR charterwill befinalized in early 2004. Annual GeneralMeetings (AGMs) approve an overall program ofwork for CGIARwhich consolidatesprograms prepared by the Centers under overall strategic directions approved by CGIAR. Center work programs are discussedwith partners, selected by Center managers,and approved by Center boardsof trustees. The private sector and the civilsociety are linkedto CGIAR through partnership committees; bothare representedon the ExecutiveCouncil. The Committee of theWhole is chaired by a BankVice-president who also chairsthe ExecutiveCouncil. A Secretariat is housedand staffed by the Bank. Itis ledby a director and staffed by ten professionalswith expertiseincommunications,finance, and govemancelpartnerships, as well as six ACS professionals.A virtualSystem Office supports these bodies, overall membership,and the Centers. ExitStrategy ESSD is convincedthat the Bank should continue to have a direct stake in CGIAR as longas the Bank remains committed to reducing poverty. The Bank is, however, increasingly selective in allocatingfunds. InFY04, about half of the Bank`s funds are allocated to supportthe reform programand CGIAR's GPG assets insteadof allocating them across the boardto all Centers, as done inthe past. The other half of the Bank'sfunds are providedas generalsupportto Centers basedon performance. 73 Annex 10 PostConflict Program BankContact: Colin S. Scott1202-473-6884 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ESSD -Social Development RecipientAgency: Post Conflict program Web Address: http:llwww.worldbank.org FinanclalArrangementsfor FYOS(Amountin US S Million) Total Budget: 8.40 DGF Funding Request: 8.00 DGF Percentage: 98% Objectivesand Expected Outcomes The grantwill providecore supportto the PCF's eighthyear of financing (FY05) and seventh calendaryear of operations(CYs 98-04). The PCF makessub-grants to a rangeof partnersto provideearlier and broader Bank assistance to conflict-affected countries. The objective isto 'position' the Bankthrough constructiveengagement in countrieswhere normalinstrumentsand budget provisionscannot apply. Sub-grants are focused on restoringthe lives and livelihoods of war-affectedpopulations,with a premiumon innovation (new approaches to conflict work), partnership(with donors and executing agencies), and leveraging resourcesthrough a variety offunding arrangements. In FY04,the PCF has beenthe main source offinancing for LlCUSsuch as Sudan, Somalia, and Haiti, as well as other unforeseenemergencies(such as Afghanistan in FY03and Iraqin FYW where the PCF'kick-started' the Bank's operations). In FY05,the PCFwill administer a new LlCUS implementationtrust fund of $25mtargeted at non-accrualcountries. DGF support will still be requiredfor other conflict-related programs,such as Mindanao (Philippines), Comoros, Kosovo,West Bank-Gaza, and Burundi. The design and objectives of the PCFare basedon the policy document approved by the Board "A Framework forWorld Bank Involvementin Post-ConflictReconstruction," R97-1411, datedApril 28, 1997. It provides essential early funding as an integralpart of operations, as laidout in OPIBP2.30, "Development Cooperationand Conflict". InJune 1999the Executive Directorsagreed to trust fund statusfor the PCFto facilitate greaterflexibility in use offunds and to allow for donor contributions. MatnComponents Typically, sub-grants cover: (i) 'watching briefs' on countries in conflict; (ii) early assessment, planning,and pilotingof reconstructionactivities; and (iii) a small numberof capacity-buildingand action researchproposals. Inthefirst six years of operation, over 130grants totaling $65.6m have been made, with demandthrough quality proposalsrunningat about twice that level. In FY04, only $2.4m remains unallocatedto address demand duringthe remainingtwo financial quarters. Grants are designed to have strategic positioning value for the Bank and its partners. InCY99, for example, the PCF providedthe first andonly Bankdisbursements in Kosovo and EastTimor. In CYOO, the PCF launched multi-donor initiativesfor war-displaced populations in Georgia and Croatia,and kick-started reintegration and reconciliationwork in Burundi. DuringCY02, the PCF providedthe only source of Bankfinancial assistancefor Afghanistan (initially), Somalia, Haitiand Sudan. InCY03 initialwork on Iraqand Cote d'lvoire was dependenton PCFfunding. 74 Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators (i) Disbursementson sub-grants (currently runningat 77% of approvals) (ii) Operationaloutputs: Throughthe investment of relatively small resources (grantsvary in size, rangingfrom micro-grantsof $25,000 for distinct activities to grants of upto $1 millionfor the preparationof multi-sectoralTransitional Support Strategies), the PCF creates the enabling conditionsfor implementationof broaderreconstructionactivity. Sub-grants triggeringdonor funding and policyco-ordinationare frequent,for exampleFYR-Serbia,Georgia, Philippines,and Eritrea. (iii) Co-financing to the PCFgeneralaccount or contributionsearmarkedfor specific proposals.The PCFcommittee and secretariat already administersthe Japanese PCF ($15mtotal) and is actively seeking further donor support. In December 1999,the PCFgenerated itsfirst donor funds for an earmarkedproject (2mSwiss Francsfor the KosovoCommunityFund), with a further $2mfrom the Netherlands. InFY02,the Belgiangovernmentcontributed$Im to the PCFfor work on Africa. The Swiss governmenthas provided$1mover FYs03-05. Progressand Achlevements The last annual report recorded$11.8 allocationsthrough sixteennewly approvedgrants, anddisbursed a record total of $13m across the current portfolio. Apart from working in new areas (conflict analysis in Nigeria)and new countries (Iraq), the PCF held an internationalworkshop on Community Reintegration Activities and starteda series of informationnotes. Partners 1Donors: Switzerland, Governments,UNAgencies, Non-Governmental Organizations I Governanceand Management A Bank-wide Director-levelcommitteeserves as a governing board,overseeingpolicyfor the PCF, setting priorities for spending, and decidingon individualsubgrants. The PCF committee meets annually to discuss a performancereviewand arising policy issues. Italso meetsapproximately every six weeks to decideon sub-grants and related issues. PCF guidelines (revisedin December2002) lay out the priorities for grant allocation and procedures. All proposalsare subjectto technical review by appropriate experts. Reporting is determinedby the administrationin each case, but typically involves a bi-annual wn'tten report. The PCF is administeredby a secretariat basedinthe SocialDevelopmentDepartment's Conflict Preventionand ReconstructionUnit. The Secretariat is composed of a PCFadministrator, a knowledge management (M&E) specialist, and an operations analyst, plusACS assistance as required.Additional staff may be recruitedto work on the LlCUStrustfund. Exlt Strategy The plan isto complement DGF financingwith increasing donorfunds. All individual activities financed by the PCF have a specific grant period. The FY05 DGF application continues a three-year strategyto maintain DGFsupport while the potentialfor support from other donors istested. 75 Annex 10 Critical EcosystemPartnership Fund Bank Contact: Michael G. Carroll1202473-9528 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ESSD Environment - RecipientAgency: Conservation International Web Address: httD:l/w.consenration.orcllwww.ceDf,net FinancialArrangementsfor FYOfi(Amount in US$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 29.1 DGF FundingRequest: 4.00 DGF Percentage: 14% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes The protectionof the earth's biologicaldiversity is one ofthe highestpriorities for long-termglobalwell-being. The lossof species and natural habitat is proceedingat an alarming pace,with unknown but potentiallydisastrous consequences. The CriticalEcosystemPartnershipFund(CEPF)takes aim at this global problem by providingtimely, strategic coordinationand assistancefor conservationwork inthe planet's most biologicallyrich andthreatened ecosystems. Main Components CEPFwill contributeto the conservation of upto 21 criticalecosystemsin developingcountries aroundthe world. CEPFwill provide smallgrants to localcommunitygroups, civil society organizations, NGOs,and private companies. Eachcritical ecosystem qualifies for USW.25 - $10 million(sub-grants are generally US$2,000 $250,000). - Since initiating operationsin 2001, CEPF has focused on initiatinggrant programsin nineecosystems. Grants totaling $14 millionfor 87 projectswere approved; morethan 58 additionalgrant requestsare pending. The online grant application, approvaland monitoring processeswere significantly upgradedto ensure swift and efficient processes. Trainingworkshops for potentialgrant applicantswere heldto expandawareness about CEPF grant availability. Performancelndlcators 1Indicatorsof progressin 2004/2005 include: The CEPF grant mechanismoperating and supporting hotspotand corridor conservationoutcomes in at least 13regions. Three Ecosystem Profilescompleted. Implementationof recommendations madeby an independent evaluation. CEPF donor base expandedto include US $150 millionby includinga sixth donor partner by the end of FY04. The comprehensive disseminationstrategy of CEPF activities, designed in FY04, fully implementedduring FY05 in all active hotspots. CEPF gradually moving into a more intense M&Ephase, aimed at developing lessons leamed, effectivelytracking grant performance,ensuring cross-fertilization among grants and hotspots, and fine-tuning the overall implementationstrategy. Completionoffunding inthree hotspots launchedin FYOl. Improvedgrant processingtimetable through standardizedapproval process. Preparationof two additionalhotspot portfolio reviews, to be undertakenjointly by CEPF and the Bank. 76 Annex 10 Progressand Achievements As of January 15,2004, there are atotal of 5 donors, US$125 million in pledges, in 13biodiversityhotspots. These funds have allowedto initiateactivities inthe following Hotspots: Guinean ForestsofWest Africa, Madagascarand IndianOcean Islands,TropicalAndes, Atlantic Forest, Choc-Darien-WestemEcuador, Mesoamerica,Philippines, Sundaland, Cape FloristicRegion, Mountainsof Southwest China, Succulent Karoo, Caucasusand EasternArc Mountains and Coastal Forestsof Tanzania and Kenya. Inthe 13hotspotsthe CEPF has supported a total of 250 projects, benefiting 170partners, and awarded US$35 millionin project grants. The averagegrant size is US$lS2,000and US$60millionin newcatalytic funding have been leveraged. Launch of the CEPF initiative inthe Succulent Karootook place inApril 2003with active participationby local stakeholders, NGOsand representatives of govemment and private sector from Namibiaand SouthAfrica. Completed preparation of the EcosystemProfilesand investment strategiesfor the Caucasus and EasternArc Mountains and CoastalForestsof Tanzaniaand Kenya approved at the DonorCouncilMeeting, July 31, 2003. Northern Mesoamerica EcosystemProfile approved on a non-objectionbasis inJanuary 2004. Currently undertakingpreparationand profilingactivities in ,Indo-Burma, Polynesiai3 Micronesia andWestem Ghats and Sri Lanka. Increase invisitors to the CEPFWeb site totaling 61,355 visitors to duringJan-June 2003. Launchof final project reports and lessons learnedonWeb site. CEPF-E-News,the CEPF's electronic newsletternow has over 700 subscribers. Published Second Annual Report in December2003. CEPF andWB conducted ajoint missionto Tokyo in October 2003 undertakento increasesupport and knowledgein Japan aboutthe CEPF. Launchof a strategyfor the threatened birds ofAsia completed by BirdlifeInternationalwith CEPF support. Japanese NGOseminar presentedby CEPFcarried out. CEPF Monitoringand Evaluationteam strengthened. Senior Directorfor Portfolio ManagementappointedM&E Unit improving data managementand grant-managementfunctions. Field-basedmid-term portfolio reviewof all CEPF programs scheduled. First independentfield-based reviewprocess undertakeninthe Vilcabamba-Amboro Corridorin August 2003. Madagascarand TropicalAndes mid-term reviews conducted inApril 2003 andAugust 2003 respectively. Partner8 Conservation lntemationalFoundation,the John D. and CatherineT. MacArthur Foundation,theWB-Global Environment Facility (GEF), and the Govemment ofJapan Oovemanceand Management A DonorCouncil meetstwice a year to review and approvethe overall annual budget, priority areas for funding, Ecosystem Profiles, and other strategic aspects of CEPFoperations. Membersof the DonorCouncil arethe Presidentof theWorld Bank Group, the CEO of GEF, the Presidentof the MacArthurFoundation,the Chairmanof CI, and a representativeof the Governmentof Japan. The DonorCouncilhas establisheda Working Groupcomprisedof technical staff from donor organizations. Itserves as a resource for CEPF staffon matters such as donor organization resourcesand expertise, Ecosystem Profiles, operational issues, and obstaclesto biodiversity conservation success. Consetvation International is responsiblefor administeringthe fund, operatingwithin CI management proceduresand practices. CEPF staff is housedat Cl's headquartersinWashington, D.C. ExitStrategy Consistent with DGF's planto provide $25mto CEPF, the program is expectedto exit DGF after allocation of the balanceof $3m. 77 Annex 10 Small Grants Program Bank Contact: Yumi Sera I202-473-2416 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ESSD Social Development - RecipientAgency: SmallGrants Program Web Address: http://www.worldbank.org/smallgrantsprogram IFinanclalArrangementbfar FY05 (Amount In US$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 5.78 DGF FundingRequest: 2.80 DGF Percentage: 48% Objectivesand Expected Outcomes The Small Grants Program (SmGP) supports civicengagement activities at the country level. Itis a cross-regional and cross- network programthat helpsthe Country Offices (COS)promotethe agenda for civic engagement. Inthe lastfour years, the SmGP hasdeveloped a strongerfocus on civic engagement, which has helped alignthe Programwith Bank operations, systematize learning, and knowledge, and reachout to strategic partners. The SmGP has strong ownershipfrom all Country Offices/Regional Departmentsto the extent thatthe demand far exceedsthe availability of funds. The purposeof the SmGP isto strengthenthe voice of poor and marginalizedgroups, giving them greater controlover the developmentprocess,thereby makingthese processesmore inclusive and equitable. Civic inclusion, civic engagement, cultural identify and ownership, andfull exercise of citizenship by participatinginthe public realmthrough civilsociety organizations are fundamental componentsofthe fight against povertyand exclusion.The intendedbeneficiaries of the SmGP are citizens, especially the poor and marginalized. By funding activities that are directly coming from CSOs, the following outcomes are expected: (i) beneficiary impact: knowledge and awareness of issues and rights; experience participating in dialogue, debate, and decision-making; and preparationfor future opportunities for civic engagement; (ii) CSOlgrantee impact: deeper understanding of the concept of civicengagement; experience in managinggrant funds and implementing activities; linkageswith other CSOs; and (iii) Bank impact: new understandingsof civic engagementand empowerment, and howthey support development invarious country contexts. MainComponents Small Grants ProgramlCountry Office: COSare expected to support activities thatengage marginalizedand vulnerable groups, strengthenthe CSOs, leveragefunding, and advancethe field of mobilizationfor civic engagement. They are expected to emphasizeactivities that facilitate the interaction of poorand marginalizedgroups with the public sector inorder to influence developmentpolicies and processes. Learning Focus: A key outcomeisthe program's promotionof learningabout civicengagement,especially approachesthat facilitate engagementby the poorand marginalized groups. The programthus providesopportunities for operationalizingsuch a complex and multifacetedconcept as civic engagementat the country and regional levels. These opportunities includethe developmentof aworking definition of civicengagementthatfit localneeds and realities,which intum helps define performance indicatorsthat are appropriateand meaningfulfor the participants.There is also the opportunity for bothgrantees and grant- makers to improvegrant management,including approachesfor monitoringand measuring results. Youth Component:A newYouth Streamthat will be piloted intwo regionswill focus on supporting activities thatfoster inclusion of youth andwill include publicationof working papersfor knowledge and learning summarizingyouth experiences. ~ 78 Annex 10 PetfonnenceIndicetom (i) Improvementinthe qualityof activitiesfunded by the SmGPthat: (a) enhance development processes, especially interactionsbetweenmarginalizedgroups, governments, andotherkey stakeholders; and (b) provideaccessto new financial, material,and knowledge resources supportingcivicengagement bythe traditionallymarginalizedgroups. (ii) Enhancedpartnershipswith other donorsinways that relateto grant-making for civic engagementactivities,and increases in leamingand knowledgeproductson civicengagementfor developmenteffectiveness. Progmar and Achievements Criticalreviewand selectionprocess of Country Office proposals leadingto qualityof CO proposalsfunded; Broader partnerships(co-funding)with other donors (suchas UNDP),bilateralsandfoundations; 75 CountryOfficesrequestedSmGP allocationshowinga continued and stronginterestin the Small Grants Program. Each CO receivesfrom $20,000 -$40,000 infunding; 512 out of 7,390 proposals(6%) from CSOswere funded. This numberwill most probably continueto increasewiththe Bank'soutreachto civil society. Partners 1UNDP, GEF, SmallGrantsProgram Governanceend Management The SmGP hasa Steering Committee, co-chairedby the Directorof SDV andthe Coordinatorof the Participationand Civic EngagementGroup. Regionaldepartments, EXT, andCDF are represented. Civilsocietyorganizationsandotherdonors may also be represented. The SteeringCommittee is responsiblefor settingthe strategicdirectionand decidingon allocations. Final decision-making responsibilitylieswith the Country Directorand is usuallymanagedby the SD or CivilSociety specialist. The selectionprocessistwo tiered: (1) The COSapply to the Secretariatfor funding allocationseach year. Applicationsare reviewed against the following criteria: (i) complementaritywith the Bank's strategy at the country levelandwith civic engagementto empowerthe most vulnerablegroups; (ii)the processfor managingthe SmGP, includingclear andwell thought-outplansfor communications, marketingand decision-making; (iii) a track recordutilizinggrantsin previous years (if applicable);(iv) rationalefor the SmGP. Preferencewill be givento COSthat show: (i) partnershipswith key playersin the development arena; and (ii) potentialfor leveragingthe SmGP by generatingadditionalfinancialsupportfrom otherdonors or governments. COSare responsiblefor administering the program, makinggrantdecisions,and completingyear-end reports.The applicationandfinal reportmustbe endorsed and signed by the Country Director. (2) Civilsocietyorganizationsapply to COSfor funding and are selectedaccordingto specificcriteriaand guidelines. Requestsfor proposalsare made bythe COS. The proposals are screenedand reviewedby a committeemadeup of Bank staff, other donors, govemmentofficials,and sometimes NGOs. A grantagreementis signed betweenthe NGO and the Bank; a final reportis requiredupon completionof the activity. 1The SmGP is managedby a Secretariat(part-timestaff) under SDV. ExitStrategy The SmallGrantsProgramhas longterm funding statusunderWindow 1, in view of its importancein allowingBankCountry offices to engage locallywith civil society. 79 Annex 10 Global Fundfor Indigenous Peoples (GFIP) Bank Contact: Navin K. Rai1202-458-1298 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ESSD -Social Development RecipientAgency: Global Fundfor Indigenous Peoples Web Address: NA FinancialArrangements for FY06 (Amount in US$ Miillon) Total Budget: 3.83 DGF FundingRequest: 0.60 DGF Percentage: 16% Objectiveslend ExpectedOutcomes The GlobalFundfor IndigenousPeoples(GFIP) was established by the Bankand funded by a DGF grant in FY04. The establishment of the GFIP resultedin high levels of direct participationfrom Indigenous Peoples (IP), wide public support from IP leaders, and strong interest for partnershipsfrom donors. ContinuedDGF support is soughtfor three ongoing efforts: The Grants Facility for IndigenousPeoples, The UN Permanent Forum (UNPF)on Indigenous Issues, and a pilot programof capacity-building for indigenous leaders in the Andean region. ContinuedDGFfunding will (i) leveragedonor funds and expand the Grants Facility's capacity to providegrantsto IPSat the community level; (ii) allowthe UNPFon Indigenous Issuesto further strengthen its rolein coordinating IP-related activities; (iii) supporta newgeneration of organizationsin LatinAmerica and other regionsin putting indigenous issueson the developmenttable. MainComponents Grants Facility for Indigenous Peoples: The Grants Facility provides grants for programs identifiedby IPSthat address development needs but cannot be funded through regular Bank mechanisms. In its first year of implementation,the program received 755 small grants applications demonstrating a high demand for such funds. Given the high volume of applications and donor demand, $1,300,000 (over FY05 and FY06)would be allocatedfor this fund to complement donor resourcesand to provide for a larger numberof grants to IPS. Strengthening the UN PermanentForum on Indigenous Issues: The UNPF provides advice and recommendations on six areas pertaining to IPS:economic and social development, culture, environment, education, health, and human rights. It also promotesthe integration and coordinationof IP activities among international agencies and donors. Andean Indigenous Leadership Capacity Building Program (Andean Program): This three-year pilot program is designed to strengthen the indigenous organizations of the Andean countries by training indigenous leaders. The Fondo lndigena is the principal Andean Program partner. If the pilot is successful, plans are to replicate it in other regions of the world by FY07. Performancelndlcators Grants Facility for Indigenous Peoples: (i) IP communities/organizations receivea minimumof 50 small grants annually; (ii) three donor govemments make commitments for partnerships; (iii)funds are effectively utilized; (iv) a full Grants Facility Boardtakes over governanceofthe Facility;(v) evaluation indicatesthat IPSmake increasedinputs intoformulation of nationalpolicies and projectsat the country level; and (vi) arrangementsto transfer the Grants Facility to an outside institutionalhome are agreed. UN PermanentForum on Indigenous Issues: (i) Forumconducts three consultationsto strengthen a global partnership betweenIndigenous Peoples,the UN system,the Bank, and other donors; (ii) Forum holdstwo global and five regional consultationswith IPS;and (iii) IPSfeel that the Forum is legitimate and feel empoweredby its deliberations and activities. Andean Indigenous LeadershipCapacity Building Program: (i) two LearningModulesadapted and two developed; (ii) 80 Annex 10 pilottraining givenwith five focus groups; (iii) five workshopsheldwith larger groups to highlight opportunitiesand constraints; (iv) at least 100indigenous representativesparticipate; (v) analytical work carried out to provide basisfor discussion and planningworkshop; (vi) nationalworkshops and internationalworkshop heldto discuss key findings; (vii) website expanded,final evaluationand reportspresented; and (viii) evaluationconfirmsthat participants' decision-makingcapacity has beenenhanced. 2 . " * ___L. 4 ProgressandAchlevemsnb The Grants Facility has receiveda firm commitmentfor additionalresourcesfrom the Government of Norway (allgrants managementcosts, including Interim Boardtravel and expenses& grants administrationcosts, are providedbythe Bank budget reserving all DGF funds for grantsto IndigenousPeoples Organizations).The Andean programhas raised resourcesfrom the Swiss Trust Fund(throughWBI). In FYO4, the InterimBoard madedecisionson the FY04 grants & started preparationsfor the selection process& establishment for a full boardthat will governthe Facility. In FY04,the InterimBoardmet 5 times to discuss issues relatedto the Grants Facility, including the governancestructure & grant reviewprocess. The Grants Facility Interim Board membersmet and consultedwith Indigenous Leaders,taking advantageof scheduledUN events on Indigenousissues. Interim Boardmembers are serving on a panelat an intemationalfoundations meetingto start the dialogue with other grantmakersinterested infunding Indigenous Peoplesissues. These events helpto gamer supportfor the Grants Facility. Inthe third session of the UN Permanent Forum on IndigenousIssues,the Bank made several presentationson the Bank's work with IndigenousPeoples, including presentationonthe Indigenous Peoplesand Development(a Bank researchproject),Social DevelopmentStrategy, etc.. The Andean programwill be launchingthe first of the trainingworkshops on May 24' in Peru. Partners * , G, ' Officialbilateraldonors, UN-PermanentForum on Indigenous Issues, other intemational and regionalorganizations: Secretariat of the Andean Community,Fondo Indigena,the World Bank Institute (WBI). Governanceand Management The Grants Facilitycomponentis managedby an extemalInterimBoard on which IPShavethe voting majority, with an interim in-house Secretariat.The external Interim Board (the permanent Boardwill be in place by January 2005) providesoverall strategic guidanceand oversight and makesdecisions on applicationsfor funding. The Boardwill be composedof Indigenous leaders (as a voting majority)and representationfrom a civil society organization(such as an NGO networkor academia), donor, government, the UNPF (ex-officio)and the World Bank. The UN PermanentForumon Indigenous Issues andthe Andean Programare externally managed. Resourcesfor the UN PermanentForumgo directly to the UN-ECOSOC. The Andean Programis managed by the Fondo lndigena in cooperationwith an Advisory Board. The Advisory Board, established and convened by Fondo Indigena, will refinethe objectives and set allocations each year. The Bank, DevelopmentGateway,andthe WBI serve as observers onthe Board. Annual Plans have beendeveloped, reviewed, and agreed upon. A Memorandumof Understandingdetails the activities to becarried out by the partners. ExitStrategy The processof transferringthe Facility's institutionalhomefrom the Bankto an outside institutionisexpected to be completed by FY07; the lasttranche of DGFfunding for the Facility is expectedto be requestedin FY07. Giventhe increasing awareness of the role of indigenous leaders in policy development,greater government and donor support are expected. 81 Annex 10 Global InvasiveSpecies Program: Supportfor InternationalCoordination Bank Contact: Kathy MacKinnonI 2024584682 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ESSD -Environment RecipientAgency: NationalBotanicalInstituteof SouthAfrica Web Address: http:/hn/ww.gisp.org FinancialArrangementsfor FYO6(Amount in US$ Million) Total Budget: 5.56 DGF Funding Request: 0.60 DGF Percentage: 13% Objectivesand Expected Outcomes The GlobalInvasiveSpeciesProgram(GISP)was founded in 1997with a missionto conserve biodiversityand sustainhuman livelihoodsby minimizingthe spreadand impactof IAS. The key objectivesof GlSP are to: a) facilitatethe establishmentof effectivenationaland regionalcapacitieson IAS; b) promotesharing of knowledge, bestpractices,and skills in invasivespecies management; c) distilland disseminatescientificandtechnicalinformationon IAS; d) developand coordinatea network of databases on IAS; e) conductscientificassessments to evaluatekey pathways in orderto identifyopportunitiesto minimize invasions;and9 promotebest practicesfor assessingthe impactof IASon biodiversity,ecosystem services, and social and economic development. Although GlSP partnersspanthe globe, the program's services are primarily intendedto benefit developingcountries.The programwill be relevantto donor-funded developmentassistanceworldwide, includingpoverty- reductionprograms. In its first phase, GlSP undertook focusedassessments of the global IAS problemand developed guides and toolkitsfor policy, regulation, prevention,and management. An expanded phaseof work (PhaseII)is now undeway to engage and inform governments and stimulateactionandcooperationto address IASthreats.The key outcome fromthe GPPwill be establishment of an InternationalSecretariatto coordinateandservicean expandingglobal partnershipnetworkto informIAS policy at national and internationallevels. MainComponents GlSP PhaseII,started in 2001,coversa sixyear programwhichwill requirefundingfor a) establishment and operational expenses for a global Secretariat, b) nationaland regionalworkshopsand activitiesto developprograms in research, law and policy,pathways of invasion,nationaland regionalcapacitybuilding,informationmanagement, and educationand outreach,and c) resourcesto developpilot projectsto test and demonstrate best practicesin IASmanagement. Thework planfor GlSP PhaseIIestablisheda set of six priorityareas and activities: 1) nationaland regionalfacilitationandcooperation;2) education, communication, and outreach;3) global informationmanagement; 4) pathway managementto minimize the impactof IAS; 5) evaluationand assessmentof IAS, includingrisk assessment and risk management;and6) lawand policy. Keyactivitiesto be supportedunderthe programare: a) staffingand operationalcostsfor the new Secretariat;b) research on invadingalien plants; c) casestudieson economic benefitsof invasiveweeds management; d) showcaseinterventionsand pilotprojectsto demonstratepracticalmeasuresfor IAS managementwhichoptimizeecological,social, and development opportunities; e) development and disseminationof best practices;and9 improvingregionaland intemationalcooperationon IAS policy. DGF funding is requestedprimarilyfor activitiesa), c), ande), with a primaryfocus on buildingcapacityin developingcountries. Performancelndlcators (i) A well-establishedandfunctioningSecretariat,ableto servicea global partnershipnetworkand provideinformationon best practicecontainmentand management of IASto developingcountries. 82 Annex 10 (ii) Researchon invadingalien plantspecies to develop pilotinterventionsfor IAS managementandcontrol. (iii) Casestudiesthat will demonstrate the costslbenefitsof IASmanagementprograms. (iv) Training modules developed and capacity-building workshops heldin six developingcountries. (v) Sets of recommendedguidelines and bestpracticetoolkits for internationaland nationalpolicies,sectors, and pathwaysof IAS introduction,as well as legislativeand managementstandardsfor preventingandmanagingIAS. (vi) At leastten nationalworkshops leadingto plansfor nationalinter-agencycoordinatingmechanisms, best practiceprotocols, & preventionand managementinitiatives.Regionalmeetings leadingto regionalaction plans& coordinationmechanisms. (vii) Pilotstudiesto improveknowledgeabout IASpathways, raise awareness of environmentaland socialcosts,and promote interventionsto reduceunintentionaland illegalintroductionsof IAS. Progress and Achievements ; (I)functioningSecretariathasbeenestablishedwithintheKirstenboschGardensinCapeTown,SouthAfrica,andafull A complementof staff has beenhired.MOUs have beensigned between itsvariouspartnerorganizations,and new potential partnershave beenapproached. (2) A ten-year vision and a five-year planhave been completed, with inputfrom the Executive Boardand partners,drawing on the implementationplanfor Phase II.(3) Severalcommunications productshave been completedand disseminated, includinga fact sheet onthe Pathwaysof IAS, and GlSP News. The GlSPwebsite has been designed,and bookletsoutliningthe worst invasivesinAfrica andAsia prepared. (4) Bestpracticemodelsand methodologies have beencompletedand disseminated. The GlSPtoolkit has beentranslatedinto Frenchand Spanishand can be found on the GlSPwebsite. Manualsandtraining modulesto outlinebest practiceprocedureto implementearly incursionand containment,pathways management,islandmanagementand eradicationand controlhavebeencommissioned. Case studies on howto measure the socioeconomic impactsof IASwere presentedat aworkshop in December2003 inassociationwith Workingfor Water, andthesewill be made intoa publicationfor wider dissemination, (5) The Secretariathas providedtwo specialreportsto the CBD on IASdealingwith islandsandfreshwater pathways. (6) Severalworkshopshave beenheldto discuss varioustopics relatedto IAS, includingtheir socioeconomic impacts, andcountry specifics. Partners NationalBotanicalInstitute(NBI),World ConservationUnion(IUCN), Centerfor Agricultureand BiosciencesInternational (CABI), Scope, The NatureConservancy(TNC),WorldWide Fundfor Nature(WWF), Conservationlntemational(CI) Govemancraand Management GlSP is currentlynot an independentinstitution,but a decisionhas beentaken to ensure that GlSPwill become a legalentity in its own right. Under the current partnership,the GPPwill beadministeredby NBI. An InternationalSecretariatwill undertake day-today management underthe supervisionof the GlSP Executive Board. The Boardwill meetannuallyandwill oversee planning,financing,and evaluationof GlSP and itsWorking Groups. CABI, IUCN,TNC and NBI representativeswill sit on the Board. AdditionalBoardmemberswith recognizedexpertiseandinterestin IASissueswill be added in 2004. Six Working Groups, incollaborationwith the Secretariat,will produceand disseminateinformationandwill providetraining and supportto governments and NGOs indevelopingcountries.An Advisory Committee, comprisedof internationally renownedexpertson IAS,will provideadviceand guidanceon technical,institutional,and geopoliticalissues. The InternationalSecretariat is based in SouthAfricaand benefitsfrom close collaborationwith SouthAfn'ca's Workingfor Water ('WFW) and Ukuvuka programs. The Secretariatis responsiblefor coordinatingandimplementingGlSP Phase II. The Secretariatwill reportannually to the Boardon its activities,and the Boardwill approvethe annualreport. Externallyfunded projectswill havetheir own additionalreportingprocedures. ExitStrategy I FY07will bethe lastyear of DGF support underWindow 2. The Bankwill supportan initialtime slice (threeyears) of the GlSP Phase IIprogram,in orderto facilitatestart-up operationsof the Secretariatandexpansionof the global networkpartnership.At the end of three years (FY06) it is expectedthat the Secretariatwill bewell-established,fully functional,and have a long-term strategyfor financingGlSP activities. An independentevaluationof the Secretariatand DGF-funded activitieswill be undertakenin FY05. 83 Annex 10 Standardsand Trade DevelopmentFacility Bank Contact: Comelis L.J. Van Der Meer-458-5462, Steven M. Jaffee-458-1696 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ESSD -RuralDevelopment RecipientAgency: World Trade Organization Web Address: http://www.standardsfacility.orgl 1FinanclalArrangements for FYOd(Amount In US$ Mlllion) Total Budget: 3.35 DGFFundingRequest: 0.30 DGFPercentage: 9% I Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes With the formationof the World Trade Organization(WTO) in 1995and the removalof tariff barriers to trade over the past decade, developing countriesconfront both importantopportunitiesfor export expansionand criticalchallenges intrade-related capacity-building. This is particularlytrue in regardto trade andfood safety, and animal and plant health standards. Developing countries' abilityto benefith-omagricultural trade liberalizationand market opportunitiesdepends to a significant degreeon the capacity of their public and private sectorsto meet internationalstandards. There are three standards-settingbodies that develop standardsfor intemationaltrade: the CodexAlimentarius (Codex),the lntemationalPlant ProtectionConvention(IPPC), andthe Office lntemational Des Epizootics (OIE). Many countries have extremely limitedcapacityto participate in standard-settingby these bodies, negotiatetrade issues relatedto standards, and effectivelyimplementstandards requirements.They often also have poor regulatoryframeworks, limitedcapacitiesfor food safety and animal health inspection,and phytosanitarycontrolswhich hindermarket access and internationaltrade opportunities, Often, their private sectors have problemsmeetingmarket requirementsbecausethey lack competitiveness and face weak investment climates. A newwork programfor the WTO, launched in2001, is primarilyfocused onthe developmentdimensionsoftrade, including standards. The leadersof the Bank,WTO, FAO, andWHO issueda communiquecommittingthe institutions to a newjoint initiativeon standards. Buildingonthis commitmentand client demand, the Standardsand Trade Development Facility(STDF) was created in2002with DGF funding. The STDF has four primary objectives: 1)enhancingthe capacity of client countriesto effectively participateinWTO trade negotiations; 2) enhancing client countries' capacityto benefitfrom internationaltrade by meetinginternationalstandards; 3) providing grants for diagnosticreviewsand assistancewith standards capacity-building programs; and 4) coordinatingdevelopmentassistance in standards through a new inter-agency partnership. MelnComponents The STDF partnersagreed to a Concept Note in December2002which outlines the specific operating mechanismsof the Facility. The BankandWTO have disseminated information on the STDFto potentialclients indeveloping countriesthrough briefings, seminars,workshops, and committees. A website for the STDF and a databasefor exchanginginformationabout the partners' capacity-buildingactivities have beenestablished. Grant proposals have been forwardedto the BankandWTO; the first grants were selected in 2003. The STDF has positionedthe Bank in a clear leadership role in strengtheningthe environmentfor long-termassistance in using standardsto meettrade and poverty alleviationgoals. Initsfirst year of operation,the STDF has demonstrated success in building the formalframework and institutionalmechanismsto: 1)strengthencollaboration among donors and agency partners in standards; 2) encourage bilateraldonors to join the Facility; 3) outline operating criteriafor funding demonstrationprojects; 84 Annex 10 and 4) prepare a business planfor a multidonorTrust Fund(TF)to providegrants for capacity-building. The TF will be created inthe second part of 2004,with an annual replenishmenttarget of $5-10 millionfor the years 2005-07. PerformanceIndlcatom (i) Creationof an interactive informationexchangedatabase betweenthe standard-setting agencies and STDF partnerson trade-related technical assistanceprograms. (ii) Enhancedcapacity of developing countries, individuallyand in cooperativeregionalsettings,to implementWTO standards commitments and to access informationabout internationalstandards in order to participateinWTO negotiations. (iii) Developmentand disseminationof tool kitsand learningmaterialsfor assessingcountries' needs in SPS standards and trade, that can be applied to client countries' development strategies. (iv) Successfullaunchof pilotdemonstration projectsinstandards capacity-building,illustrating innovativesolutionsfor expandingtrade through standards. Launchof a multi-donorTF to providecapacity-buildinggrants for SPS in developing countries. Progressand Achievements (1) 2 projectsapprovedand severaldraft proposals awaiting approval (2) website+ data baseestablished (3) work on businessplan+ donor consultation for multi-donorTF started. Partners United Nations (UN),World Trade Organization (WTO), Office lntemationalDes Epizootics(OIE), bilateraldonors,WHO, FAO, IPPX, Codex. Oovemanceand Management Senior-leveloversight is providedthrough a Steering and Policy Committee. The Steeringand Policy Committee, comprised of representativesof theWTO, the Bank, FAO,WHO, OIE, IPPC, and Codex, will meetat least once ayear. These meetings will includeconsultations amongthe partnersto coordinatethe self-managed activities of each agency, inorder to develop and execute ajoint program. A Working Groupselects projectsand administersthe STDF. Itwill decide on the planfor using STDFfunds, including guidelinesfor managingthe TF and grant allocation. Specific STDF activities will beselected by the Working Group, informed by each agency's intemalcoordinatingmechanisms. The Working Groupand the three standards organizationswill reportto the Steering and Policy Committee. A Chairwill be appointed from among the members;an ExecutiveSecretary has beenappointed byWTO in consultationwith the Bank. The Bankand other agencies will managetheir own activities directly butcoordinate and cooperatewith partneragencies. The partnershipas a whole will monitorthe results. There is an annual progressreportof activities, whichwill includeactivities supported by each of the agencies. Trustfunds have separate reporting requirements. TheWTO, inconsultationwith the Bank, isthe outside executingagency to administerthe funds. This ensures a direct link to ongoing work, ensuring integration of developingcountry concerns inthe multilateraltrade agenda and leveragingthe B a n W O partnership. ExitStrategy The programwill exit DGF after FY05. STDF started a fund raisinginitiativewith bilateraldonors to augmentfunds. This is being coordinatedwith the partners, however,the Bank is leadinginthese efforts. It is anticipatedthat bilateralfunding through a multi-donorTF will be forthcoming ina sufficient manner so that the STDFwill be a stand alone entity in FY06. An independentevaluation is scheduled for FY06. Annex 10 Global ReportingInitiative Bank Contact: Charles E. Di LevaI202-458-1745 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ENVDR RecipientAgency: Global Reporting Initiative Web Address: http:/lwww.globalreporting.org 1FlnanclalArrangements for FYOS (Amount in USS Million) Total Budget: 3.42 DGF FundingRequest: 0.30 DGF Percentage: 9% Qbjactivgcr and ExpectedQutcomm The Global ReportingInitiative(GRI) was established in 1997with the mission of developing globally applicable guidelines for reporting on the economic, environmental,and social performanceof businesses, government organizations, and non- governmentalorganizations(NGOs). The GRI pursuesthis missionthrough a multi-stakeholderprocessof open dialogue and collaboration inthe design and implementationof globally accepted,widely applicableSustainability ReportingGuidelines(the Guidelines). A generallyacceptedframework for sustainability reporting benefitsall stakeholders, including companies, investors, customers, activists, ratingagencies,and govemments. By encouragingall organizationsto routinely assess and report their contributionsto economic, social, and environmentalsustainability, and by engaging stakeholdersin a unique, focused partnership,GRI provides both a productand a processthatcontributeto sustainabledevelopmentand poverty alleviation. The GRIemergedfrom the UNWorld Summiton Sustainable Developmentwith a new, high levelof recognitionof its potential to contributeto sustainabledevelopment. Duringthe pastyear, the numberof organizations usingthe GRI (including in developingcountries) has morethan doubled and GRI has continuedto consolidateitself as the world's only global sustainability reportingframeworkthat is both `triple bottomline' infocus and multi-stakeholderinform. The partnershipbetweenthe GRIand the Bankwill provideessentialfinancial supportto successfullyestablish a strong, independentinstitution to stewardthe GRI forum, processand product. Itwill ensure closecollaboration betweenthe two institutions and their global networkof partners,kirther establishingthe GRI Guidelinesasthe global sustainability reporting standard used by the Bank in its reporting, and by Bankloanrecipientsworldwide. L MainComponents Improvement of Current Products: GRI has launcheda revision processthat will leadto the developmentof a new, 2005 versionof the Guidelines. A roundof regional consultations has begun; input has beenreceivedfrom over 150 participantsfrom all major stakeholdercommunities. Developmentof NewProducts: GRI has recently begun sector supplementdevelopment processesfor the Miningand Metals and PublicAuthority sectors. It is also seeking expressionsof interestfrom other sectors. Considerationis beinggivento introducingthe GRl's HlVIAlDsResourceDocument(launched in SouthAfrica) morewidely in Africa, India, Brazil, and China. Diversification and Consolidation of RevenueStreams: GRI has adopted a moreentrepreneurial business model. GRIwill seek to reduce its relianceon foundationgrants, while at the same time increasingrevenuefrom projects and from its supporter base and diversifying its reliance on sourcingfrom the USA. The global recessionreducedGRl's expansion plansand forced a 20% reductionin expenditures during 2003. The requestedDGF grant will be an importantfactor inthe successful implementationof the GRI Business Planfor 2003-2005. Expanding Uptakeof GRIGuidelines and Use of GRI Products: The GRI BusinessPlansets a goalof havingmorethan 600 businesses,plus20 public authorities and civil society organizations (CSOs), usingthe Guidelinesby the end of 2005. GRI plans to achieve this goal by engaging GRI report user groups to increase demand and expandthe use of reports,while at the same time attracting new users from stakeholdergroups and from different regions. 86 Annex 10 Performancelndicsrton Global, independent institutionwith strong governancestructure: (i) Boardof Directorswell-established andfunctional; (ii) Chief Executivehired; (iii) locationfor GRI headquarters selected; (iv) locationsfor GRI regionaloffices identified; (v) GRI financial sustainabilityensured; (vi) professionalstaff hiredfor the permanentorganization;(vii) GRI Stakeholder Council establishedand functioning; (viii) GRITechnicalAdvisory Councilestablishedand functioning. Guidelines Stewardship: (i) Guidelines modifiedto be moreapplicable to low- and middle-income countries, developing countries, and countriesintransition; (ii) expanded useof Guidelines by developing county businesses;(iii)significant increase inthe numberof companies usingGuidelines; (iv) first sets of supplements releasedfor industry-specificreporting, facility-level reporting,and small and mediumenterprises (SMEs); (v) expandeduse of Guidelinesby govemments; (vi)firstWorld Bank Sustainability Report based onthe Guidelinesreleased; (vii) Guidelines becomestandardframework for sustainabilityreporting. Outreach, Promotionaland Educational Activities: (i) first sets of toolsfor understandingreporting issues (suchas verification, metrics, and report content) developedand beingtested; (ii)first sets of toolsfor monitoringand reviewing reports developedand beingtested; (iii) Guidelinestranslated into 10 languagesand supportedby materials available on the Intemet. ResearchActivities: (i) research projects underwayto continuedeveloping industry-specific reportingand SME reporting;(ii) joint research projectswith the Bank on the applicationof GRI Guidelinesin developingcountries accomplished; (iii) numberof test projects underwayto test Guidelines indeveloping countries; (iv) global inventory of sustainability reporting research resourcesconducted; (v) multi-year researchagendadesigned and launched; (vi) numberof researchprojectsunderwayto assess the impactof sustainability reportingon civil society and localcommunities; (vii) resourcecenter created at the Secretariatto increasethe availabilityof knowledge about sustainability reporting. Progressand Achlevements The year 2003 2004,saw a 100%increaseinthe uptake of the GRI Guidelines. Over 350 organizations(includinglargemulti- - nationals, SMEs, not-for profitand NGOs)from over 30 countries(includingJapan, Europe,Africa, and LatinAmerica) currently use the Guidelinesin preparingtheir reports. In May 2003 GRIlaunchedthe Structured Feedback Process(SFP) -as afirst step in a three year global consultative processfor developmentof the next2005 version of the Guidelines By September2003 over 150organizationsfrom 30 countries become involvedinthe SFP through questionnaire responses. BetweenDecember 2003 and April 2004 GRI is organizing eight regional SFP roundtablesin six regions in an effort to gain inputandfeedback from reportersand report usersfrom diverse geographies and sectors. Partners Netherlands, Ford MotorCompany, Nike Inc., PriceWaterhouseCoopers, UN Foundation, Siemens, C.S. Mott Foundation, Baxter International,KPMG,Shell. Govemanceand Management A Board of Directors, drawnfrom diversestakeholder groups and geographic regions, has fiduciary, financial, legal,and overall strategic responsibilitiesfor GRI. Other governing bodiesinclude a Stakeholder Council, an electedbody with approximately 60 members;a Technical Advisory Council, consisting of experts infields such as environmentalscience and human rights; a Secretariat,which implementsthe work planand performsexecutive functions; and Organizational Stakeholders,open to all organizationsthatagree to publiclysupportthe GRI mission. The OrganizationalStakeholders have the powerto elect the Stakeholder Council. Ad-hoc GRIWorking Groups, drawn worldwide from institutes, universities, governments, corporations, and other sources, help implement GRl's technical agenda, A Chief Executivesupervises the Secretariat. ExitStrategy r FY05 is the last year for which GRIwill request DGFfunding. 87 Annex 10 ForestPartnershipsProgram Bank Contact: DavidS. Cassells/ 202-473-1376 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ENV ReclpientAgency: WorldWildlifeFund, ForestTrends,World Business Councilfor Sustainable Development Web Address: 1 http://www.forest-alliance.ora - www.forest-trends.orq- www.wbcsd.ch FinancialArrangementsfor W05(Amount InUS$ Million) Total Budget: 5.66 DGF FundingRequest: 0.75 DGF Percentage: 14% ObJecUvtbsand ExpectedOutcomm is' The Forest Partnership Program (FPP) supportsthe continueddevelopmentof the multi-party partnershipsneededto realize forests' recognized potentialto play a major role inalleviating poverty,fostering sustainable economic development& protecting importantenvironmentalservices & values. The FPP currently involvesthe World B a n W FAlliance for Forest Conservationand Sustainable Use, ForestTrends, & the World BusinessCouncilfor Sustainable Development(WBCSD) Forumon Forests. The FPP's activities are helping improvethe establishment & effective managementof protectedareas; the mobilizationof environmentally, socially, & economically responsibleinvestmentin sustainableforest management;&, more generally, speeding the transformation of unsustainablepatternsof forest utilization towards more environmentally sound & socially responsible norms. A key concem is fostering the development of innovativepaymentmechanismsfor forest environmentalservices, to helpensure that all forest values are sustained andto supportthe development of the ruralpoor inforest-dependentcommunities. MainComponents World B a n M F Alliance: This partnershiphas embracedthe Bank's goal of ensuring sustainablelivelihoods for forest- dependentpoor and indigenouspeoples. Itwas founded to help achievethree overarchingtargets: (i)50 millionhectaresof newforest protectedareas; (ii)a comparablearea of existing buthighlythreatenedforest protectedareas secured under effective management;& (iii)200 million hectaresof productionforests under independentlycertifiedsustainable management. e Forest Trends (FT): FTaims to improveforest d forestry's contributionsto poverty alleviation by identifying and advocatingfor transformationsinforest ma policiesthat underliethose markets. FTseeks to achieve these goals by: (i) developingmarketsand market-based instrumentsfor forest ecosystem servicesthat benefitthe poor; (ii) identifying opportunitiesfor and constraintsto community forest managementand enterprises;and (iii)expanding marketsfor and investments in sustainablyproducedforest products. WBCSD Forest Program: In 1998,the Bank initiatedthe CEOs' Forumon Foreststo facilitate dialoguewith the CEOs of large forestry firms from aroundthe world. This arrangementhasexpanded to includefirms from retailingand production, as well as some major NGOs. It has an importantforum for the exchangeof views and the developmentof ideas on howto reduce barriers to sustain st management,partner more effectively with responsibleprivate sector investors, and more actively incorporatethe privatesector inforest policydialogue. 1 Performancelndlcstois World B a n M F Alliance: (i) supportingcountry-level initiativesthat accelerateprogresstowardsthe conservation and sustainable use of forest resources; (ii) leveragingsupport for major regionalforest conservationand management initiatives; (iii)implementinga targeted learningand capacity-building programto help reducebarriersto effective forestconservationand management; (iv) refining monitoringtools and reporting mechanismsto demonstrateprogressin meetingthe Alliance's targets 88 Annex 10 for increased protectedarea coverage, improved protectedarea management,and improved managementof production forests; and (v) developing a proposalfor a broader-basedForest Partnership,to maintainmomentumtowards improvedforest conservation and managementafterthe completion of the 1998-2005Alliance agreement betweenthe BankandWWF. Forest Trends: (i) helpingdevelop new markettransactionsfor environmental services inapproximatelythree critical forest areas; (ii) helping establisha financial infrastructurefor sustainable forestry; (iii) helpingestablish new markets and investments for improvedforest managementinthe Pacific Rim region; (iv) fostering key players' understanding of market constraints and opportunities and of policy issues impactingcommunityforests; and (v) catalyzingproductivemarket connectionsfor community organizationsin selectedcriticalforest areas. WBCSD Forest Program: (i) participationbyWBCSD and key membercompanies in regionalforest investment in Russia and Brazil; and (ii)continuation of forest dialogueactivities on key SFM issues. Progressand Achievements World BanWWWFAlliance: Duringthe lastfiscalyear, theAlliance produced a business planto guide activities inways that build on lessonsleamedand progressmade inthe initialphase. Itisfocusing on: (i) target-driven activities with the potentialto bringsignificant on-the-ground field outcomes; (ii) leaming and capacity-buildingactivities that help shapethe attitudes and agendas of institutions with a major stake inthe governmentand managementof the world's forests. ForestTrends: FTmadeconsiderableprogresson its grant objectives. It initiated an intemationalworking groupto make practical progresson designingand implementingmarketsfor the environmentalservices of forests. it launched (i) a Pacific Rim Initiativeto facilitate coordinationamong institutions promotingsustainableforestry inthe region(in 2000); and (ii) newwork engagingcapital marketswith sustainable forestry (2003).FT is developinga facility that is designedto attract more investmentinto sustainableforestry. Italso providedtechnical guidance to the ChineseTask Forceon Forests and Grasslands. WBCSD Forest Program: TheWBCSD helpedfoster stronger linkageswith leadingforest productsindustry enterprises. Fundswere distributedto The Forest Dialogue(TFD), an intemational group which, in collaborationwith the WBCSD, organizedtwo workshops on forest certification and on expanded opportunitiesfor interaction with privatesectoi enterprises. DGF funding helpedfacilitateinput byWBCSD and its membercompanies into the successful Forest InvestmentForumheld in October 2003. All three components of the FPPfurther the Bank's development objectives. They are aimed releasing barriersto the mobilization of capacity and finances from other sources, including regular Bankoperations. The components do notcompete with or substitute for regular Bankinstruments; they can beviewed as "seedfunding"to develop proposalsfor increasedcooperationand investmentflow. Partners WorldWide Fundfor Nature (WWF) International,World BusinessCouncilfor SustainableDevelopment(WBCSD) Forest Program. Governanceand Management The FPP is an externallymanagedpartnership. There is nooverarchinggovernance structure. OnlyAlliance-supportedactivities are agreedupon betweenthe Bank and its partner,WWF. Two staff membersof the ESSD ForestTeam and a staff memberin each of the six regions dedicatea portion of their time to the BanMMNFAlliance. FTis governed by an independentboardof trustees, which includes Bankrepresentation. One memberof the ESSD ForestTeam serves on the FT boardof trustees. WBCSD is a member-ledorganizationgoverned by a Councilof CEOs of member companies. An ExecutiveCommitteeoversee8 its management. Two membersof the ESSD ForestTeam are involved inthe WBCSD forestprogram& its associatedforest dialogue, which is coordinated by Yale University. All partners produce annual reports, publications, & outcomeactivity statements. ExitStrategy The FPPwill exit DGFfunding after FY05. 89 Annex 10 Targeted Research and Capacity Buildingfor Coral Reef Management Bank Contact: Marea Eleni Hatziolos1202473-1061 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ESSD Environment - RecipientAgency: University of Queensland,Australia Web Address: http:// www.gefcoral.org Total Budget: 4.31 DGF Funding Request: 1.oo DGF Percentage: 35% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes The Global Statusof Coral Reefs2002 Reportliststwo thirds of the world's reefsas under severe threatfrom the cumulative impacts of economic developmentand climatechange. Evenmore recent reportingfrom the scientific communitystresses the now-globalextent of coral reefdecline. Negativetrends appear to be observed inall coral reef regions of the world, clearly indicatingthe global scope of the problem, and hencethe needfor a global coordinated responseto it. Equallyalarmingisthat (i) there are majorgaps in global knowledgeon howto manage coral reefecosystems faced with this newcombinationof stresses; and (ii) much knowledge is not reachingpolicy makersand coralreefmanagers in useableform, Up untilnow, researchhas beenfragmented, making it difficultto distillinformationgloballyto assess trends. Uncoordinatedinvestigations have also hinderedthe interpretation of data and the design of cost-effective interventions. This new partnershipfor Targeted Researchand Capacity Buildingwill establish a global network of coral reef scientists so that: (i) key knowledgegaps can be systematicallyaddressed: (ii)targeted researchis multidisciplinary: (iii) the research is integrated:and (iv) researchfindings are effectively communicatedto decision makers. Main Components The partnershipaimsto laythe foundation for science-based managementthrough a strategic alignment of scientists, institutions, and resourcesinfour coral reef regionsof the world. Main components include: Researchrelatedto coral reef stress and analysis of managementoptions: The major output will be a series of targeted investigationsto fillthe most significant gaps in global understandingof how majorstressorsaffect coral reefs. Outputswill also include improvedmanagementtools. The findings will contribute to policy briefsthat will helpfocus more concernand attention on coral reefmanagementand stimulate more effective global, regional,and localremedia action. Scientific learning and capacity building: Most coral reef researchis based in the developedworld, whereas most coral reefsare locatedindeveloping countries. To rectify this global imbalance,most ofthe researchwill beconducted in the developing world by teams of developed and developingcountry scientists. This will ensure that the new informationsuppliedto coral reefmanagers is locally appropriateandwill foster significant newcoralreef researchand managementadvisory capacity in the developing world. The main output will be strengthened developing country Centersof Excellence(COEs),which can serve as effective nodesfor targeted learning and capacity building between developed and developingcountry scientists and as models for science-based management. Fellowshipsprovidedto young developingcountry scientists, coupledwith supportfor essential equipmentto upgrade researchfacilities, will help builda new generationof developingcountry researchers. Science-basedcoral reef managementand policy tools: The results of the targeted investigationswill be formulatedfor key audiences and the information andtools producedwill be disseminatedto enhancethe managemen of coral reefs. Modelingand scenario-buildingapplicationswill integrate the results intodecision-support tools. A pane will prepareand release a series of managementand policy briefs,integratingthe resultsand interpretingthem fo target audiences. The findings shouldfeed indirectly to AAA work, environmental assessments, and strategic dialogue between the Bank and its clients to influence lending and policies. 90 Annex 10 Performance Indicators Component1 Addressingknowledgeand technologygaps: 1) Sixworking groups establishedand conducting - interdisciplinary research. 2) Researchcarried out at four major sites or regionalnodesdeveloped into COEs for science-basedmanagementof coral reefs. 3) Key gaps in understanding of processeswhich determinecoral reef ecosystem healthand sustainabilityunder stress filled and implicationsfor managementassessed.4) New tools and techniques for assessing coral reef stress and for rehabilitating damagedreefsdevelopedand disseminated.5) Research resultsand implicationsfor managementpublishedin peer-reviewedjournals and other mediaaccessible to key stakeholdergroups. Component 2 Promotingleamingand capacitybuilding: 1) Scientists, institutions,and students have enhanced - capacity to engage in interdisciplinary,cutting-edge research. 2) Coral reef managementcommunitylNGOs equipped with bettertoolsand information. 3) Localcommunities' traditional knowledge integratedinto field research, training, and interpretation of results. Component3 Linkingscientific knowledgeto management: 1) Enhancedcommunication between researchers, - traditionalusers, managersand decision-makers. 2) Managementrelevantinformation, advice and policy options inthe form of Policy Briefs issued by Synthesis Panel. 3) User-friendlymodels of ecologicalimpacts and decision-support tools indicatingthe trade offs of various managementinterventionsand development policies availableto decision- makers at the local level. Progressand Achievements I I New Program. Partners II miaterais,ana World Bank GroupAssociated Funds (includingGEF), US NOM, University of Queensland,UNESCO-IOC, a number of oeveiupingcountry maririeicuraireeiresearcn irisIiwtiunsin me rriiiippines, anzanta,IVI~XIGU I ?-- 2` Qovemance,andManagement A Synthesis Panel,composed of preeminentscientistswho chair the six technical working groups, a representativeof each COE and of the executingagency, and six to seven international experts, will oversee the partnership'sdirection and outputs. An ExecutiveCommittee,which is a subset ofthe SynthesisPanel, will reviewthe performanceofthe working groups and other recipients and make annualfunding decisions. The Synthesis Panelwill commissionexternal peer reviewsof the research and will engagespecialized expertiseto advisethe panel, as necessary. SynthesisPanelmeetingswill includeopportunitiesfor dialoguewith the publicand other key audiences onfindings that merit broaderdebate. DGFfunds would be used primarilyfor capacity buildingwithin the developngcountry Centers of Excellenceandfor advisory servicesfor the SynthesisPanel. DGF resourceswould flow directly to the University of Queensland, as the executing agency,to supportthese activities andwould not be administered by the Bank. Exit Strategy The exit strategy is one of scheduled disengagement, culminatingaller FY07,as the partnershipdevelops and altemate sources of financing are identified. The first three years will be criticalto establishing a viable foundation for researchand capacity- building activities, which iswhy DGF co-financing is proposed. Linkingthe TR to Bank investments, as well as to NGOcoral reef conservationefforts aroundthe world, will contribute to sustainability by facilitating the uptake of results and creating demand for information. 91 Annex 10 InternationalAssessment of AgriculturalScience and Technology for Development Bank Contact: RobertT. Watson-EsdvpI202-473-6965 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: ESSD RecipientAgency: The Intemation'l Assessm't ofAgricult'l Science& Technologyfor Dev. Web Address: http:llwww.agassessment.org Total Budget: 5.07 DGF FundingRequest: 0.75 DGFPercentage: 15% Object(vas and ExpectedOutcomes The InternationalAssessmentof Agricultural Science and Technology for Development(IAASTD) hasthe following overall objectives: (1) improveagriculturaloutcomes by enhancingpolicy-making; (2) build and support localagricultural science and technology capacity, in order to enabledevelopingcountriesto sustainably meet agriculturaldemandsover the nextfifty years; and (3) stimulate privateand publiccapitalflows to support productive investment inagricultural science, technology, and infrastructure, inorder to promote sustainabledevelopment in accordancewith the implementationplan concludedatthe JohannesburgWorld Summit for SustainableDevelopment. The IAASTDwill accomplish this by providingdecision makers with the robust, up-to-date informationneededto reducehunger and poverty,improverurallivelihoods, and facilitate equitable, environmentally,socially and economicallysustainabledevelopment. Relevant informationcoveredwill includethe generation, access to, and useof agricultural knowledge, science and technology. MainComponents Distillation of relevant learning: The IAASTDwould enablestakeholders to: a) gain common understandingand vision for the future; b) provide robust informationfor decision makers; and c) develop new partnerships.An Assessment Reportwill providea criticalretrospective of the historical relationshipsbetweenagricultural knowledge, science, technology, institutional systems and policies, and nutritional security and rurallivelihoods. Developmentsin agricultural knowledge,science and technologywould be analyzedthrough the lens of producers'adaptationsand responsesto innovations, coupledwith analysis of the effects onthe environment, health, poverty, and nutritional security. Improved understanding of contentious issues: Knowledgefrom the Assessment, collected and vetted ina transparent processthat includesdiverse stakeholders, would allow policy makersto make informeddecisions on the environmentaland social acceptability of technologies. Itwould improvethe quality of the debate on the acceptability of newtechnologies, providing poorercountrieswith a foundationfor makingdecisions on howto safely and cost-effectivelymeetthe demand for agricultural products. Improved partnerships witha broad range of stakeholders: The Bank's role as an honest broker andfacilitator during the Assessment process is criticalto promotingtrust among a range of stakeholders.This trust would help broadenthe communityof stakeholders working with the Bankto promoteruraldevelopmentand achieve the Millennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs)of reducingextreme hunger and poverty, promotinggender equality, and ensuring environmental sustainability. Improved operations and use of resources: The Bank isthe largest contributor (US$50 million annually)to the CGIAR, and annually lends about US$300 millionto agricultural S&T. Knowledgegained through the Assessment could have a major impacton Bank funding priorities, partnerships,and support for international research, and could provide an opportunity to look at the policy and institutionalimpactsof such an innovative, non-lending, cross- sectoral enterprise. Bank experts who participate inthe preparationand peer-reviewwill reflectknowledgegained through Bank operations intheAssessment report, thus promotingthe Bank as a knowledgeinstitution. 92 Annex 10 Performancelndlcatora e Uptake of the Assessment: A majorperformanceindicatorwould be the data gained from surveys on the dissemination and use of the knowledgeprovidedinthe Assessment Report. e Decision making: Translationof knowledgegleaned in the Assessment into policieswill be trackedas an indicatorof the Assessment's effectivenessin supporting decision makers. e Increase in portfolio of partnerships or partners: Memberswho join existing agricultural partnerships or who create new partnershipsfor application of science and technology in agriculturewould indicatea successfuloutcome. a Increase in quality of lending to agriculture: Improvements inthe qualityand resultsof lendingwill yield improved nutritionalsecurity and rural livelihoods. Progressand Achlevements New Program. Partners Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO), World Health Organization(WHO), UNDP, UNEP, official bilateraldonors Oovomance and Management An intergovernmentalstructure is proposedfor the Assessment, with a multi-stakeholder Bureau followingthe modelof the IPCC. Decisions on Assessmentactivities would be taken by govemmentsin plenary meetings,which would be open to all stakeholdersand would take into accountthe recommendationsof the multi-stakeholder Bureau. To preparethe global and sub-global assessmentreports,over the courseof the Assessment processthere will be four full plenarymeetings,three to four meetings ofthe Bureau,and dozens of meetingsof experts from the full rangeof stakeholders. The Bureauwill advise the plenaryof all governments. The proposed intergovemmentalprocess should ensure ownership by govemments,while the integratedBureau allows the full range of stakeholdersto meet as a single body, creatingopportunitiesfor constructive exchangesand buildingconsensus. Specialstepswill be taken to ensure developingcountry engagementand ownership. Of the roughly 30 countries representedon the Bureau,it is anticipated that developingcountrieswould comprise over 50%. Also to ensurefull participation inthe plenarysessions, each developingcountrywould be providedwith travelcosts for one representative. The processwould be managed by two secretariats. A primary secretariatwould be hostedat Bank headquarters.The other, hosted in one of the co-sponsoring agencies, would managethe sub-global assessmentsin developing countries. DGF resourceswould flow to and be managed exclusively by the SAS, and would be used to helpfund the sub-global assessments in developing countries. Trustfunds mobilizedwill be used primarilyto support developingcountry participationin expert meetingsand build localcapacity. The primary secretariatwould be technically competentwith excellentcommunication capacity,and would will operate in a transparentfashion while retaining autonomy. The director, seniortechnicaladviser,and budgetanalyst will be provided by the Bank.The regionaland globalcoordinatorswill be secondedfrom UN agency partners. The sub-global assessmentsecretariatwould have two regionalcoordinators and two administrativestaff. Exit Strategy The Assessment process would be limitedto three years. The Bankwill disengageat the close of the process. All stakeholders have a strong commitment to ensuring that the AssessmentReportis delivered,and the structureconsequently dissolved, within the timeframe. 93 Annex 10 MillenniumProject Hunger Task Force Bank Contact: NwanzeOkidegbeI202-473-7566 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ESSD - RuralDevelopment RecipientAgency: The HungerTask Forceof the MillenniumProject Web Address: http:// www.unmillenniumproject.org/html/tforce~2.shtm Flnanciat Arrangement$for FYO5(Amountin US$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 4.08 DGF FundingRequest: 0.25 DGFPercentage: 6% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes The purposeof the partnershipisto supportthe work of the HungerTask Forcein developing a global action planto halveworlc hunger by 2015, and eliminate it over the longterm. The HungerTask Forceis part of the MillenniumProject, whichwas established by the UN Secretary Generalandthe UNDPAdministrator to advise UN membercountries, the privatesector, and civil society on ways to meetthe MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs). Over a periodof three years (2002-2005) the MillenniumProject is developing recommendationsand action plansto assist all developing countriesin meetingthe MDGs. The Hunger Task Force is one of ten task forces that comprisethe MillenniumProject. Eachtask force is made up of leading experts from around the world. The first MDG commits UN membersto "halve, between 1990and 2015, the proportionof peoplewho suffer from hunger."The Millennium Project's Hunger Task Forceis chargedwith developing a global action planto meetthis goal. The Task Forceis comprisedof 30 leading experts in science,economics, nutrition, business,and development policy from 17countries around the world. They represent a variety of sectors includingintemational agencies, govemments, businesses, NGOs, and academia. Main Component8 The Hunger Task Force mandate isto develop a global action planfor hunger alleviation. While the Task Forceis not directly responsiblefor the implementationof its recommendations, ultimatelythe results of itswork will be measured by the reductionc the numberof hungry people inthe world. The indicatorsdefined for the MDG on hunger are 1)the prevalenceof underweight children underfive years of age, and 2) the proportionof the population belowa minimumlevel of dietary energy consumption. Through intensive researchand analysis, periodicmeetings, and dialoguewith stakeholders and policy leaders,the Hunger Task Forceis developing recommendationsand an action planfor achievingthe MDG on hunger. Itwill complete three formal reports and present itsfinal recommendationsto the UN Secretary General inJune 2005. A major new dimension of the Task Force's activities in 2004 will be EarlyAction Partnershipswith govemments and stakeholdersin Sub-SaharanAfrica. Through these partnerships,the Task Forcewill help design action plans for hungeralleviation in "hunger hotspot"areas. These action planswill link localcommunity-based action, nationalpolicy and instiutionalreform, and international policyto create a locally rootedstrategy for achievingthe MDGon hunger. Theywill serve as an important Project outputthat will offer the opportunity t apply Task Force recommendations in the context of national policy planning processes. Since its formation in late2002, the HungerTask Force has met three times; completed an extensive backgroundpaper: conducteda geo-referencedanalysisof global hunger,including identificationof eight major hunger"hotspots"in Sub Saharan Africa; and iscurrently preparinginitialrecommendations on a global strategy for hunger alleviationto be presentedin its lnterir Report. During2003, the Task Force began serving in.aconsultative roleto NEPAD, assistingthat organization in developing coordinatedprograms to increase schoolfeeding, restore soilfertility, and launchother anti-hunger initiatives. The Task Force's work is intendedto build uponthe analysis and accomplishments of the FA0 anti-hunger programand other ongoing initiatives. .. 94 Annex 10 f ! Performance Indicators GlobalAction Plandeveloped Hunger "hotspots" identied Nationalaction plansfor hunger reductiondeveloped in selected countries Progressand Achlevements I NewProgram Partners I Officialbilateraldonors, foundations, UnitedNations, civilsocieties/NGOs Governanceand Management In additionto reportingto the UNSecretaryGeneralandthe UNDP Administrator,the HungerTask Forceis subject to oversight from the U.N. Experts Group,comprisedof representativesof all the U.N. Agencieswho oversee UN participation inthe project, and an lntemational Advisory Panelcomprisedof globally recognizedexpertswho provide independentoversightto the Project. The HungerTask Force is directed by two CoChairs, who' reportto the MillenniumProject Directorand assumefinal responsibilityfor the Task Force's outputs. To oversee itswork products,the Task Forcehas appointedcoordinatorsfor its four areas of work: 1)research,analysis, and reportwriting; 2) public outreach; 3)Africa Initiatives; and4) strategy and administration. Fromamong its members,the Task Force has also designated: 1)working groups on agricultural production, nutritionalinterventions, market development, and publicoutreach; and 2) Formalliaisonsto each of the other Millennium ProjectTask Forces,to coordinate and integrate researchand policy recommendationsin areas of common interest. Task Force members, underthe leadershipofthe Co-Chairs, select and monitorthe Task Force's activities. Managementof Task Forceactivities isoverseen by the Co-Chairs and is implemented by the designated coordinators. The progressof the Task Force is monitoredby the Millennium ProjectSecretariat,the UN ExpertsGroup, and the UNDPon behalf of the UN Secretary General. The HungerTask Force meetstwice a year to agree on objectives, workplans, and budget allocations. These allocations are monitored throughoutthe year. The Task ForceCo-Chairs providequarterly progressreportsto the group, and Task Force members review progress at the biannual meetings. The Task Forceprovidesannual narrative and financial reportsto the MillenniumProject Secretariat,which inturn reportsto the UNDP and partneragencies. The Task Forcealso provides individualreportsto funders, detailingthe use of grant-basedfunds. The HungerTask Force's final report will be peer reviewed priorto distribution. By formalagreement betweenthe UNDP Millennium Project Trust Fundandthe Earth Instituteat Columbia University,the HungerTask ForceSecretariat is housedat the Earth Institute,which also managesthe Task Forcebudget. Exit Strategy This is a one-year funding request,as the Task Forcewill conclude itsterm by June 2005, at which time the World Bank's representation on the MillenniumProjectTask Forcesand processeswill also cometo an end. 95 Annex 10 Africa Stockpiles Program Bank Contact: Steven P. Maberl202-473-2994; Steve Gormanl202-473-5865 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: Africa RecipientAgency: Africa Stockpiles Program Web Address: http:l/www. africastockpiles.org FlnencialArrangementsfor FYDS(Amount in US $ Million) Total Budget: 13.73 DGF FundingRequest: 1.50 DGF Percentage: 16% Ob]ectives and ExpectedOutcomes i The African Stockpiles Program (ASP)will: 1)eliminateexistingstockpilesof obsoletepesticides, and 2) implement preventive measures aimedat changing the behaviorof stakeholders responsiblefor managingstocks of pesticidesso that the problem does not recur. Virtually everyAfrican country has stockpilesof obsolete pesticidesand associatedwastesthat have been accumulated over periodsas longas 40 years. These pesticidesare seriouslythreateningthe health of both ruraland urban populations,and contributeto land and water degradation. An estimated 30 percentof the waste materials are believedto include PersistentOrganic Pollutants (POPS).Inaddition, it is particularlyimportantto address the issue because: (i) available datashowthe problem iswidespread inAfrica; (ii)there is limitedcapacity to address the issues; and (iii)despite early efforts, the problemcontinuesto worsen. The ASP supports poverty reductionthrough enhancement of the quality of life, growth, andthe regionaland global commons. ASP protectsvital inputsto the daily lifeof poor people living in ruralareas, such as access to clean water for irrigation and consumption; access to clean soilfor farming; and protectionof environmentaland human health, especiallyfor poor people who are morevulnerableto toxics exposuredueto malnutrition,etc. andfor poor children becauseof malnutritionand their small size and rapidgrowth. Inaddition, obsolete pesticidestockpilesare a burdenon poor national economies inthat there is a financialcost associatedwith procurementof the originalpesticides,aswell as their replacementswhen they became obsolete. The numberof peoplelikely to benefit from the ASP is hardto estimate, but as an indication it is knownthat hundredsof thousands of pesticide poisoningoccur each year inAfrica, thousands of these result in death. Direct beneficiariesof the programarethe govemments, farmers, and ruralcommunities of 53 African countries;the indirect beneficiaryisthe global communitythrough reductionsin global POPs emissions. Main Component8 ASP activities are expected to fall primarily intothree areas: 1) inventory,disposalandlor destructionof stockpiled obsolete pesticidesand associatedcontaminated materialsand soil; 2) catalyzingthe developmentand implementationof appropriatepreventionmeasures; and 3) capacity-buildingand institutional strengtheningto preventfuture accumulation. This will be undertakenthrough a phased, long-term program (10-15years) that is expectedto be implemented in three tranches, starting with a limited pilot tranche of 3-4 years, in conjunctionwith the initiationof capacity-building to prevent recurrenceof the problem. I 96 Annex 10 Performancelndlcatora Country-basedProject ImplementationUnits (PIU)eliminate stocks of pesticidesand implementpreventivemeasures. Indicators: Percentageof publicsector stock of obsolete pesticidesthat have beendisposedof by the end of the project; Percentageof soils contaminatedby publicsector stock of obsoletepesticidesthat are inthe process of rehabilitation by the end ofthe year. Governmentagencies -through the assistanceof the ASP TechnicalSupport Unit (TSU) have the capacity to - managepesticidestocks and implement preventionanddisposalactivities. Indicators:Governmentagencies have the capacity to manage pesticides;Quality and quantity of technicalsupport, as expressed in annualTSU work plans, delivered on time and to the satisfactionof the client. ASP partners,donors, NGOs,and relevantstakeholders have-with the assistance of the Cross-CuttingManagement Entity (CCAME) -the informationthey needto dealwith issuesand common problems relatedto obsolete stocks of pesticides. Indicators:Quality and quantity of cross-cuttingsupport, as expressedin annual CCAME work plans, delivered on time and to the satisfaction ofthe client. e Priority actionsfor dealingwith obsolete pesticidesissues inAfrica are implementedina coordinatedfashion by ASP partners and country units,facilitated by the CoordinationUnit (CU). Indicators:Quality and quantityof ASP Coordination,as expressedin annual CUwork plans, deliveredon time andto the satisfaction ofthe clients. 1 ProgmsandAchlevermonts I NewProgram. Foodand Agriculture Organization(FAO), UNEP, UNIDO, UNECA,WHO, UNITAR, BaselConventionSecretariat,African Union, PesticidesAction Network-UK, PesticidesAction Network-Africa, W F , Inc., Crop Life International,AfDB, GEF Governance and Management i The ASP Conference, consistingof all stakeholders, the private sector, and interesteddonor representatives,will provide overallguidancefor the program. Itwill besupported by a Steering Committee. The Bank is a member of the ASP Conferenceand SteeringCommittee. A Coordination Unit (CU) will providesupportto the Conferencein overseeingASP implementation. Hostedinitially by the Bank,the CU will act as the Secretariat, consolidatinginformation from various components, coordinatingwith countriesand donor agencies, and coordinatingthe preparationof the successive phases of the program. A Technical Support Unit (TSU), hostedby FAO,will reportontechnicalwork programmonitoring. The Bankwill report on fiduciary aspects. Other institutionalarrangementsinclude a Cross-Cutting Activities Management Entity (CCAME) hosted byW F and -at the country level a Project Coordination Unit and Steering Committee. - Eachparticipating countrywill develop awork programwith the help of the TSU. Country partners will implementtheir country- levelprogramswith assistancefrom other ASP partners. Activitiesat the country levelwill be supervised as appropriatebythe TSU and the CU and/orWortd BankTTL. Activitiesdelivered by other ASP partnerswill be supervised by the Steering Committee. Partnerswith implementationroles (e.g., W F , FAO, etc.) and organizationssubmitting proposalsto theASPS competitive grants mechanismwill be responsiblefor developingtheirown work programs/proposals, Prioritiesfor the upcomingyear will be issuedbythe Conferenceand SteeringCommittee. The duration of the partnershipis 15years. The programwould requestfunding from DGF over a three-year periodand planto exit from DGF after FY07. 97 Annex 10 DevelopingConnectivity between Biologicaland Geospatial Informationin Latin America and the Caribbean BankContact: DouglasJ. Graham/ 202-473-6667 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: LCSES RecipientAgency: Inter-American Biodiversity Information(IABIN) Secretariat Web Address: http:// www.iabin.net t I Financial Arrangements for FY05(Amount in US $ Miillon) Total Budget: 3.68 DGF FundingRequest: 0.40 DGF Percentage: 11% Objectivesand Expected Outcomas Supportwill be providedto the Bank`s forthcoming Inter-American Biodiversity InformationNetwork (IABIN) project,whose goal is to develop and promotestandards and protocolsfor biologicalinformationinthe Americas. Very limited funding is includedunder this projectfor the developmentof value-added applicationsthat bridge biologicaland non-biologicaldata sets. Nofunds are available specificallyto enhance linkageswith the geospatialdata community. This proposalis intendedto leverageinvestments underthe IABINframework by facilitating connectivity betweenbiological and geospatialdata inthe Americas, in order to enhance the impactof this information on development processes. The primary objectiveof IABINisto promote sustainable development andthe conservationand sustainableuse of biological diversity inthe Americas through better managementof biological informationand betterdecision-making. IABIN'sspecific objectivesare to: (i) develop an internet-based, decentralizednetworkto provide accessto biodiversity information; (ii) providethe tools neededto draw knowledgefrom a wealth of resources; and (iii)providea mechanismfor exchanginginformationrelevantto the conservation and sustainable use of biologicaldiversity. This GPP hastwo objectives: (i) to co-financethe developmentof IMS standards and protocolsto enhance interoperabilityand usability of geospatialdata in IMSsystems; and (ii)to develop linkages betweenbiologicaldata sets under IABINand geospatial data sets inthe MACGA alliance to develop criticalnew applications. MainComponent8 r Internet MapServer (IMS) Component: While there are widely adopted standards for geospatial data itself, there has been littlework done onthe standards for presentingthe data to general users or decision makersthrough IMSsystems. Before being able to make substantiveprogress on the two following components, protocols and approaches used in multinational and regionalIMSs must be standardized. The DGF-fundedprojectwill facilitate meetingsto encouragethe adoptionof common IMSstandards. IABIN-IMS Interoperability: This componentfocuses on the basic issues of inter-operability. The GEF-funded IABINproject will develop standards to allow interoperability between biological information systems. There are, however, many procedural and methodologicalissuesthat needto be addressed in order to reach a significant levelof interoperability betweenIABIN- compatiblebiologicaldata sets and non-biologicaldata sets inthe IMS systems. Developmentof ValueAddedApplications: This component, the core of the project, aims to producefive newvalue-added applicationsthat build on the advances and interoperability achievementsunderthefirst two components. The DGF-funded projectwill focus on applications and approaches that bring immediatevalue to the developmentcommunityand are most likely to impact the overall Bank goals oftargeting the poor in ruralareas through projects in agriculture, landadministration,natural resourcemanagement,and vulnerability reduction. The final listof value-added applications will be developed in the first three monthsof the projectandwill depend on co-financingarrangements, demand from decision makers, and a consultation processwithin the Bank. 98 Annex 10 Performancetndlcators I Standards definedfor key areas hinderingIMS design, compatible with global and regionalstandards. IMS systems reconfiguredaccording to these standards. Year one indicators:a) documentproducedon globalbest practice IMS standardspertinentto posting of LatinAmerican geospatialdata; b) two regional-level workshops to develop MesoamericanlCaribbeanIMS standards: c) proposalfor LatinAmericanKaribbean IMS standards; d) two regional-level trainingworkshops on IMS standards. lnteroperabilitystandards defined to allow communicationof data between IABlN biologicaldata and IMS systems. Effectivetraining programs underwayto promote usage of standards. Year one indicators:a) documentproduced on interoperability of data between IABIN biologicaldata standards and emerging IMS geospatialdata standards,identifying problemsand opportunitiesfor data exchange;b) initial proposalfor standards to promote interoperability between biologicaland non-biological. Five value-added applications beingused in ruraldevelopmentprograms in LAC by end of project. Year one indicators: a) one workshop to identifythe most interestingpotentialapplicationsfor use in Bank rural developmentprojects; b) backgrounddocumentsoutlining problemsto be solved and potentialsynergies. Partners 1NASA, USGS,World Bank-Global Environment Facility, City of KnowledgeFoundation-Panama The programwill be managed by the Secretariatof IABIN. The Secretariat reports to the IABIN Council,which meets once a year and includesparticipantsfrom every country inthe Americas. It is expectedthat specializedstaff would be hiredto join the Secretariatstafffor the duration of the project, in order to coordinateand carry out project activities. The IABIN Secretariatwould manage the funds and reportquarterly to the Bank on the use of the funds. Technicaloversightwould be providedby Secretariat staff and-as needed other consultantsfrom the IABIN Project. - The IABIN Secretariatwill be in the City of Knowledge,Panama. It is expectedthat the partnersin the projectwould agree to a common set of goals and objectives and a common means of obtainingthem, but ultimately it is expectedthat each financier would manage its own funds. Inis projea aoes nor invoivea long-term commitmenr,as me main oqeaive IS me one-rime aevetopmenr OTKey sranaarasana key information managementapplications. The IABIN Secretariathas a longer-term existence underseparate financing arrangementsand will be able to ensure a continuityin the use of the productsderivedfrom this project. It would exit from the DGF after receiptof FY07 funds. 99 Annex 10 COM+: Alliance of Communicatorsfor Sustainable Development Bank Contact: Sergio Alvaro Jellinek / 202-458-2841 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: EXT RecipientAgency: World ConservationUnion (IUCN) Web Address: http:l/www.complusalliance.org FinancialArrangements for FYOS(Amount in US$ Milllon) Total Budget: 1.01 DGF Funding Request: 0.20 DGF Percentage: 20% Objactlvw and ExpectedOutcomaa COM+is an alliance of global organizationsseekingto advance sustainable development inthe public agenda by using communicationsto create synergiesand expand global reach. COM+ is a new, innovativecommunications platforminwhich organizations -civilsocietynetworksfrom the South, global environmental organizations,research institutions, international organizations, tthe corporate responsible businesscommunity, and global mediaoutlets-join forces to reach newaudiences, especially in developing countries, on issuesthat are key to poverty reduction. COM+ aimsto: (1) Create a multipliereffect through commonactionon communicationsfor sustainabledevelopment. (2) Leverage sustainabledevelopmentissues linked to local, national, regional,and global poverty reductionagendasto bridgegaps through the exchange of ideas, knowledge,and information. (3) Raisethe profile, role, and effectivenessof communicationsin encouragingattitudes and behaviorsthat are consistent with sustainable developmentand poverty reduction. Bythe end of 2005,the goal isfor the COM+communications platform to be operationaland usedby audiences. Expectedoutcomes include: (i) increasedmedia coverageof sustainable developmentissues; (ii)at least 72,000 visitsto the COM+website per month; and (iii)at leastfour global organizations interested in cooperating with COM+. _____I " " . . . . Main Components Umbrella Initiatives: This component covers convergentactivities by most or all COM+ partners. Two umbrellaactions have beendefinedfor 2004: (i) the UN's Commissionon SustainableDevelopmentin NewYork (04/04),which focusedon the provision of sustainablewater services to the poor; and (ii) the World ConservationUnion's (IUCN's) World Conservation Congress in Bangkok(11/04),which will focus on climate changeand adaptationindeveloping countries, as well as on socially responsiblebehavior bythe privatesector in developing countries. These multimedia actions, which include high- levelroundtables, a BBC documentary, media launches, electronicdebates, a forumwith film directors, and a news and features services, represent opportunitiesfor a uniquevalue added. Exchangeof ideas and knowledge: This componentwill provideopportunitiesto establish communications among key stakeholdersfrom the sustainable development community and beyond, reachingout to the communicationscommunityand opinion leaders as away to reachwider general audiences. Activities includethe creationand maintenanceof a website portal, roundtables and dialogueswith different constituencies, conferences and debates, and online public discussions on priority issues relatedto sustainabledevelopmentand poverty reduction. Prioritythemes, focusing on developingcountries, include: (i) economicwell-being and socialbalance; (ii) water resources; (iii)environmental pollution and its linkagesto health; (iv) environmentalconcerns about energy; and (v) corporate governance, including environmentaland social responsibility. Permanentmedia program: This component seeks to provide high-qualityprofessional information and communication services through multimediachannels. Actions include: (i)joint efforts to produceand broadcast documentariesandfilms; (ii) developmentof a global news and feature service on sustainable developmentissues, for printand broadcast media;and (iii) interactionwith popular mediachannels (e.g. MTV) in order to reachwider audiences. Training and capacity building: This componentwill providetraining and capacity-building opportunitiesfor journalists from developing countries. When possible,COM+will buildon ongoing initiativesinthis field. Activities will include 100 Annex 10 workshops, seminars on special topics, or mixed-mediaeducational programs. A COM+journalist award, resultingfromjoint efforts by three member organizations, is underdiscussion. Journalisttours, in connectionto workshops,will be organized. Performance lndlcatow I i 0 Umbrella Initiative 1(New York): (i)two documentariesproducedand delivered; (ii) COM+ newsand feature service operational; (iii)multi-stakeholder roundtableorganized; (iv) expert opinion survey launched; (v)World Bank"littlegreen data book 2004"on sustainability launched; (vi) coverageof debates providedonline. 0 Umbrella Initiative 2 (Bangkok): (i) documentaryproducedand delivered; (ii)Three multi-stakeholderroundtables organized; (iii)youth "town-hall" meetingheld; (iv) broadcasttraining for SouthAsian N producers held; (v) survey conductedand findings released; (vi) COM+ news and feature servicefocusedon relevantthemes; (vii) debatecoverage providedonline. Exchangeof ideas and knowledge: (i) COM+website operational; (ii) roundtableand online discussionorganized; (iii) study oncommunicationsfor sustainabledevelopmentdelivered; (iv) opinion pieces postedonwebsite and disseminated through media. Permanentmedia program: (i) COM+ newsand feature servicedeveloped; (ii)two documentaries produced; (iii) plans designed and approvedfor launch of a COM+-sponsoredradio broadcastservice,to be implemented in 2005; (iv) plans developedforjoint actionswith popularmediachannels, to be implementedin 2005; (v) one majorTV spot produced. Capacity-building and training: (i)three regional-levelworkshops peryear heldfor joumalists; (ii) onejournalist tour per year organized in conjunctionwith workshops; (iii) COM+joumalistawardfor coverageof sustainable development delivered. Progressand Achievement8 IWith own resources, COM+ launched its web portal, www.complusalliance .org andthe umbrellaactivity 1was delivered successfully (April-May2004). Partners Conservation International (CI), WorldConservationUnion (IUCN), Global EnvironmentFacility (GEF),World BusinessCouncil on Sustainable Development(WBCSD), Earth ReporVTelevisionfor the Environment(NE), British BroadcastingCorporation (BBC), InternationalFederationof EnvironmentalJournalists (IFEJ), Globescan/2020GlobalAlliance, Southern Caucus of NGOsfor SustainableDevelopment, InterpressServices (IPS), Reuters Foundationand TheWorld Bank ,ConsultativeGroup of InternationalAgriculture Research(CGIAR) Governanceand Management COM+will have a lean governance and managementstructure. Partnerswill act as focal points for implementingjoint actions, whichwill be coordinated by a small Secretariat (one coordinatorand one communicationsofficer) .The Secretariatis hosted by IUCNin Costa Rica; the IUCNHead of GlobalCommunicationswill line-supervisethe Secretariat. The Secretariatwill coordinateCOM+ communicationsactivities, with separate partnersearmarkedfor specific activities and programs. A Steering Committee composedof representativesof all partnerswill set operational prioritiesand provide guidanceand decision-making. The Steering Committeewill meet at least twice ayear. A FinancialCouncil has beencreated .The Council comprisesthe WB, WBCSD, GEF and CGIAR, with IUCNacting as Secretariat(Ex Officio).The Council decides on financial allocations, business plan implementationand reportingto donors An Advisory Council, to includewidely respected"messengers"from different fields, will be createdto provide independentadvice and serve as COM+ "champions." ExitStrategy 1 r COM+ has medium-and long-termobjectives, and may expand. The DGF Council endorsed a one year grant with exit in FY05. The DGF grant facilitates smooth start-up and implementation,providinga bridgeto sustainable altemativefinancing coming from a multi-donortrust fund and other sources in FY05 and FY06. 101 Annex 10 The Global Forumfor Health Research Bank Contact: Janet Nassim/202-473-7024 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD Health,Nutrition& Population - Recipient: GFHR, a Swiss non-profitorganization Web Address: htt~:/~,alobalforumhealth.org FInenclalArranQemstlkfor NO6 {Amountin US$ Million) Total Budget: 131.25 DGF Funding Request: 6.78 DGF Percentage: 5% I Objectivesand ExpdlctedOutcomes The Global Forumfor HealthResearch (GFHR)was establishedin 1998to helpfocus researchefforts on the health problems resuitinginthe heaviest burdenon the world's health, to improvethe reallocationof health researchfunds and to facilitate collaboration among partners inthe privateand public sectors. GFHR's mainactivities include: (i) analyticalwork in priority setting, includlng burdenof disease analysis, researchon resourceflows to identifyfunding gaps or duplication and cost- effectiveness analysis; (ii) organizationof annualforum inwhichthe main actors inthe public and private sectors interestedin improvingthe allocation of health researchfunds discussthe pastrecord andfuture actions; (iii)launching initiatives inthe health area which are spun off, usuallywithin a couple of years, once outsidefunding is located; (iv) strengthening communicationamong GFHR partnersand disseminatinginformation regardingthe 10/90gap (that onlylO%of the world's health researchfunding goes towards solving problems causing 90% of the world's diseases); and (v) measuringresults of the actions taken. One of the latest of GFHR's initiativesisthe Public-Private Partnershipfor Health. Helpingto forge public-private alliances is an essential aspectof GFHR'swork. Such initiatives become independent partnershipsor legalentities to which donor funding is channeleddirectly. MainComponents Components GFHR is an umbrella programhousingthe following initiativesin FY05: Child Healthand NutritionalResearch Initiative Alliance for Health Policyand Systems Research 0 Initiativeon CardiovascularHealth Initiativeon Public Private Partnerships for Health Medicinesfor MalariaVenture 0 EuropeanObservatory Inaddition, GFHR channels Bank funding to GAVI and IAVlpartnerships. Perfamanca Indicators There are three main performanceindicators: Informationand dissemination numberand type of products - Initiativeshetworkssustainedor developed Holdingof Annual Global Forum -numberlrange of participants 102 Annex 10 Progressand Achlevements OED evaluated6 globalhealthprograms, including GFHR, ina reportissuedinApril 2004. A new StrategicDirections Plan hasarticulatedand is guidingthe implementationof GFHRs response, Forum 7: Geneva. Dec2003. 650 registeredparticipants, includingfrom Ministriesof Health; donorsto andfunders of healthresearch; healthresearchersfrom academia, MedicalResearch Councils, ResearchInstitutes;collaborating agenciesand partnersincludingWorld Bank andWHO: anda wide varietyof stakehotdersfrom bothdeveloping and developed countries. Focus - latestissuesin 10/90gap, includingneedsfor capacitystrengtheningat country level, gender disparities, with emphasis on infectiousand noncommunicablediseases,violenceand injuriesand progress in public-privatepartnershipsfor health. - a 0 Publications: The 10/90Report(to be printedinApril 2004): a publicationon Gender Issuesin Health Research;A new publicationon the CombinedApproach Matrix guide to this majorprioritysettingtool createdby the Global Forumandexamples of applicationsto be printedinJune 2004. Supportto networks on RoadTraffic Injuries;SexualViolence, Initiativeon CardiovascularHealth;ChildHealth& NutritionResearchInitiative;Alliancefor HealthPolicy& Systems Research: Initiativeon Public-PrivatePartnerships for Health, and MentalHealth. 0 Increasein corefundingfor GFHR - raisedto $3.4 millionfor 2004, the largestannualincreaseever. 0 Newcollaborationinitiatedwith Councilon Health Researchfor Development(COHRED). 0 Collaborationstrengthenedwith WHO in preparationfor Forum8 andWorld Summit on HealthResearch including - conducting5 RegionalConsultationson HealthResearchfor the MDGs (jointly organizedbyWHO, GFHR and COHRED). Collaborationstrengthenedwith RegionalHealthResearchForums -Africa;LatinAmerica and Caribbean; Asia and Pacific;MiddleEast and N. Africa). Partner% WHO, World HeartFederation, NationalAcademies, Billand Melinda GatesFoundation,RockefellerFoundationand bilateral donors Governanceand Management The GFHR is managedby a 20-member FoundationCouncil, representingeightconstituencieswith a majorinterest in health research. The Bank is a memberof the FoundationCounciland of STRATEC-the Scientific,Technicaland ResearchAdvisory subcommittee. Thereare two FoundationCouncilmeetingsa year, and at leasttwo STRATECmeetings. Objectivesand allocationsare decidedthroughanalyticalwork to identifypriorities(a core functionof the GFHR), consensus- buildingthroughthe Annual Forum, and STRATEC, which reviews and approves individualprojectsabove US$20,000 and makesrecommendationson emergingpossibilities. The FoundationCouncilhasfinal say. There is a small secretariatof ten professionaland support personnelbasedin Geneva. Reporting is done throughannualreports, publications,and a website. ExitStrategy The VPU plans to continueengagementin GFHR as long as performance is satisfactory.The GFHRs analyticalwork and priority-settingprovidea service to the whole donorcommunity. Long-term supportis requested,subjectto satisfactory evaluation. As GFHR becomesestablished,the Bankexpects itto play an ever-largerrole in channelingfunding to high-priority healthR&D programs. 103 Annex 10 UNAIDSGlobal and RegionalActivitiesfor Intensified Responseto HIV/AIDS - Bank Contact: DebreworkZewdie l 202-473-9414 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: HD -HealthNutrition& Population RecipientAgency: UNAIDS Web Address: http:l/w.unaids.org FinancialArrangementsfor FY05(Amount in US$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 135.0 DGF FundingRequest: 4.00 DGF Percentage: 3% L Objectivesand ExpectedOutcome8 The objectiveof UNAIDSisto lead, strengthen, and support an expandedresponseto the HIVIAIDSepidemic. Sinceits establishmentinJanuary 1995,UNAIDShastaken the leadintracking and fightingMIVIAIDS,which hasclaimed more lives in the pastdecadethan all civilwars combined. The proposedgrantwill supportthe continuedresponseto HIVlAIDS,one of the biggest threats to human development andto poverty alleviationefforts. Itwill support UNAIDS'effortsto (a) reducethe transmissionof HIVlAIDS;(b) provideaffordable,cost-effectivecare andtreatmentfor people livingwith HIVIAIDS;and (c) mitigatethe socioeconomicand human impactof HIVlAIDSon individuals, households, andcommunities. HIVIAIDS has haddevastating effects on the worst-affectedcountries. MainComponents (i) Catalyzeactionand strengthencapacityat the country level,particularlyin monitoringand evaluation;resourcemobilization; expansionof civil societyinvolvement;provisionof technicalresources; andsecurity,stability, and humanitarianinterventions.(ii) Expandthe responseof the development sectorto HIVIAIDS. (iii) Strengthendevelopingcountries' capacityto gather,analyze, and usestrategicinformationrelatedto the HIVlAIDSepidemic and, in particular,to makeprogress in achievingthe goals and targets of the Declarationof Commitment, includingthroughthe CountryResponse InformationSystem (CRIS),whichwill be operationalin all developingcountriesby the end of 2005. (v)SustainHIVlAIDSleadershipat all levelsby forgingpartnershipsof politicaland socialleadersto ensurefull implementationof the Declarationof Commitment andto realizerelatedMillennium DevelopmentGoals; increasingthe accountabilityof UNAIDSat the countrylevel;and improvingthe scope and qualityof UN supportto nationalpartnersthroughstrengthenedUNTheme GroupsonAIDS, bettercoordinationat the regionallevel, increased staffcapacityin key areas, and development of morecoordinatedUN programsin linewith nationalprioritiesand objectives. PerformanceIndicators t A comprehensiveset of indicatorswas developed at the UNGeneralAssembly's SpecialSummitonAIDS (UNGASS). These includeUNGASSgoalswith respectto partnerships,policies,and resources.(i) On partnerships: increasein number of institutions and community networksinvolvedin designingand implementingHlVlAlDS policieslprograms;% of UNAgencies participatingin the developmentand implementationof the UNstrategicplan; and Number ofjointly fundedprograms amongthe UN and internationalorganizations. Numberof programs underjoint privatelpublicpartnershipsand numberof regional, sub-regional,and inter-regionalinitiatives. (ii) On donor mobilization: % of HlPCcountriesthat havehadall bilateralofficialdebt cancelled;annual amount of USD spent globallyon AIDS in low-incomeandat-risk countries;annualincreaseinfundingfor the developmentof microbicidesandvaccines: % of developed countriesthat earmark0.7 % oftheir GNP to ODA and 0.150.20% of GNP as ODA for least developed countries. Number of HIVlAIDSnationalstrategicplansaddressingpreparednessfor emergency situationsand refugees'needs. Number of partnersin humanitarianwork integratingHIVlAIDSprevention,care,and awareness in their frameworks. Extentto which corelstandardizedM&Eframeworksare includedin nationalM&Eplans,as measured by responseto UNGASSsurvey. Numberof prioritycountrieswith a developed CRIS. Numberof prioritycountriesutilizingCRIS for resource tracking.(iii) On policies:number of globaland regionalmeetingswith HIVlAIDSonthe agenda; % of UN agencies and internationalorganizationsworking in countriesaffectedby conflictand disasterthat haveincorporatedHIVlAIDSin their plansand programsand provideHlVlAlDSawarenessand trainingto their staff. 104 Annex 10 ProgressandAchlevements e An independentevaluation of the UNAIDS Programwas completedin2002,five years afterthe establishment of UNAIDS.The PCBand the Committeeof CosponsoringOrganizationreviewedthe final evaluation report in Dec.2002. e To ensurethat Bankfunds arewell spent, andto helpthe HNP Sector Board& DGF Council measurethe success ofthe UNAIDSDGF grant, the resultsof an independentevaluationwill be submittedto the Bankno laterthan April 30,2006. e OEDevaluated6 global healthprograms, includingUNAIDS, in its reportissuedinApril 2004. UNAIDShas: e Increasedglobal awareness on HIVIAIDS - The external evaluationof UNAIDSacknowledgedthe increasedcommitment and leadershipon HlVlAlDSworldwide at all levels as one of UNAIDS' greatestsuccesses. e Strengthenedcommitment& capacity of cosponsors 81the broader UN system -The profile of HIVIAIDSwithin UNAIDS cosponsoringorganizationshas grown significantly. Mostcosponsoringorganizations now include HIV/AIDSas a corporate priority in its own right, with dedicatedstaff; separate strategies, target 8 indicators integratedintomediumterm strategic plans. Individualcosponsoring organizationshave undertakento act as "convening agencies" in key substantive areas such as: M&Eand economic impact (WorldBank) care & support,orphans & vulnerable children, etc. e Establishednormativeframeworks - UNAIDShas helpedto developnormativeframeworks in a numberof important areas, includingeducation, access to care & treatment in resource-limited settings. These& similar efforts improvethe quality ticoherence of action at all levels. e Effectively mobilizedresources. e Helpedcountriesaccess funding from the Global Fundto FightAIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria - UNAIDShas devoted significant to countries seekingto access & implement HIV/AIDSprograms using reso eprovidedinvaluablesupport Global Fund. e Enhanced capacity to respondeffectivelyto HIV/AIDS - The capacity of countries to mount 8 sustainmulti- sectoral responseto AIDS hascontinued to improve. e Strengthenedmonitoringand evaluation The Country ResponseInformationSystem (CRIS) is under implementation in - countriesto systematicallygather a wide rangeof nationaldata on HIV/AIDSto respondto national, regional& global information needs. Partners UNAIDSCosponsors (UNICEF,UNDP, UNFPA, UNODC,UNESCO,WHQ, ILO,WFP, and theWorld Bank), UNAIDSSecretariat, InternationalPartnershipAgainst AIDS inAfrica, Pan-CaribbeanPartnershipon AIDS Oovemmce and Management e A Program CoordinatingBoard (PCB) serves as UNAIDS' govemingbody, with representativesof 22 govemments from all geographic regions, the UNAIDScosponsors,and five nongovernmentalorganizations, including associationsof people livingwith HIVIAIDS.The PCB holds a session once a year in Geneva, and in altemateyears holdsthematic sessions outside Geneva,to discuss objectives, strategic focus, and allocations. The PCBis responsiblefor overseeing the planof work and budget. e The UNAIDScosponsoring agencies-through a Committeeof Cosponsoring Agencies -monitor UNAIDSactivities. A PCBmonitoringand evaluationplan callsfor regular reportingto UNAIDS' partnersand for processesto assessthe outputs, outcomes, and impacts of the program. The evaluations are sharedwith partners and disseminatedwidely through a consultativeprocess. e UNAIDS' Secretariatis headquarteredin Geneva,with offices in morethan 60 countries and cosponsor representationin dozens of additionalcountries. I Exitstretegy 1 i Giventhe strong link of HlVlAlDSto developmentand UNAIDS' central role in HIV/AIDSprevention, a long-term engagement in this partnership is anticipated. The HNP Sector Boardmonitorsthe progress of UNAIDS. 105 Annex 10 The African Programfor Onchocerciasis Control Bank Contact: Bruce Benton1202473-5031 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: AFTF3 RecipientAgency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http:llwww.worldbank.org1gper r 1FinrnclalArranglementsfor FYO5(Amount In US$ Million) Total Budget: 101.7 DGF Funding Request: 3.27 DGF Percentage: 3% The objective of the African Programfor Onchocerciasis Control (APOC) isto establish, within 12to 15years, effective, self- sustainable,community-directedtreatment (ComDT) of onchocerciasis with the drug ivermectinthroughoutthe endemic areas inthe geographic scope of the program; and, if possible, in selected and isolatedfocito eradicatethe vector by using environmentallysafe methods. Currently, 20 millionpeopleare heavily infectedwith onchocerciasiswithin the APOC countries. The attainmentofthis objective is expectedto contributeto the eliminationof onchocerciasisas a disease of public healthand socio-economic importancethroughoutAfrica and so contributeto improvingthe welfare of the continent's people. The intendedbeneficiariesare 109millionpeople living in 19countriesinAfrica (outsidethe West African OCP area) who are infectedwith onchocerciasisor are at high risk of contractingthe disease. Additionally, the 11countriesof the OnchocerciasisControlProgram(OCP) inWest Africa are also protectedagainst reinvasionfrom borderingAPOC countries to the east. MainComponents Programcomponents include: (i) assessmentof disease distribution; (ii) surveillance; (iii) vector control; (iv) trainingand distribution of ivermectinthrough community-directedhealth services; (v) capacity building; (vi) advocacy; (vii) information, educationand communication IEC); (viii) biostatisticsand information systems; (ix) research; (x) monitoringandevaluation;and other healthcare activities. PerformanceIndicators I * 4 Eventualdistributionof ivermectinto 90 millionpeopleper annum. 107programscurrently operate in 16countries; over 80,000 communities actively involvedinthe distributionof ivermectin. Estimatedtotal numberof projectsto be carried out is 122. Establishmentof sustainable, community-directeddrug delivery systems in each target countty within eight years. Total current projectstreated 40m people in 2003 andwill treat68mwhen fully scaled up. Localcapacity buildingfor communities,govemment personnel, and local NongovemmentalDevelopment Organizations (NGDOs). White blindness is the most striking symptomof onchocerciasis, severe itchingand unsightlyskin damage are responsiblefor about two thirds of the disability associatedwith the disease. When fully scaled up,APOC every year will add morethan 600,000 person-years of productivelaborto the economiesof its participating countries,years of productivity previouslylost primarily due to itching. .. Annex 10 Independentscientificstudies havefound numerouspositive spillovers incommunities undertakingComDT, includingthe distribution of additionaldrugs and improvedtreatment rates. APOC is nowworkingwith the I Micronutrient Initiativeto distributevitamin A throughComDTprojectsinseveralcountries, e Additionalresearch is requiredto determinewhen it is safe to end mass distributionof ivermectinonce disease transmission has been stopped,without riskinga recurrenceof the disease. ___b_ Progressand Achievements The next independent evaluation of APOC will be carriedout in 2005. APOC has made impressive progress since the last application. Interms of deceasecontrol, approximately40 millionpeoplewere treated with Mectizan, preventingblindness, reversing skindisease, and restoringdignity. Treatmentswere distributedto nearly68,000 communities in 16countries. In terms if capacity building, APOC trained or retrained 107,008 CDDs ad 13,713 healthworkers in 2002. in scientificterms, APOC supported researchconclusivelydemonstratingthe effectivenessof co-distributing other health interventionsalongwith Mectizan. APOC and its partners also conducted many pilotprogramsto do so, deliveringVitaminA, praziquantel, and Albendazole along with Mectizan in ComDT projectareas. A Bank projectis being preparedat the requestofthe Ministry of Health in Guineato distributecondoms and HIV/AIDSinformationvia ComDTprojects in 2,400 villages in central Guinea. Partners African DevelopmentBank, OfficialBilateralDonors, UNDP,WHO, Gulbenkian Foundation, Kuwait Fundfor Arab Development,NGDOCoalition, OPEC Fundfor InternationalDevelopment, private sector companies. Govemanceand Management The APOC is cosponsoredby UN agencies and has an importantpartnershiparrangementwith the privatesector (Merck & Co., Inc.) and NGDOs.The Bankserves as the FiscalAgent andWHO acts as the ExecutingAgency. Program headquartersare in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. APOC managementoversees the development of procedures and guidelinesfor executingComDT projects, approves national-level projects,coordinates monitoring and evaluation exercises, ensures that researchis carried out insupport of control, and maintains a geographicalinformationsystemonthe prevalence of onchocerciasis. Progress reports,action plans and budgets,country reports, and audit opinions are distributed to all partnersbefore the JAF yearly meeting. The Bank presents a financial forecast to the donors and the governing board each year and upon request, sends supervisionlprogressreportsto donors. Affectedcommunitieshavewide leeway in implementingAPOC project activities. The NationalOnchocerciasisTask Forces (NOTFs) prepareproject proposals and oversee country-level programaotivities. NOTFsare composed of representativesof the Ministriesof Health (MOHs), NGDOs, and other partners involvedin onchocerciasiscontrol. MOHs have ultimate responsibilityfor integratingthe programinto existing healthsystems. The APOC Technical Consultative Committee(TCC) reviewsand advises on the acceptabilityof new projects, basedon technicaljustificationand financial feasibility. The Committeeof SponsoringAgencies (CSA), a steering committeechaired by the Bank, plays a prominent rolein overseeing programimplementationand advisesthe Joint Action Forum (JAF), which serves as the governing board. The JAF sets policy, approvesAPOC action plans and budgets, assessesAPOC's globalfinancing requirements,and decides onthe inclusion of countries at the recommendationof the CSA. The NGDOCoordinationGroup coordinates activitiesof NGDOsinvolved intraining and other support. 7 Exitstrategy All APOC activities will be fully transferredto the participating countries after2010. At this point, APOC will come to a conclusionand all external donor supportwill cease. All ivermectin delivery projectsand vector eradication projectswill have beenpreparedand implementedby this time. A primaryobjective is to haveeach ivermectindelivery project entirely self- sustainingwithin a periodof five to eight years. 107 Annex 10 Populationand Reproductive Health Capacity BuildingProgram Bank Contact: ElizabethLaura LuleI 202-473-3787 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD Health Nutrition& Popylation - RecipientAgency: Multiplegrant recipients Web Address: Multipleweb mailaddresses Total Budget: 17.03 DGFFunding Request: 2.20 DGF Percentage: 13% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcome8 The PRH program aims to buildthe capacityof civil-societyorganizations to develop and implementculturally appropriateinterventionsinthe sensitivefields of populationand reproductive health, leadingto healthierbehavior at the individualand community levels,reducingthe impoverishing effectsof poor reproductivehealth, and improvingreproductivehealthoutcomes. The PRH program has three main dimensions: (i) on-granting through internationalintermediarieswith linksto grassrootsgroups world-wide, and support for the development of networks;(ii) support to operations researchleadingto the development of cost-effectiveinterventionsand protocols; and (iii)support to organizationsactive intechnology and informationtransferto community levels. The beneficiariesare mainly women and adolescents inruraland peri-urbansettings, throughthe organizationsin which they participateor from whose activitiesthey benefit, There is a specialemphasis on reachingcommunities underservedby government agencies. The program'srange is global, with a particularfocus on Africa. The fit betweenthe Bank's coreobjectivesin povertyreductionand those of the PRH program is excellent. Reproductive health problems hit the poor harderthan thosewho are better-off,especially the mostvulnerable-women and children. In addition, the PRH program contributesto other emerging directionsof the Bank's agenda -accelerating achievement of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals, improving gender equity,inclusionand participation, developmentpartnerships, coalitionsfor change, and fosteringglobal publicgoods. MainComponents (i) The programprovidesfunding for groups and networksworking to: (i) increaseaccessto and choice infamily planning and other reproductivehealthservices; (ii) reduce maternalmortality and morbidity; (iii) promotethe health of adolescents;and (iv) reduce harmful health practicessuch as female genital mutilation. Achievements include: a Technology development and transfer: e.g. the Motherand Babypackagethat has beenwidely adopted as a planning guide for Safe Motherhood programs; the developmentof a lowcost test for syphilis; research and development of microbicides;and guidelinesfor cervicalcancer diagnosis and treatment in resource-poorsettings. Sustainingthe momentumof the Safe MotherhoodInitiative leadingto the formation of an expanded partnershipfor safe motherhoodand newbornhealth, and major related conferences. a * Leveragingsignificant financial and technical support for the programs and initiatives funded; and nurturing a significani number of fledgling grassroots groups intocredible nationalorganizationsthat can attract long-termfundingfrom donors and eventually graduate from this programto accessfunds fromWorld Bank projects. DSW has leveraged funding from the EUand the private sector. The UN Foundationhas providedmatchingfunds for the Safe Motherhood Initiative. Piloting and replication (e.g., A sexuality and life skillsprogram pilotedfor schools in Mexicowas implemented nationwideand is now being replicatedin other LatinAmerican countries.) Culturally appropriate approaches to female genital mutilation,developedand implemented by country groups that belong to the networks created by Rainbo and the Inter-AfricaCommittee. Facilitating south-to-south collaboration and learning. a Innovativeinterventions (e.9. increasing access to the poorest in Bangladesh& developing poverty assessment tools). 108 Annex 10 Developingnew technology to prevent HIVIAIDSand unwantedpregnancy.The Bank has beenan active partnerinthe development of a new intemational partnershipfor microbicides; Bank support has helpedattract additionaldonors. In an era of spiraling HIVIAIDSand STIprevalencerates, this is an important publicgood similar to IAVland GAVI. (ii) Establishingeffectivenetworksof grassroots adolescent health groups in severalAfrican countriesand sharing lessons learned. (iii)Fosteringcloser collaborationktween intermediaries, especially the EURONGOs. PerformanceIndicators 1 (i) Numberof grassroots groups supported through intermediary organizations; (ii) Leveragingof additionalfinancial and technical resources; (iii) Numberof projects providingassistancefor activities appropriateat the community level- research,information, & technology; (iv) Safe Motherhoodinitiative and lntemationalPartnershipfor Microbicides sustained and strengthened throughsupportto key partners,workshops, operationsresearch, and information dissemination;(v) Number of toolsdeveloped. Progressand Achlevements A meetingin Helsinkitook placein October2003to follow-up on the recommendations of the Paris meetingto explore bettercoordinationand closer collaboration between NGOs and resource mobilizationto leverage DGFfunding. The IPMleveraged $60 millionfrom the Gates Foundationto support researchanddevelopmentwork. IPMstill requires an additional$450millionto accelerate proofof concept of various productsinthe pipeline. The funds from DGF support buildscapacity at the country levelin supportof the clinicaltrialsand advocacyworkings inclose collaborationwith civilsociety and women's groups and IAVI. Website linkages beingestablished betweenthe NGOswith a link to the NHPwebsite. Leveragingof other funds continueswith the EUbecoming a major donor for reproductive health. The NGOs report leveraging$14.5 millionperyear from bilateraldonors and foundations. A new expanded Partnershipon Safe Motherhoodand Newbornhealth established incorporatingthe lntra-Agency Group. Partnersare the recipientsof grants, both internationalNGOsacting as intermediaries, and the grassroots groups supported. Grants support selected activities of the intemational bodies of professionalassociations, networks and, for the Safe Motherhoodcomponents, the InterAgencyWorking group, andwork of its core members. GovernanceandNlana$sment The PRHprogramis a essentially a small grants programmanaged by a committee of HNPstaff, which includesthe most senior Bank staff inthe field, chair of the Populationand ReproductiveHealthThematic Group, andthe TM and administrator. Meetings are heldtwo or three times peryear to allocatefunding, reviewthe portfolio, and agree on mainobjectives. HDNHE managesthe reviewof proposalsby a committee,the process of proposalscreening, letters of agreement, and follow-up, includingof compliancewith requirements. Thefirst evaluationwas conducted inJanuary 2000. There is noformal govemingor advisory board, butthe PRHprogramoften asks for peer reviewfor particular proposals, particularly ifthere are implicationsfor country operations. There is no officialsecretariat, inthe usual sense of programmanagement. Eachgrant is madeto a recipientwhose managementand program execution arewholly independentof the Bank. PRH"secretariat"functions involve about six staff-weeks of time bythe TM & an assistant. Long-termDGF support is requestedfor this program, given (i) its centrality to the "unfinished agenda" of reproductivehealth identifiedas a priorityfor the Bankinthe SSP, and (ii) its contribution to poverty reductionthrough support to the developmentof sustainable programs& organizationsat the community level. Twenty to twenty-fivegrants are made eachyear, but there is a continuousprocessof intemalrenewal,& noyear's list of recipients is exactly the same as the last. The FYOl evaluation addressedthis issue,& found that only in exceptionalcircumstanceswith strongjustificationhadthe same organizationbeen supportedfor morethan 5 years. The program sponsors proposeanothersuch review in FY05,following which fundingwould be requestedfor a further 3 years. 109 Annex 10 Special Programfor Researchand Training in Tropical Diseases(TDR) Bank Contact: Ok Pannenborg1202-473-4415 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNHE RecipientAgency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http:/lvww.who.inVtdr FfnanclalArrangementsfor FYO8(Amount In USS Mtlllon) TotalBudget: 31.75 DGF FundingRequest: 2.00 DGF Percentage: 6% The UNDPMlorldBankMlHOProgramfor Researchand Training inTropical Diseases(TDR)was started in 1975/76with a twofold objective: (i)researchand developmentof new, improvedtools for the control of eight majortropicaldiseases; and (ii) the strengtheningof nationalresearchcapabilitiesin countrieswhere those diseaseswere endemic. The eight diseases are: leprosy, leishmaniasis, schistosomiasis,trypanosomiasis, filariasis, malaria, Chagas Diseaseand Onchocerciasis. Inorder to maintain its leadingposition inthe developmentof newtools and the training of researchersfrom disease-endemic countries, a newstrategic vision for TDR promotes: (i) closer interactionwith health systems and disease controlprograms; (ii) capacity strengthening; and (iii)full utilizationof scientific and technologicaladvances inthe biomedical, social, and information sciences. Inaddition, TDR's disease portfolio was expandedto includetuberculosis and dengue. By investing in researchon these ten diseases, largely neglectedpriorto TDR because of their concentration in lesserdevelopedcountries,the program's research has ledto new insights andcontroltools that aid in reducingthe global disease burden in developing countriesand supportthe MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs) relatedto maternalhealth, malaria,tuberculosis, and HIVIAIDS. The primary beneficiaries are the most disease-endemic countries. 1 MainComponents I The componentsof TDRs work can be classified within seven expected results areas: new basicknowledgeaboutthe biological, social, economic, health systems, behavioraldeterminants,and other factors importantto effective controlof infectiousdiseases generated and accessible at nationaland international levels new and improvedtools developed for use in infectious diseaseprevention and control (e.g., drugs,vaccines, diagnostics, epidemiologicaltools,environmentaltools) new and improvedinterventionmethodsfor applying existing and newtools developed and validated newand improved policies for large-scaleimplementationof existing and new preventionand control strategies developed, validated, and made accessiblefor application in national controlsettings partnershipsestablished; adequate supportfor research and product development capacity building incountries provided adequatetechnical information,researchguidelines and instruments,and advice accessibleto partnersand clients in countries resources mobilizedand managedfor research, productdevelopment, and capacity building. TDR has beenexceptionally successfulin the field of malariagenomics, having beenthe primary catalyst inthe 2002 sequencing of the full genome of the malariavectorAnopheles Gambiae. Similarly, TDR was instrumentalin supporting the sequencing of the malaria parasite PlasmodiumFalciparum. The following are examples, and nota comprehensivelist of all output indicators for the program. Fieldtrials of methods, new drugs, and other tools 110 Annex 10 .% Discoveryand development of new drugs, vaccines and diagnostics for the TDR target diseases, such as visceral leishmaniasis, a majortropicaldisease in SouthAsia. Researchon the implementationof new and improvedtools in areaswhere TDR now places great emphasis. Partnershipsand capacity buildingfor researchand productdevelopment. Progress and Achlevements An interimevaluation of TDRs managementand governancewas conductedin2003. The draft report's overall conclusion is that TDR managersdeserve creditfor formulating and implementingmajor changessince 1998.the new decision-making structureis processintensiveand focuses more on inputsthan on outcomes; the disease researchcoordinationfunction, in particular, needs strengthening; new businessprocesses are detail oriented and needto be further developed and refined; improvementsare neededin staffing, performancemanagementand humanresourcedevelopment: and moreaccountability for resultsis needed. An independent performanceevaluationof TDR will beconducted in 2005. Achievements includethe following: Malaria:trials are undeway to determine whether iron supplementsor intermittentchemoprophylaxis should be recommendedto preventsevere anemia in areas of high malariatransmission.Lymphatic Filariasis: two diagnostictests are being sought becausethe traditionaltests are inconvenientand haveto be undertakenat night, There are six newdrug candidatesfor malaria treatment, to addressthe serious threat of multi-resistancy of existing drugs. Several promising drug candidateshave progressedto further development. Increasedemphasis is being placedon naturalproductsand on increasedefficiency of drug screeningoperations. There are new developmentcandidatesfor vaccines for malaria, leishmaniasis,and schistosomiasis. TDR is: (i) carryingout studiesto improveusage, increaseaccessibility, and evaluate the impactof insecticidetreated materials; (ii)assessingthe utilityof fixed-dose combinationof four drugs; (iii) in Onchocerciasis,emphasizing making community-directedtreatmentsustainablewhen supportfrom the Onchocerciasis Control Programand the APOC program comes to an end; (iv) undertakinga mutti-counttystudy to determine how bestto encourage the routine use of simple hygiene practicesto help alleviate the symptoms of lymphaticfilariasis inAfrica; (v) assessingthe monitoringclimateto evaluatethe impactof controlprogramsandthe efficiency of insecticides:(vi) developing,guidelinesfor lymphaticfilariasis elimination strategies. TDR coordinatesthe international networkof partnersto pursue the genomics and proteomicsof the Anopheles gambiae, a mosquitowhichtransmits malariainAfrica. The parasite genome networksstimulated byTDR are now concentratedon identifying genes and subsequent proteins and targets for drugs andvaccines. Training programson the immunology of infectious diseases have beenimplemented. Partners UNICEF, UNDP,WHO, officialbilateraldonors, corporations. Governanceand Management TDR is governedby a Joint Coordination Board, with representationby all majorparticipating entities. The Standing Committee,which acts as an executivesecretariat, is composedof the four co-sponsoringagencies-WHO, the Bank, UNICEF,and UNDP -plusthe chairpersonof the Board. The Scientific and Technical Advisory Board, which meetsyearly and overseesthe scientific direction of the program.TDR publishes an annual report, awebsite, a newsletter, and multipleother publications.TDR is housed inGeneva and has about 27 professionalstaffmembers. Exit Strategy Becauseof the time neededto develop newtherapeutic agents, and the specific epidemiologicalfeatures of some diseases, the TDR has an open-endedtime frame. The Bank has been involvedwith TDR since its inception, and its decision to begin contributingfinanciallywas made in recognition of the serious health and developmentimpact of the majortropicaldiseases, and with full understandingthat combating them would take a long-termcommitment. Through its internalreviewmechanism the program "exits"from diseases once tools becomeavailable. Annex 10 Researchand Developmentin HumanReproduction Bank Contact: Khama Odera RogoI 202473-6117 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD -HealthNutrition& Population RecipientAgency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http://www.who,int/hrp/ FlnanctalArrangementsfor FYOS(Amount In US$ Miillon) . Total Budget: 15.00 DGF Funding Request: 2.00 DGF Percentage: 13% ObJaetlvssand ExpectadOutcome8 Researchand Developmentin Human Reproduction (HRP) was foundedin 1972as a specialprogramofWHO to support and evaluate internationalresearchand development relatedto human reproduction, with particularreferenceto the needs of developingcountries. The Bank becamea cosponsor of a re-structured HRP in FY88. The programcarries out two broadtypes of activities: (1) coordinating researchthrough a global network; and (2) buildingnationalcapacityin fertility and reproductive healthresearch. A major HRP objective has beento monitorand provide informationon the safety of the mostwidely used contraceptives, which is an invaluable globalpublic good. HRP has also engaged in basicand appliedcontraceptiveresearchand in research on priorityreproductivehealthproblemsthat affect poor andvulnerablegroups, particularlypoorwomen and infants. Improvingmaternalhealthis one of the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) and a corporatepriorityof the Bank. Thework of HRP is centralto the achievement of these goals. - MainComponents The currentwork programputsgreater emphasis on programimplementation issues in poor countries.HRP-established prioritiesfor reproductivehealth2004-2009 are reflectedin the work program. -Family planning: Developmentof new methods of fertility regulation. Assessments of the long-termsafety of existingmethods. - Maternal and neonatal health: Focus on main causes of maternalmortalityand morbidity. Clinicaltrials on interventionsfor the screening,prevention,and treatment of hypertensivedisordersof pregnancy,pre-term delivery, and intra-uterinegrowth retardation. Long-termfollow-up studiesof mothers and infantswho receivedinterventionsduring pregnancy and childbirth. - Control of reproductive tract infections (RTI) and sexually transmitted infections (STI): Assessment of cost-effectivenessand impactof different STI controlstrategies. Guidelines for managementof RTVSTI. Improveddiagnostictests and screening strategies to detect asymptomaticinfections. Strengthened capacityfor STllRTl surveillance at the country level. - Prevention of unsafe abortion: Guidelineson provisionof abortionand removal of barriers to safeabortionservices. Studies to reduceside-effectsof abortion, search for compoundsfor medicalabortion, and compare differentabortionmethods. Documentationof impactof changesin abortionlaws and estimates of the costof providingor not providingsafe abortion services. -TechnicalSupport: Buildingresearchcapacity, facilitatingdissemination of researchfindings, and improvingqualityof reproductive health. Researchon the impact of healthsector reformon reproductivehealth. HRP seeksto advancethe agenda agreed upon at the lntemational Conference on Population and Development held in 1994. Itwill continueto provideguidance on integratinggender equity and human rightsintosexual and reproductivehealthprograms. Performancelndlcatons 0 Output: development of steroidalcontraceptionfor men. Indicators: three clinicaltrials initiated,one on-going, and one completed in 2004. Three clinicaltrials completedand one on-going in 2005. Studies on new leadsfor malefertility regulation initiatedin 2004, on-going until2006. 0 Output: evidenceon the context and determinants of adolescent sexual and reproductivehealthand on factorsthat enable programsto meettheir needs. Indicators: researchgaps and prioritiesidentifiedin 2004. Callsfor proposalsdisseminated and studies developed in 2005. Studies ongoing in 2006. 112 Annex 10 Output: systematicreviewof effectsof maternal healthinterventions. Indicators: three newsystematic reviewscompleted by the end of each year. Ongoingupdating of reviewspreviously published. Output: safety, acceptability,and efficacy of a newantiretroviralregimenfor the preventionof mother-tochildtransmission of HIV, Indicator: multi-centerclinicaltrial initiatedin 2004, on-going with early resultsdisseminatedin 2005, continuing in 2006. e Output: assessment of the cost-effectiveness of different modelsfor integrationof programsfor reproductivehealth, managementof RTls/STls,and HIWAIDS. Indicator: modeling of identifiedstrategies completedand published. Output: countrystrategiesfor reproductivehealthpolicyand programdevelopment and improvedquality of care. Indicators: strategic assessments conductedintwo countries each year. Recommendationsfrom similarassessmentstested intwo countriesin 2004 and completedin 2005, and ina third country initiatedin 2005 and completedin 2006. e Output: improveddisseminationand utilizationof researchfindingsat the country level. Indicators: guidelines developed and tested and oneworkshopheldin eachWHO Region in 2004. Supportprovidedfor the use of guidelines in at leastone centeror for one researchproject per regionin 2005. Progressand Achievements The last independentexternalevaluationwas completed in2003. The overallconclusionisthat, duringthe period1990-2002, HRP has clearly metexpectationsinterms of itscore missionto coordinate, promote, conductand evaluateinternationalresearch in RH and has achievedits majorobjectives. The programestablishedits positionas the global leaderingeneratingresearch resultsand establishing scientificconsensusthat advance RH policiesand practices, especially for developingcountries. Among the many recommendations,the externalevaluation notedthat HRP should: (i)Inthe shortterm reduce andfocus its agenda, giventhe mismatchbetween available resourcesand the agenda. However, in the longterm it is importantto attractadditionalfinancial and human resources. (ii) Give additionalemphasis to electroniccommunication. (iii)Decen ent tasks to regionaloffices. (iv) Strengthen the monitoringof nationalresearchresultsby more frequent to ensurethat research resultsare known to national& internationalhealth policy-makers. (vi) Strengt inistrationsand development agencies at countrylevel. (vii) Since the price of maintainingthe governance & advisory bodiesis considerablein stafftime & effort, reducethe numberof committee meetingswhere possibleand combinefunctions. Majorachievements include: (I) successfultesting of single dose 1.5 mg of levonorgesterolfor emergency contraception; (ii) completion of Phase IIstudy of an estin combination; (iii)completion of Phase IItrial of testosteroneundecanoate; (iv) completion of user studies; (v) reviewof evidence linkinglongterm OC usewith cervicalcancer; (vi) review of research on safety of reuse of female condoms; (vii) development of systemto assure that WHOs evidencebasedguidancefor FP remains current; (viii) publicationof severalreportson safe motherhood best practices; (ix) analysisof DHS data on unsafe abortion & young women; technicalconsultationon herpessimplex. - . Partnere . c UnitedNations DevelopmentProgram, theWorld HealthOrganization, UNFPA, ti many bilateraldonors Governanceand Management The Policy and Coordination Committee (PCC) meetsannually and setsoverall policyand programdirection. A Standing Committee (SC) meetsthreetimes each year to reviewHRP's plansof action, make proposalsto the PCC on financing, and review HRPs allocation of resources and other issues. A Scientific and Technical Advisory Group (STAG), reportingto the PCC and the SC, reviewsthe content, scope, & dimensions of HRP & recommends prioriiies& a planof action. A Gender Advisory Panel provides advice & guidanceon mattersrelatingto gender. Througha strategicplanningprocessmanagedby STAG & approved by PCC, HRP has developeda six-year strategicplancoveringthe period2004-2009. Formalwritten annualtechnicalreports, as well as financialreports, are presentedat each PCC meeting. A finalfinancial reporton 2002-2003 will be presentedin2004. HRP is basedin the WHO in Geneva. Fundscontributedto HRP are held in a trustfund managed by theWHO. ExitStrategy The research and trainingprovidedby HRP is an ongoingneedand is in linewith the reproductivehealthapproach proposedinthe Bank's PopulationStrategy. Periodicreviewsare conducted to determine whetherthe current levelof support shouldbe continued. 113 Annex 10 Roll Back Malaria Bank Contact: Ok Pannenborg1202-473-4415 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNVP RecipientAgency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http:/lwww.rbm.who.int Total Budget: 11.92 DGF FundingRequest: 1.oo DGFPercentage: 8% Malariais endemicto the poorestcountries in theworld, causingover a milliondeaths and up to 500 millionclinicalcaseseach year. About 90% of the deaths occur inAfrica; most are childrenunderfive. The economic losses due to malariainAfrica have recentlybeen estimatedto be about US$ 12 billionper year and the needfor malaria control has been estimatedat about US$3 billion. The Roll Back Malaria(RBM) global partnershipwas founded in 1998 byWHO, UNICEF,the World Bank, and UNDP,with the objectiveof halvingthe malariaburdenworldwide by the year 2010. This goalwill be achievedby scalingup a set of core interventions,includingrapideffective treatmentat the community level,the use of insecticide-treatedbed nets, preventionof malaria during pregnancy, and epidemic preparednessand response. AdditionalRBMgoals includeachievingthe MillenniumDevelopmentGoal (MDG) for malariaand contributingto the MDGfor child mortality. RBM has nowshifted itsfocus to support to implementationof RBM strategieson a national scale in endemiccountries. The DGF grant will be utilizedto (i)strengthenthe partnercoordinationmanaged by the RBM Secretariat; (ii) coordinatetechnical and programmatic support for implementationof the RBM strategy at the country and regionallevels; and (iii) mobilizetechnicalassistanceto facilitatecountries' access to the GlobalFundfor AIDS, TB, and Malaria. MainCamponents. The followingactivitiesare plannedfor 2004105: e StrategicOrientationFrameworkcompleted, includingconsultationwith working groups, to develop best practicesfor ITNs, malariain pregnancy,case management,communication, and financing. e Globalpartnershipworkplan developed in linewith the new RBMstrategicorientation. e Sub-regionalnetworks established and fully operational. Annual countrywork planningsupportedby sub-regionalnetworksin 24 high- and medium-readiness countries. e Country inter-agency coordinatingmechanisms fully functional in the 24 high- and medium-readiness countries. e Country ProgramAdvisors or equivalents appointed where requested; managementsystem support providedto the 24 countries. e Strategyadoptedand operationalto enhance the effectivenessof existingpartnershipsin developingnewtools for malaria. e Strategiesdevelopedand adoptedto increaseprivatesector and NGO participationin RBM. e Partners'consensus on the RBM partnershipoperationalframework reached. BiennialGlobalPartnersForumorganized. a Numberof high-readinesscountriesin all regionsthat are scaling-upRBMinterventionsincreased. e Malariaintegratedinto country healthsector reviewand planningin six countries. Radio-based communication projectsidentifiedand implementationstarted. Bestpracticesframeworkdocument developedas follow-upto reviewof best practicesin healthcommunication. Fullset of RBMcommunications and advocacy materials, reflectingnew RBM priorities,revised,updated,and completed. e RBM partnershipbusinessplanto support"MalariaMedicines& Supplies Service" developed and operationalized. e Documentationof countryresource requirements for malaria2005-2010 basedon recommendationsof an experts' meetingto reviewtrends in requirements & harmonizecountry funding mechanismswith resource allocationtoolto be proposedby RBM. e Guidancenotes on malaria controlfinancingissues produced. e Reportsproducedon efficientuseof existingresourcesfor malariacontrol. Research findings and reportson the economic costs of malariadisseminated 114 Annex 10 Perfomancelndicaton a Countriesassisted in the implementation of RBM strategicplans. Countriesassisted in developing, updating, and implementing rationalanti-malarialdrug policieswithinthe context of national essentialdrug programs. Countriesassistedin scaling up the useof insecticide-treatedbed nets. Countriessupported inimplementing the RBMmonitoringand evaluationframework. Countriessupported ingoing to scalewith implementation of IntegratedManagement of ChildhoodInfections(IMCI). Countriesinwhich taxes and tariffs on ITNshavebeen reducedor eliminated. Countriesthat have integratedmalariacontrolactivitiesintoannual healthsector plansand haveallocatedsufficient resources for implementation of those plans. Progresrrand Achlevsmsints -~ - 1. Appointmentof an RBM PartnershipSecretariat`s ExecutiveSecretary and establishment of the RBM PartnershipBoard, which has beenexpanded to include countrylevelrepresentationfrom six high burdencountriesinAfrica. Operatingframework for the Partnership has beendeveloped& a strategicorientationsframework for scaling-up is being developed. 2. Globalworking groups havebeenestablishedto produce strategicframeworksto guideeffortsto scale-up malariacontrolinterventions in the followingareas: malariain pregnancy; insecticidetreated Net materials & Vector Control; monitoring& evaluation; case management; communications & advocacy; finance& resourcemobilization; &, preparationof a MOU betweenthe GlobalFund& RBM. 3. Consultationswere heldin 14high burdento assess readinessto scale-up, assess gaps and bottlenecksand examine potential resourcesneededto achievethe Abuja targets. 4. Sub-regional networks establishedinfour regioninAfricato facilitatecountry level planningto mobilizesupport. 5. Joint RBMand GlobalFundreviewsin preparation,start-up and implementation of GlobalFundcountry proposals. 6. Explorefeasibilityof establishingMalariaMedicinesand Supply Service. 7. MaintainRBMwebsite andweb-alerts usedas primarysources of communications. 8. Consultationswith Ministerof Healthof SADC and ECOWASregions and participationinthe African Union meetingsheldin2003. Partners WHO, UNICEF, UNDP, officialbilateraldonors, Gates Foundation, corporations Qovemancsand Management RBM is coordinatedby a Secretariat locatedatWHO headquarters. The Secretariatengages relevantpartnerson various aspectsof RBM and mobilizesand coordinates the support providedto countries. Itoversees four key areas: globaladvocacy and communication, partnercoordination, country support,and resourcesand financing. An RBMBoardwas establishedin 2002 to develop and monitorthe activitiesof the Secretariat. The Board sets the goals and objectivesof RBM partnership,approvesthe Secretariat's workplan, and coordinatesthe input of partner agencies. The Secretariatreportson overallprogress to the Board, which is accountable to the broader partnershipthrough bi-annual partners forums. The Bank holdsone voting seat on the Board. RBM uses working groupsto develop and refinetechnicalstrategies for goingto scale. InteragencyCoordinating Committees in each countrydevelop annualworkplansand determine requirements for technicaland programmaticassistance. FourAfrican sub-regional networks,which are extensions of the RBM Secretariat, assistwith planningand coordinatingexternalsupport to countriesscalingup RBM interventions. Exitstrate$y The Bank has acknowledgedthat this programwill involvea long-term engagement by the Bank. It has transitionedfromWindow 2 to Window 1. 115 Annex 10 Stop Tuberculosis Partnership BankContact: Diana E.WeilI202-473-6782 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNHE RecipientAgency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http://www.stoptb.org rota1Budget: 19.70 DGF FundingRequest: 0.70 DGF Percentage: 4% Objsctlvasand Expected Outcomes The Stop TuberculosisPartnership(Stop TB) aimsto reversethe TB epidemicand meetthe 2005 interimtargetsandthe 2015 Willennium DevelopmentGoals (MDGs)for communicable disease control. Itseeks to improvecoordinatedactionagainst the Norseningglobalepidemic, which resultedin overtwo milliondeaths and nine millionnewcases in 2002. Stop TB aims to controlTB wid reduce the impoverishingeffects of disease, through rapidand coordinatedadoption,adaptation,and scalingup of effective mtrol strategiesand newtechnologies. The partnership's structure has grown to includenearly300 partners, includinghigh-burden :ountries, civilsociety, industry, foundations, technicalagencies, academia, and bilateraland multilateralorganizations. For FY05,the partnershiprequestssupport to continue progress in coordinatingthe implementationof nationalTB controlplans in the highest burdencountries. This assistancewill support efficientdruggrant-makingand procurementservices, incountry monitoring, scaling up of newstrategiesfor community-based care, and public-publiccollaboration.Stop TB will work with partnersto address health system weaknesses that limit access to and use of services.Itwill mobilizeresources for TBlHlV interventions,for prevention snd treatmentof drug-resistantdisease, and for expanded research and development for newdrugs, diagnostics, and vaccines.The partnershipalsoseeks increasedfundingfor managementof the Global Drug Facilityandfor the development of strategies to better serve the poor. MalnComponsnts Global TB Drug Facility (GDF): (a) provide quality-assured drugsfor three millionfirst-linepatienttreatments; (b) ensure technicalassistanceand monitoringin all GDF-supportedcountriesand inthose receivingtreatments for drug-resistantcases via the Green LightCommittee; (c) promotestandardizationin the useof fixed-dose combinationdrugs and patientkits;(d) increasethe efficiencyand diversityof the supply system; and (e) facilitate direct procurement, includingthe use of multilateral financing. Partnership governance, coordination, and innovation: (a) supportan acceleratedplanfor DOTSexpansion in high- burdencountries;(b) mobilizeresources for 2002-2005workplangaps at the nationallevelin 22 high-burden countriesand for core partnershipfunctions; (c) launchand scale up newTBlHlV implementationpoliciesin sub-SaharanAfrica, EastAsia, and Europe;(d) replicateand scale up drug-resistant TB treatmentprogramsand consolidatedanalysis of resultsand strategy revisions; (e) promotecross-working groupcoordinationamong R&Dteams and DOTSexpansion teams; (f) definestrategies for human resources strengthening,public-private modelscale up, engagement of non-primary care institutions,and lab strengthening; (9) global and regionalfora and selected nationalpartnershipfora; (h) establishnewnetworksto support revisednationalTB strategicplansthat includeexplicitapproaches to reachingthe poorest;and (i) reviseoperational procedures and reporting. Advocacy, social mobilization, and communications: (a)organizea global Stop TB PartnersForum and associated advocacy for World TB Day, includingfocus on TB/HIV and R&Dchallengesand progress; (b) launchajoint TBlHlV advocacy strategy with UNAIDSand other partners;(c) develop, with nationalcounterpartsand partners,severaladvocacy plansfor high-burden countries;(d) developcomprehensive community social mobilizationstrategiesand pilotsin severalcountries; and (e) continue to develop communicationtools and linkages with other partnershipsto support MDG advocacy and social mobilizationefforts. 116 Annex 10 Performancelndlcators 0 Global TB Drug Facility: Documentationthat at least25% of estimatedTB patientsglobally are beingtreatedwith drugs of knownquality. Provisionof at leastthree million first-line patienttreatments underDOTS. At least 10-15 countriestaking advantageofthe GDF direct procurementmechanism:GDFwill use at leasttwo suppliersper product. 0 Partnership coordination: Documentedprogressin reachingMDG interimyear 2005 targets, DOTS service coverage,case detection coverage, and treatment successrates.Over 180countriesto haveadopted DOTS by end of FY2005. At least sevento ten of the highestburdencountriesto havesignificantlyincreasedrateof DOTS expansionand impact,and have improvedhuman resources. At leastfive nationalTB controlstrategicplansrevised inthe top 22 high-burdencountries, includingspecificobjectivesfor reachingand serving poor populations. Newstrategiesinitiatedto increaseaccess and use. TBlHlV linkedinterventionsimplementedin at least three to five high-burdencountries. Results available on scaled-up drug- resistantTB treatment programsinat leastfive affectedcountries. Public-privatepartnershipsfor R&D in drugs,vaccines, and diagnosticssharing results. 0 Advocacy: The Global Partners'Forum2004, linkedto World TB Day 2004, generating increasedmedia coverage in major outlets. National advocacy strategies developedin at least3 countries;a new campaignfor TB/HIV launchedwith UNAIDSto supportjoint efforts inthe highestburdensettings. Ppaglrasurand Achievements The Stop TB Partnershipand itssystemof governanceare nowwell-establishedand demonstratingsignificant,and measurable outputsand impact. Results are brieflyprovidedfor each of the three main areasof operationbelow: GDF: a) GDF has arranged 7 rounds ofapplicationsfrom countriesand NGOswith approved support of 56 applicationsto serve 2.3 millionpatients under DOTS programsworldwide;b) second-roundof competitiveselectionof the GDF procurementagent and quality controlagent;c) 40 countries receivedTB drugs;d) Novartissignedan MOU to provide500,000drug kits; e) GDF initiateddirect procurementservices;9 GDF developeda catalogueof approvedand prequalifiedproductsand manufacturers;9 MOU developed with the Global Fundto FightHIV/AIDS,TB and Malaria;and g) consolidationof GDF's managementand the Green LightCommittee. Strategy, coordination and innovation:a) the DOTS ExpansionWorking Group held major meetings at regionaland globallevel;b) a committee produceda strategy framework for overcomingobstaclesto DOTS expansion;c) via Stop TB working groups,strategies were developedand tested for TBlHlV linked services, public-privatemix models,community-basedcare and drug-resistanttreatment; d) govemments,technicaland financial partnersoutlinedan accelerated planfor DOTS expansion in 9 countries;e) guidelinesfor workplaceTB controlwere publishedand endorsed& disseminatedby the World EconomicForum. Advocacy: social mobilization& communications,planned& coordinatedWorld T8 Day 2003 with documentedeventsinmore than 50 countries& a major TB controlcampaign accompaniedthe CricketWorld Cup in SouthAfrica and on TBlHlV for World AIDS Day; Recruitedworld musicstar A.R. Rahman as a globalambassador.Via a Task Force,developeda strategicframework for communicationsfor expansionat national/sub-national level. Partners Bilateraldonors,WHO, US-CDC, Soros FoundationlOSI, American LungAssoc., Research Institutefor TB, Partnersin Health, IUATLD Qovemsanceand Management The partnershipis overseen by a Coordinating Board representinghigh-TB burdengovernments,regional representatives, bilateral institutions,foundations, multilateralinstitutions(WB andWHO are permanent members), NGOs and technicalagencies,& chairpersons ofthe Stop TB working groups. The Coordinating Board meetstwiceyearly. Stop TB also has six substantiveworking groups, which meet at leastonce per month,& a working committee offhe CoordinatingBoard. A large partnenr'forum is held every two years. The Secretariat is led by a Executive Secretary, supported by financing& management officers;a GDF management team; coordination& working group staff; social mobilization,communications,& advocacy specialists; & supportstaff. The GDF includesan applicationtechnical reviewcommittee,a procurementagent, & qualitycontrolagents. ExitStrategy It is proposedthat DGF financingcontinueat a levelthat enhancesthe Bank's activeengagement with key agencies and demonstrates Bank commitmentto overcomingobstaclesto meetingthe MDGs. The Bank hasacknowledgedthat this programwill involve long-term engagement by the Bank. It hastransitionedfromWindow 2 to Window 1. 117 Annex 10 Partnershipfor Child Development Bank Contact: DonaldA. P. BundyI202-473-3636 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNED RecipientAgency: Partnership for Child Development, ImperialCollege,Universityof London Web Address: http:// wwwshild-development.org Total Budget: 13.45 DGF FundingRequest: 1.50 DGF Percentage: 12% - Objectlvesand adOutcomes Educationfor All (EFA) is centralto the Bank's poverty reductionstrategy. Ill-healthand malnutritionconstraineducation and learning and havethe greatestimpacton poor anddisadvantagedchildren, particularlygirls. Theseproblemsare exacerbated, particularlyin Africa, and most particularlyin poor ruraland urbancommunities, by the HlVlAlDSpandemicthat is destroyingeducation systems. These problemsare constrainingcountriesfrom achievingtheir EFA goals and their MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs). The mainobjective of the Partnershipfor Child Development (PCD) is to support countries,particularlythose includedinthe FastTrack Initiative(FTI), in attainingtheir EFA goals. To do this, PCDseeks to improvethe implementationof (i) schoolhealth& nutrition programs,& (ii) HIV/AIDS mitigation& preventionprograms. PCD's globalmission statement is "to improvethe education, health, nutrition, & psychosocialstatusof the.school-aged child in low income countries, with a particularemphasis on girls." PCD is the lead technical organization in school health& nutrition. Itprovides technical support to the UNAIDS Inter-Agency Task Team for AIDS & 'Education(IATT), & has developeda uniquelyextensivenetworkof technicalpartners. The evidence-based platform, built & strengthenedby PCD's activities,has catalyzedthe development of large-scale operationalactivitiesfunded by other sources. This has ledto the reallocationof PCD resources& expertiseto newcountries. PCD providestechnicalsupport to acceleratethe education sector's responseto HIV/AIDSin sub-Saharan Africa, assisting boththe UNFRESH(Focusing Resources on Effective SchoolHealth) partnership& the UN IATTinitiative. The beneficiariesare low-incomecountriesin Africa, Europe, CentralAsia, SouthAsia, & South- EastAsia, especially poor & disadvantagedchildren,localpolicy makers,teacher training institutions,the private sector, teachers, schools, civil society, & parents. PCD aimsto support countriesin attainingtheir EFAlFTlgoals by pursuingtwo objectives: Objective 1 Supportingthe development, implementation, and monitoring of cost-effective programs in school - health and nutrition, with particularemphasis on the prevention and impactmitigation of HIWAIDS. PCDwill: (a) promotegreaterunderstandingof constraintson education systems; (b) enhance the effectivenessof girls' education & of life skills interventionsto reduce HIV prevalence& risk behaviors; (c) focus on orphans & vulnerable children (OVC) to increase their opportunities for attendingschool; & (d) support the development of innovative,cross-sectoralprogramsto enhance leamingthrough better- targeted health& nutritioninterventions. Two sub-programs will support this activity: (i) the OECD Youth at Risk Initiative,which is assistingECA countries in ensuring educationalprovisionsfor studentswith disabilities; & (ii) the InternationalChristelijkSturnfonds(ICs), which is supporting an evaluationof HIV/AIDS preventionin school childrenin Kenya. 0 Objective 2 -Ensuring the access of orphans and vulnerable children to education. This is a new programaimed at catalyzing an internationalpartnershipto leveragefunds to ensure that OVC access to educationin Africa. The Partnershipfor OVC will identify, describe, & disseminateexamples of good practicesin ensuringOVC access to & retention by education systems. DGF support will help catalyzethe first phaseof activities,buildingthe foundationfor a concerted response by a broad groupof development partners. A three-yearprogramwill be put in motionto buildpartnerships, create 8 disseminate knowledgeon the subject, & improvethe experiences of OVC in school-community life. Two sub-programswill support this activity:(i) UNICEF, which is working regionallyinAfrica to create a partnershipfor OVC; & (ii)the Biomedical Research& TrainingInstitute(BMRTI). 118 Annex 10 PerformanceIndlwtone Indicatorsfor Component I:(a) Capacity strengthened in nine sub-Saharan African countriesto develop more effective FRESH and HIV/AIDSprevention programs;(b) Technicalsupportprovidedto a partnership with UNESCO inAsia to develop more effective FRESHand HlVlAlDSprevention programs. Capacity strengthenedin 17Asian countries. (c) Knowledgebase created researchcarriedout to enable the development of more effectiveFRESHand HIV/AIDSpreventionprograms. (d) informationdisseminatedto facilitatethe development of more effectiveFRESHand HlVlAlDSpreventionprograms. Literaturetranslatedand distributed. a Indicatorsfor Component 2: (a) Global partnershipcreatedto providea knowledge networkto support OVC access to education. Communications networkcreatedto support effortsto operationalizeprograms. (b) Examplesof good practices that enableOVC access to quality education identified,described, and documented. Good practicesassessed infour African countries. (c) Strategies developed for ensuring OVC access to qualityeducation, Evidence-based recommendations made to guide implementationof conditionaland non-conditionalcashtransfers. In-depthcase studiesconductedand scientifically rigorousdata madeavailableon the viabilityand impactof differentmethods of making grants to support OVC education in Zimbabwe. PCD had providedtechnicalsupportfor school healthand nutrition(FRESH) and HlVlAlDSpreventionprograms in support of EFNFTI. PCD has providedqualitytechnicaladvice and support to the UN system FRESH partnership, and to FRESHschoolhealthand I nutritionprogramsin Africa andAsia. Programs in sub-Saharan Africa are nowtargeting over 50 millionchildrenin22 countries. In addition,PCD conductedthe followingactivities: (i) trainingand capacitybuilding,investigatingthe impactof ill-healthand malnutrition on leamingand school attendance, (ii) accelerating the education sector responseto HlVlAlDSinAfrica, in support of EFNFTI, (iii) enhancingthe qualityof schoolbasedHIVlAIDSintetventions,and (iv) access to educationfor OVC. Partners Partnershipfor Child Development(PCD), Wellcome TrusUBurroughsWellcome, OECD, UNICEF, UNESCO, UN Foundation,Billand Metinda Gates Foundation,MacArthur Research Network, NationalInstitutesof Health, HatvardDean's Fund, CreativeAssociates, MedicalResearchCouncilUK ,Centerfor Disease Control, Zimbabwe CDC, Abbot Project, Departmentfor InternationalDevelopment UK, DevelopmentCooperation Ireland, and USAID. Govemrncr,and Management The partnershipconsistsof a consortiumof countries, agencies, and civil societies. The Partnershipfor Child Developmentat St Mary's MedicalSchool, ImperialCollege, Universityof Londonwill coordinatework and managefinances. Management is entirely independentof the Bank. The PCD has an advisory board composed of intemationalexperts,which meetsannuallyto assess and monitorprogressand to set prioritiesand goals. A secretariat, housedinthe Universityof London, administers and manages PCDs activities. Secretariatstaffcoordinatewith teams of technicalexpertsthroughoutthe world. PCD has annual meetingson yearly objectivesand allocations. The allocationsfor the four PCD subprograms are earmarkedto fund-specificprogram activities. The PCD programspecificallyaims to develop countries' capacity to more effectivelyaccess Bankfinance (especially MAP & EducationProjects)and to encouragesupport from other development partners. Thus the programwill havea naturalendpointwhen the target clients havetransitionedfrom the development of policyand plansto the disbursement of finances for operations.This has alreadyhappenedto a largeextent in Easternand SouthernAfrica, andthe programis shiftingits emphasis to West Africa, Central Africa, andAsia. An independentevaluationof PCDwas completedin FY04and the evaluationshows good results. 119 Annex 10 Association for the Developmentof Education in Africa Bank Contact: BirgerJ. Fredriksen1202-4736033 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: AFTHD RecipientAgency: Associationfor the Developmentof EducationinAfrica Web Address: http:/lwww.adeanet.org FinancialAmangemcantar for FYOO (Amount In US$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 6.40 DGF FundingRequest: 0.35 DGFPercentage: 5% The Associationfor the Developmentof EducationinAfrica (ADEA) was establishedin 1988with supportfrom the Africa Regionof the Bank. ADEA was devisedas an importantelement in a comprehensive strategy to help breakthe stagnationaffectingeducation in Sub-SaharanAfrica (SSA) inthe 1980s. Startingas a networkfor cooperation among agencies, membership in ADEA has since been extendedto includeSSA Ministersof Education. ADEA, by far the most important education networkin Africa, playsa crucialrole in promotingthe types of knowledge exchange and consensus buildingthat are requiredto promote educationreformsandto build nationalcapacityto implementthe reforms. ADEA providesa unique forum where African policymakersand donor representatives can: (i)exchange informationon the challenges African countriesface in accelerating the development of their education systems; (ii) reflecton the lessonslearned and share them with other countries,and (iii) discuss strategiesand programswhich buildon good practiceswithin and outsideAfrica and which can be supportedtechnicallyand financially by externalpartners. Inthis way, ADEA helps facilitatethe development of Bank-supported ,technicallysound and, financially sustainable educationprograms which havethe nationalownershipneeded for implementation. Strengtheningthe ADEA partnershipis a key ingredientin the Africa Region`s strategy for acceleratingthe development of education in SSA. ADEA is alsotaking a leadingrole in advocacy and knowledge-sharing in two importantareascrucialto SSA's abilityto reach the EFA goals: (i)the relationshipbetween educationand HIV/AIDS; and (ii) improvingthe qualityof basiceducation. MBln Components ADEA's role as a network: ADEA's mainachievement has beenits establishment as the most importanteducation network for Africancountries, African education policy makers, and development partners. This is done through: (i)Meetingsof the ADEA SteeringCommittee(SC): Virtually all donors operatingin SSA are represented, alongwith ten African Ministers of Education. (ii) Annualfwo-day workshops for SCmembersfocusing on key issuesfacing educationin Africa. (iii) Direct supportto countries, includingknowledgesharingthroughAPEA's newsletter and other publications,identifyingtechnical expertiseon specificeducation issues. (iv) Completionofan lndependentEvaluationReporton ADEA, in early 2004. Follow-up to ADEA's biennial conferences: Every other year,ADEA organizes a conference. Most SSA Ministersof Education81donor agencies participate,along with education professionals from insideand outsideAfrica. ADEA Working Groups reinforcement of Bank support for education sector programs: ADEA's 11Working Groups (WGs) contributedirectly to Bank-sponsored training& knowledge-sharingactivitieson issuescriticalto the success of sector programs. TheWGs helpin training programdesign 81delivery, provide legitimacy for the trainingwith donors8 client countries, & bringin additionalexpertise& financing from other donors. Activitiesplannedfor 2004 include: (1) aworkshop on textbooksfor six Anglophone countries;(2) a major programon teacher training,development, 81management, as well as a conferenceon the use of "contractualteachers;" (3) ajoint conferenceon girls' education; & (4) continuedcooperation in organizingtraining sessions for Africanjoumalists, held in conjunctionwith Bank-sponsored conferences. ADEA as "neutral meeting ground" for politically sensitive activities: This includestwo sets of activities. (1) Training leadersofteachers unions& pafent associations. Trainingfor the unions, done in cooperation with EducationInternational (El), the internationalteachers union, aims to increaseunionleaders' awareness of education issuessuch as the importance of achievingthe EFAtargets 81teachers'responsibilityin ensuring good quality, inclusiveeducation. Trainingfor parents focuseson the importanceof EFA & on educating girls. (2) Briefingsessions fornew/yappointededucationministers, 120 Annex 10 Performance lndlcatora 0 ADEA's networkfunction: Two SC meetings, andtwo meetings of the Bureau of AfricanMinistersof Education;one workshop for SC members; continuedpublication of the ADEA newsletter;publicationof the "Synthesis Report"from the December 2003 BiennialConference; completionof the independent evaluationof ADEA. 0 Follow-up to ADEA's biennial conferences: Agreement on an activeprogramfor follow-upto the ADEA conference; organizationof one intemationalseminar on education quality. 0 ADEA's role inreinforcing Bank-supported education sector programs: SupportfromADEA in organizing workshops andtrainingevents: (i)a workshop on textbooks; (ii) at leasttwo workshopson teachertraining, development, and management; (iii) ajoint conferenceon girls education: at leastthree trainingworkshops for African journalists. 0 ADEA as "neutral meeting ground" for politically sensitive activities: Supportfrom ADEA in: (i) completing a study on contractualteachers inAfrica; (ii)organizing a sub-regional conferenceonthe use of contractualteachers to reach EFA ,in cooperationwith El; and (iii) organizingat feast two briefingsessions for new Ministersof Education. ADEA conducted the followingactivities: (i)Organization of the December2003 Biennialconferencein Mauritius whichwas ADEA's most importantachievement this year; (ii)Three meetingsof the ADEA Stee helped stimulate discussions of education issuesamong the 20 donor agencies and the 10African education ,itteewhichoftheSteeringCommittee;(iii) A members two-day workshop for SteeringCommittee members;(iv)Activitiesorganizedby ADEA that reinforceBank-supported education sector programs at the country level. ContributionbyADEA Working Groups (WG)to kactivities: (a) contributionto the organization of workshop for Francophonecountriesto help designsustainabtesystemsfor development, procurement, distributionand useof textbooks; (b) cosponsoring a majorsub-regional conference on higher inAfrica; (c) organization of workshops to disseminate lessons learnedfrom AfricanRegionsector reviews; and (d) organizationof trainingworkshops for Africanjoumalists and communication officialsin conjunctionwith majorconferences. ADEA has also establishedan AfricanJoumalistawardfor African journalistswriting on educationissues. ADEA provideda "neutralmeeting ground"for activitiesthat can be politicallysensitive. This included: (i)Workingwith the InternationalTeacher Union & the African Associationof Parents to continue the work program on training of leadersof Africanteacherunions and parent associations. IAssociationfor the Developmentof EducationinAfrica (ADEA), Canada, DFID, France, IIEP, Netherlands,Norway, Sweden. Governance and Management f ADEA's Steering Committee (SC) constitutesthe formalgoverning body. The SC approves budgets,work programsfinancedthrough membershipfees, & WG work programs. The SC also reviews the implementationof the pastyear's work programs& budgets. The Bank is represented on the SC. The currentChairpersonof ADEA is from the Swiss DevelopmentCooperation. Activitiesare implemented & managedby the Secretariat 8 the Working Groups (WGs). The Secretariatis housedin IIEPAJNESCOin Paris,and is managed by an Executive Secretarysupportedby a smallstaff. Mostof the work is conductedthroughthe 11WGs, whose leaders are locatedin various agencies. Overallimplementationis monitoredby the ADEA SC, basedon a reportprepared by the Secretariat. ExltStrategy The financingprovidedthrough the DGFconsiderablyincreasesthe Bank's voice withinADEA & enables the Regionto reinforcethe synergy between itswork and that of ADEA andthe other partnersparticipatingin ADEA. An independentevaluationis expected beforeFY06fundingdecisionsare made by the DGF Council. 121 Annex 10 Nutritionand Gender 3ank Contact: Milla Mclachlan/ 202-473-5277 PesponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNHE qecipient Agency: InternationalCenterfor Researchon Women (ICRW) Neb Address: NA FlnanciatArra?.rgemantefor FYOS(Amount in US$ Million) rota1Budget: 3.00 DGF FundingRequest: 0.50 DGF Percentage: 17% The goal of the Nutritionand Gender (NG) Initiativeis to improvenutritionoutcomes indeveloping countries,especiallyby determining low to enhancewomen's rolesand status, decision-making capabilities,and controlover resources. Specific objectivesare: 1)to find 'easible, cost-effectiveapproaches to improve the nutritionalstatus of adolescentgirls, women, infants,and children;2) to develop a global network of institutionslearningfrom, sharing, and advocatingfor nutritionand gender activities;and 3) to enhance the technical xpacity of localand regionalorganizations in gender analysis, nutritionprogramdesign and evaluation, and advocacy. The Initiative's jirect beneficiariesare women and adolescent girls, particularlyin sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. NGobjectivesare consistentwith the Bank's coreobjectivesin sustainable povertyreduction and contributeto achievinga number of the MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs) which are unattainableif malnutritionpersists. Malnutritioninthese populationsimpedes wman and economic development both inthe presentand in the future. In additionto the core povertyreductionobjective, this Jnique cross-sectoralpartnershipwill fostercontributionsto other dimensions of the Bank's strategicframework. Itwill add to the knowledgebase for improvedcountry programs and strategies, buildhuman capacity for the knowledge economy, pushforward on the agenda to improvematernaland childhealth, and contributeto empowering poorwomen to participatein development. Main Components The NG Initiativecombines programmatic, research, and policycommunicationobjectives. Itwill approach a variety of existing programs,to strengthentheir efforts by adding a gender andlor nutritioninnovation. Research skillswill be appliedto monitor and evaluatewhether changes inthese programs leadto improvednutritionalstatus. Simultaneously, an advocacy planwill be designed and implementedto engagekey in-countrypolicy makers, government units,and NGOsin programinnovationsto promote improved nutritionalstatus. The NG Initiative focuses onWest Africa and South Asia because of these regions' great nutritionneed: rates of low birthweightand poor maternalhealthand nutritionalstatus are worse comparedto other regions. Process outputs anticipated by end of Year 3: 1) Secretariatstaffedand functioning; 2) two regionalhubs staffedand functioning;3) 10-25 granteescarryingout action-learningin each region; 4) GlobalKnowledge Network designedand launched; 5) resultswritten up and disseminated for at least 15 activities;6) resourcesfully mobilized to fund the initiativefor five years. Potential longer-term nutrition impact (assuming NG Initiativecontributes to expanded, scaled-up programs to address female malnutrition in multiple countries): 1) monitorablepositiveimpactof specificadd-on component interventions;2) documentedchange infoodlnutrition-relatedbehaviors. Potential longer-term gender impact: 1) sector-specificimpacts(e.g., primaryeducation enrollment,performancein adult literacyprogramsby gender); 2) non sector-specificgenderimpact(e.g., socialinclusionof women, householdresource allocationdecision-makingby women). Spillovers to borrowers and donors: heightenedawareness of genderand nutritionissues, examples of effective interventions;lessonson multi-sectoralapproaches to address malnutritionand other development challenges;increased capacity of publicsectorsand NGOsto address malnutritionissues. 122 Annex 10 Progressand Achievmtsntar An independentevaluation is plannedfor FY06. The IntegratedSocialDevelopment Center (ISODEC) has been identied as the huborganization, afteran extensive consultative processin the West Africa region. A nationalNGO based inAccra, it has the capacity, experienceand interestto managemultiple partnerships,and to implement programmatic and advocacy activities. At the start, ISODECeffortswill concentrateinthe northern part of the countrywhere malnutritionand hunger are greatest, and theywill also explore the variationin nutritionand gender relationships throughoutthe country. The NutritionUnitof the MOH in Ghana is a centralpartnerin the Initiative,and hasguided its direction from the initialstages. It has the capacityto implement scaled-up versions of successfulpilotprogramsevaluatedand recommended throughthe Nutrition& Gender Initiativeactivitiesin Ghana. Duringthe first few months of activities,ISODEChas establisheda nutritionpanelheaded by the headof the MOH NutritionUnit, and gender panelled by a local NGOnetwork. Both panelsare conducting reviews of pastand recent progressin their respectivefields, and developingproposals on howthe two fields can complement eachother's efforts. Also, plans are underway in threeareas of existing programmatic activity: first, ISODECis working with Bawku East Small Scale Farmers' Associationto add nutritionand gender objectivesinto its micro-finance programs: second, it is working withthe MOH Familyand ReproductiveHealthprograms,to strengthen its nutritionand gender objectives. Work in South Asia will start in March2004, with the identificationof a huborganizationin India. Partners Official bilateraldonors, World Food Program, UNICEF P Govemanceand Management The InternationalCenter for Research onWomen (ICRW) housesthe External Secretariat. ICRWs Board of Trustees provides fiduciaryoversight A Leadership Council, whichwill includerepresentationfrom the participatingregions, contributesto . management of technicalquality. The Secretariatmanages the flow of funds to regionalNetworkHubs in Sub-Saharan Africa and SouthAsia. It also managesthe Knowledge Networkthat linksthe elements of the program, and is responsiblefor all aspects of administration. The Network Hubsadministerthe smallgrants programto community-based Action LeamingCenters.' A Steering Committee of experts oversees the Secretariatand approvesthe NG Initiativework program. Criteriaand proceduresfor allocationof sub grantswill bejointly developed by the Secretariatand appropriateregionalhub, and approvedby the SteeringCommittee. Other localstakeholders will be involvedas representativesto the hub from executing agencies, community groups, localor regional academiclresearchinstitutions, and beneficiariesof development programs. SteeringCommitteemeetingsand an annual reportserve as the primaryreportingmechanismsto partners. Itisexpectedthatthe Initiative'ssuccesswillhaveelicitedstronginterestandsecurefinancingfromexternaldonors, eliminatingthe needfor DGFfunds after receiptof the FY05 DGF grant. 123 Annex 10 UNStanding Committeeon Nutrition Bank Contact: Milla McLachlanI202-473-5277 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNHE Recipient Agency: World HealthOrganization Web Address: http:llunsystem.orglscnl Total Budget: 0.75 DGFFundingRequest: 0.10 DGF Percentage: 13% The mandateof the UN StandingCommittee on Nutrition(SCN) is to: (i)raise awareness of nutritionproblems and mobilize commitment to solvethem at the global, regional, and nationallevels: (ii) refinethe direction,increasethe scale, and strengthenthe coherence and impactof actionsagainstmalnutritionworldwide; and (iii) promotecooperationamong UN agencies and partner organizations in supportof nationaleffortsto end malnutritionin this generation. With the broadadoption by the globalcommunity of the MillenniumDevelopmentGoals(MDGs), this mandate becomes allthe more important. Malnutritioncontinuesto exact a devastatingtoll on the well-being of individualsand on the growth and prosperityof communities and nations. The persistenceof malnutrition,in spite of significant gains in addressing individualmicronutrientdeficiencies,demands renewed focus. No single UN agency or programhas the mandateto leadactionagainstmalnutrition. A wide rangeof agencies are involved, yet in none of the agenciesis nutritiona corporatepriority. If adequately resources,the SCN can provide the necessary 'voice' for nutrition,playinga conveningand leadershiprole. The SCN is a maturepartnership,operatingsince 1977, which bringstogether 19 UNagencies, two intergovernmentalorganizations, approximately 14 bilateraldevelopment partners, and a growing numberof NGOs. The SCN has evolvedthroughseveralphases. It now hasthree mainareas of action: (i) raisingawareness of nutritionissuesand mobilizingacceleratedactionagainstmalnutrition:(ii) reviewingthe UN systemresponseto malnutrition,monitoringresource allocation,and disseminatinginformationon trends and achievements; and (iii)facilitatinggreaterimpact on malnutritionby promoting harmonizedapproachesamong UNagencies, governmental and nongovemmentalpartners,and by disseminatinginformationabout effectivepolicies,strategies,and programs. Inthe contextof globalcommitmentto the MDGs,the SCN strategicplan is currentlybeing revisedto align its activitiesmore closely with globalprioritiesandto ensure a greaterfocus on deliveringconcreteproductsthat will help achieve the MDG goals. The SCN will focus its activitieson: (i) global advocacy for the inclusionof nutritionwhere itwill makethe biggestcontributionto the MDGs; (ii) strengtheningthe use of and reportingon nutrition-related MDG indicators; and (iii) compilingand disseminatinginformationon policy and programmatic innovationsto support the integrationof nutritioninto MDG action plans at countrylevel. Working groups are the drivingforce of the SCN. The workinggroupsare currentlybeingreorganizedto focus specifically achievingnutrition-relatedMDGs. Specificoutcomes for each working groupwill be finalizedduringthe 2004 annual meeting. The SCN convenes a yearly State of the Art Symposium to highlightan emergingissuein the field of nutrition. In2004,the topic is "Nutritionandthe MDGs." The expected outcomeof the 2004 Symposium is commitment by key SCN partnersto a clear actionplanfor supportingcountry-leveleffortsto accelerateprogresstowardachievingthe nutrition-relatedMDGs. Publications includeSCN News, nutritionpolicypapers (includingSymposium reports),quarterty reportson the nutritional status of refugeesand displacedpersons,and occasionalreportson the world nutritionsituation. The expectedoutcomeis that SCN publicationswill be recognizedand readby key decisionmakersin countriesidentifiedas MDG focus countries. 124 Annex 10 Performance Indieatom Numberof working groupwork plansthat reflectattentionto key MDG issues. Numberof SCN partners providingspecificnutrition-relatedsupport for country-leveleffortsto achieveMDGgoals. Proportionof decision makers recognizing SCN publications. Proportionof decisionmakers reportinghaving readkey SCN publications An independentevaluationwill take placein FY06. The SCN prepared the 5th Report on the World NutritionSituation, which focuses on integratingnutrition intodevelopment processes such as PRSPs and Sector Reform Strategies,and on its contributionto achieving the MDGs. The SteeringCommittee initiateda processto reviewthe SCN Strategic Plan, to streamline the SCN's activitiesand measureits impact.An actionplanto strengthen the governance structureandfocus the SCN's activitieson supporting the achievementof the MPGs,throughthe use of nutritionindicators,globaladvocacy, and country case studieson effective integrationof nutritionintoMDGinitiatives,was presentedat the AnnualMeetingin March. Partners United Nations,officialbilateraldonors, NGOs, and inter-governmentalagencies Governanceand Managment The SCN's governancestructure is currently underreview. It is proposed that an Advisory Board be createdto provide oversight. Currently,a Chairperson is elected by participatingorganizations. A Steering Committee, with representationfor UN agencies, inter-govemmentalagencies, bilateralpartners,and NGOs, guides the implementationof the strategicplan,monitorsfollow-up of recommendations made by the working groups and their task forces, identifiesstrategicvenues for advocacy for nutrition,and assists in identifyingnewissuesto be addressed by the SCN. A Secretariat, housedatthe WHO in Geneva, facilitatesimplementation of the strategicplan, fostersdialogueamong the partners to initiateand sustainplannedactivities, implements a work program and a biennialbudget,raisesfunds, and managesa peer review processto ensure the quality of technicalpublications. Allocations are made by the Secretariataccording; contractsare issuedby the WHO. The Secretariatsubmits a reportevery otheryear on its activitiesand staffing, problems encountered, and measurestaken to overcomeproblems. It reportsto the Steering Committee. Duringannualsessions, SCNworking groups agreeon work plans, which are then reviewedby SteeringCommittee. Reportson the activitiesare made at the nextannual session. This is aWindow2 programwhich is expected to exit after receipt of FY06fund. 125 Annex 10 Health Equity Program Bank Contact: Elizabeth Laura LuleI202-473-3787 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD HealthNutritioni3 Population - RecipientAgency: World Health Organization Web Address: NA t 1FinanclalArrangement8 for FYO6 (Amount inUSti Mililonf Total Budget: 14.12 DGF FundingRequest: 1.50 DGF Percentage: 11% Objectives and Expected Outcome8 *I* f 41( - The HealthEquityProgram(HEP) would support experimentalfield operationalresearchto identifyways to increase programcoverage among the poor,in order to attain equal coverage among all groups. The expectedimmediate outcomeof HEPwould be a set of documented cases on the effectivenessof modifiedapproachesto HNP servicedelivery in reachingthe poor. The evidence from successful experimentswould be presentedto leadersof the participating global initiatives(listedbelow) as centralelements in an effortto enable them to more effectivelyreachdisadvantaged groups. The initiativeleaderswould be encouragedto continuethe work, initiallysupported throughthe HEP,with their own resources. This would achievethe HEP`s desiredlonger-term outcome of stimulatingself-sustaining poverty components of the initiatives'programs. The evidenceof the experimentswouldalso be widely disseminated throughprofessionalpublications,workshops, and other channels to policy makers responsiblefor overall healthsystems in developing countries, recognizingthat the lessons learnedthrough the HEP- supportedwork would be highlyrelevantto the policymakers'work, as well as to the global initiatives'activities. The overallexpected outcome of the programis a pro-poor shift in the distributionof benefitsprovidedby HNP serviceprograms. HNP serviceprograms currently tendto achievehighercoverage among the better-offthan among disadvantagedgroups. The HEP would providematchinggrants to countryHNP service programsthat receivesupport from one or moreof the partner agencies. The grants wouldenablethe recipientprogramsto: (i)experiment with modifiedstrategiesfor servicedelivery, designedto increasecoverage among disadvantagedgroups; and (ii) assessthe effectivenessof the modifiedstrategiesin reachingthe poor more effectively. Grant recipientswould be selectedthrougha professionalpeer review of applications. Applicationswould be receivedin responseto an globalannouncementdistributedthroughthe partneragencies and others. The grantswould beadministeredby a partnershipof poverty specialistsin six globalhealth initiatives,organized bythe RockefellerFoundation,the Bank, and the World HealthOrganization (WHO), The partnershipsecretariat,which wouldfully funded by sourcesotherthan the Bank, would also provide technicalsupport to grant recipientsin orderto ensurethat valid effectivenessassessmentsare produced. (i) Numberof grants supporting field experimentswith innovative,plausiblemodificationsin HNP service delivery strategiesdesigned to increasecoverage amongthe poor. (ii) Percentageof grants that producevalid, valuableassessments of the experimentalstrategies'effectivenessin achievingtheir pro- poorcoverage objectives. (iii) Volume of partner funds attractedto matchthe grantsand support technicalassistanceand relatedactivitiesbythe secretariat. (iv) Pro-poor changes in the strategiesof participatingglobalhealth initiativesthat, inthe view of informedindependent reviewers,can reasonablybe attributed -at leastin part-to the evidencegenerated throughthe HEP; the numberof participatinginitiativesthat decide to provide increasedsupport from their own resources for pro-poor strategydevelopment,to continue HEP-initiated work. 126 Annex 10 P q m r and Aehlevemctnb ~~~ ~ As this is a new program, there is no progressto report.An independentevaluation would be carriedout afterthreeyears, Partners Child SurvivalPartnership,GlobalAlliancefor Vaccines and Immunization, InternationalPartnershipfor ChildSurvivaland Newborn Health, lntemationalTrachoma Initiative,RollBack Malaria Partnership,StopTB Partnership,officialbilateraldonors, Gates Foundation, RockefellerFoundation,internationaland regionalOrganizations Gavemaneeand Management Overallguidanceand administrationof the HEPwould be handledby an inter-agency partnership. The structureof the partnership, currentlyunder development, is likelyto feature a guiding body of representativesfrom the participatingglobalhealthinitiativesand others(such as the Bank,WHO, and major donors). The guidingbodywould serveas the governingladvisoryboard. Itwould design the callfor proposalsand ensure the call's widespread distribution. Inorderto avoid any possibleconflictof interest, decisions concerningorganizationsto receivegrant support would be made by an independentgroup of professionalsappointed by the guiding body. Administrativeservicesand technicalsupport would be providedby a smallsecretariat reporting to the guidingbody and attached for administrativepurposesto one of the participatingagencies (such asWHO). Currentplans call for the secretariatto be led by a half- time senior professional,and staffedby two to three mid-level and/orjunior professionals. The servicesof these staff memberswould be supplementedby seniortechnicalconsultantsto assistHEP grantees. DGFfunds providedfor the HEPwould be administeredby WHO, througha specialseparateaccount usedonly for HEPgrants. -.*_I.. . Exit Strategy The HEP would supporta three year program of grants thatwould come to a close at the end of FY07 - 127 Annex 10 Capacity Buildingfor EducationalPlanningand Management Bank Contact: Shobhana SosaleI 202-473-6490 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HDNED RecipientAgency: InternationalInstitutefor EducationalPlanning(IIEP) Web Address: http://m.unesco.org/iiep FlnanclalArranpemen@for FYOS(Amount In USt MllIton) Total Budget: 16.64 DGF Funding Request: 1.oo DGF Percentage: 12% Objectivesand Expected Outcomes The Capacity Buildingfor EducationalPlanningand Management Programaims to: (i)closethe gaps in policymakers' capacitiesto plan, implement,and monitor educationalreforms; and (n) help policymakersbetter respondto changingaid modalities,including sector-wide approaches and the demandto link education more tightlywith strategies to reduce poverty. The InternationalInstitutefor EducationalPlanning(IIEP) serves as the umbrellaorganizationfor the Program, sub-granting funds and liaisingwiththe Inter-Agency Network for Educationin Emergencies (INEE) and the Centerfor Economic Researchand Graduate Education(CERGE-El). The CERGE-Eltrains economists to cany out analyses of resourceallocation. Itsobjectivesare to: (a) hire senior economists to serve as anchors for buildingCERGE-El's faculty; and (b) train students from areaswhere the needfor well-trained economists is most critical. The primarybeneficiariesof the IlEPprogramswill be nationaland intemationalpolicymakers, educationalplanners, and administrators,especiallythose in the Bank's client countries. The beneficiariesof the CERGE-El programwill be students from the Balkans,Caucuses, CentralAsian republics, and Russia, as well as policy makers inthe ECA region. Component I Institution building: (a) TheAsian Networkof Trainingand ResearchInstitutionsin EducationalPlanning - (ANTRIEP),to strengthenANTRIEP institutions'abilityto buildcapacity in skills development in educationalplanningand management, (b) TheEducationResearchNetwork for Westand CentralAfrica, to strengthenits role as a focal pointfor educationand healthresearchin the region.(c) The SouthemAfrica Consortiumfor MonitoringEducational Qualify,to enhance its reputationfor research and trainingexcellence.(d) TheEconomiclnstitufe for Social and Economic Development (an Argentine NGOwhich signed a partnershipagreement with IlEPin FY04) to establisha network of LatinAmerican policy makers, planners, researchers, and practitioners. (e) Strengtheningthe informalnetwork of traininginstitutionsin FrancophoneWestAfrica,to holda secondcourse to strengthencapacityto monitorEFA implementation.(9 CERGE-E/:(i)to continuehiringpart-timesenior professorsto mentor studentsandjuniorfaculty; (ii)to continueconvertingmaturinglocal faculty intotenured staff; (iii)to deepen and broaden a multistep programto train under-preparedeconomicsPh.D. students from the Balkans,Caucuses and CentralAsian republics. Component 2 -StrengtheningIIEP'sAdvanced Training Program (ATP) IlEPwill strengtheninstructionalmaterials for - ATP. Expectedoutcome: Highquality educationalplanningand managementtrainingat llEP and partnerinstitutions. e Component 3 -Continue buildingon activities carriedout in FY03and FY04:with priorityon (a) ethics and corruptionin education; and (b) a Virtual University. Expectedoutcome: Criticalpolicyissuesin educationalplanningandthe improvement of educationalgovernancein developingcountriesaddressed. Component 4 -Activities on topics of immediate importance for EFAefforts incountries: (a) improvingschool management in the context of decentralization;(b) district-levelplanningin countriesintransition; (c) teacher policiesand their impacton effectiveness and retention; (d) secondaryeducation; (e)the effects of HIVIAIDSon education;(9 education in crisis situations; and (9) programs relatedto povertyalleviation. Expectedoutcome: Expandedknowledgebase on specific strategiesfor EFA. 128 Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators Component 1: (a) ANTRIEP: one seminar, one annual meeting; (b) ERNWACA: researchand web posting; (c) SACMEQ: a move towards self-fundedoperations; (d) REDlllEPand ETIS:communications tools, regionalseminar, databases, electronic discussionforum; (e) secondtrainingcourse on EMIS; (9 CERGE-El: number of dissertationcommitteesServed on by visiting faculty, advisory relationshipsbetweenvisitingand localfaculty, increasedadmissions of and retention rates for studentsfrom targetcountries. Component 2: (a) enhancedtrainingmaterials.(b) development of overallsupport: glossary of education planningterms developed; instructionalmaterialsdeveloped, and sofhvaretoolsevaluated. Component 3: (a) ethics and corruptionin education: two studies commissioned; experimentalcourse organized; study tour organized. (b) Virtual University: high-levelinvitationalroundtableorganizedand reporton deliberations published; internet forumfor donoragenciesand development banksorganized and summary document preparedand addedto website; analytic framework on the use of ICTin highereducation initiated;website enhanced. Component 4: (a) decentmlization and schoolmanagement: three nationaldiagnoses, one workshop, three monographs, and a brief comparativereport; (b) three moduleson planning in transitioneconomies; (c) monographon teacher policies;(d) seminar on secondary education; (e) modelof the impact of HlVlAlDSon education institutions;(9 education in crisis situations: three studies, support for countriesin crisis, MSEE publishedand piloted,networking, teacher training,youth resourceguides, advocacy strategy, increasedresource commitments: (9) basiceducation course for education planners and NGOlagencyrepresentatives. - Pmgtesur andAchievsmenta, As of December2003, followingwere the specificoutputs achieved: strengtheninginstitutionalcooperation; successful completion of the ATP master'sprogramby preparingkey training materials; strengthening the IlEPObservatory-regular update of ETICOprogram; edited40 chapters of a guidebook for Ministryof Educationofficialsand agencies on Planning and Managing Educationin Emergenciesand Reconstruction; publishedfirst of seven case studies dealing with education inemergencies and reconstruction entitled"SurvivingSchool: Educationfor RefugeeChildrenfrom Rwanda 1994-W etc. UNICEF, Citigroup,Siemens, Lehman Brothers, J.P. MorganlChase,Whitehead Foundation, Otto Marx Foundation, official bilateraldonors, AfDB, EU, foundations (Ford, Camegie, McArthur,Rockefeller,Fundacion Chile, Kellogg), CARE, UNHCR, Save the Children. Governance and Management - The IlEP is partof UNESCO. Its GoverningBoardselects,manages, and monitors IIEPsactivities. IlEPis authorized to receivefundingfrom extemalagencies;its statements of accounts are separatelyaudited. IlEP publishes annual progress reports and auditedstatementsof account. An independent evaluationis conductedonce every threeyears. CERGE-El activitiesare managedand monitoredby a Director, who reportsto an ExecutiveSupervisory Committee (ESC). CERGE-El has staffin a facility in Prague. Academic activitiesare monitoredby the CharlesUniversity, the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, and the ESC. Annualreportsand auditedfinancialstatements are submitted. I FY05 is the lastyear of DGFfundingfor this program. I 129 Annex 10 Programfor EducationStatistics (PES): Improvingthe Quality of Internationally ComparableEducationStatistics Bank Contact: LianqinWang 1202-473-3685 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD Education - RecipientAgency: UNESCO Institutefor Statistics Web Address: http:/l www.uis.unesco.orq TotalBudget: 27.61 DGF Funding Request: 1.20 DGF Percentage: 4% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes The purposeof the Programfor EducationStatistics (PES) isto improvethe qua of education statisticsand ensurethat reliable, comprehensive, and timely education statisticsare available. The FY05requestfor additionalsupport for PES, reflectsthe urgent needfor increasedinvestmentinthe work of the UNESCO Institutefor Statistics(UIS), the agency that managesPES. Two factors drive this request:(i)the urgentneedfor timely, highquality data to monitorprogresstowards time-bound internationaleducation targets (e.g., the MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs)); and (ii)the needto informplanning and policyin target countries. The FY05 DGFgrantwill helpthe UISand its partnersto support projectsthat contributeto: (1) improvingthe quality of nationaland international education statisticsand indicators;(2)developing appropriatemethodologiesand standards in educationstatistics; (3) building statisticalcapacity in memberstates to collectand useeducationstatistics;and (4) strengthening statisticalanalysisand interpretation, to builda culture of statisticsusefor nationaland internationalpolicyformulation. The expected outcomes includea marked improvement in countryresponseratesto the UIS annual data collection, in data coverage, and otheraspectsof data quality such as accuracy and timeliness(whichis criticalfor monitoringthe progressof MDGs); and greater use of data at the nationaland internationallevels. MainComponents Development of new indicators and methodologies: This component will buildon the success of theWorld Education Indicators(WEI) Programby ensuring that newcountriescan be includedin and benefitfrom the program. Key activitieswill include: (1) Extendingthe WE/approach beyond the cutrent 19participating countries. (2) Addressing some of the common problems of compilingeducation statistics in federal and large countries.This component isexpectedto resultin: (i) improved data quality; (ii) more relevantdata (such as out-of-school childrennumbers); and (iii)detailedcomparativestudiesof disparitiesinlargercountries. Fundamental review of UISannual education survey: This component will assess and make improvementsto the UIS annualeducationsurvey (the primarydatacollectiontool), and will carry out a fundamental, systemicreviewof the data soughtfromcountries,the methodology for its collection,and the timing of the various aspectsof collection.This component is expectedto resultin a much improveddatacollectiontool that wiff significantlyenhance dataquality. Statisticalcapacity building (SCB)in individual countries: This componentwill assist individualcountries in planning, implementing, and maintainingcapacities, methodologies,and systemsfor producing and usingeducationstatistics. In FY05, projectswill concentrate on: (i)the productionand use of data sub-nationallyfor decentralizedmanagementof education; (ii) data to meet educationplanning cycle needs; 81(iii)cross-nationallycomparable data to meet internationalmonitoringgoals. Analyzing and interpreting education indicators: This componentwill help nationalstatisticians,researchers,and policymakersto makeinformed decisionsaboutparticipatingin nationaland intemationalstudiesand to ensurethat their participationresultsin a greater impacton educationpolicy. Itwill also identifyprojectsto expandinternationalstatistical outputsrelatedto priorityinformationneeds. Activitieswill include:(i)lmprovingthe use and interpretation of data on leaming outcomes. (ii) Enhancingthe intemational database of strategic education indicators. (iii)UIS SummerSchool. UlS will establish,in partnership,a summer school to deliver training on the analysisand interpretationof educationdata. 130 Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators This projectis expectedto result in a marked improvementin responserates,coverage,and other aspects of data quality,and in greateruse of data at the nationaland internationallevels. Specificindicatorsinclude: Category A: (i) improveddata quality;(ii) moredirectlyrelevantdata; (iii) betterquality data for larger countries;and (iv) detailed comparative studiesof disparities between provincesof larger countries. Category B: (i) consensus between agenciesand countries on data requirements;(ii) improveddata quality;(iii) realigned surveyto reflectcountries'capacityto providedata; (iv) successful implementationof capacity-buildingand trainingprograms. Category C: (i) development,testing, implementation,and useoftraining, methodology,and systems modules;(ii) systems modules integratedinto a comprehensiveStatistical InformationSystem;(iii) moretimely data to meet nationalneeds;(iv) moretimely, cross-nationallycomparable data to meet internationalmonitoringgoals;(v) qualityassuranceto ensure data reliability. Category D: (i) increasedawarenessofthe importanceof measuringleaming outcomes;(ii) improvedanalysisand communicationof assessmentresults;(iii) development oftrainingmaterialson using educationdata to informpolicy; (iv) delivery of training programs;(v) improvedcoverage and comparabilityof educationdata; (vi) improved metadata;(vii) publications demonstratingthe use of cross-national datato informeducationissues;and (viii) delivery of curriculum for researchersfrom developingcountries. World EducationIndicators Project:Producedmajor internationalreport:Literacy Skills or Tomorrow'sWorldjointly with OECD. Organized data analysistraining and assisted nationalteam in preparingPlSA data reports. Knowledgeand Skillsof Youth in Middle Income Countries-ComparativeAnalysis of PEA PLUS results Using EducationIndicatorsfrom HouseholdSurveys:UISjointly held a 2- day seminar with the Quebec Inter-University Consortiumon SocialStatisticswhich focused on educationdemand as measured by householdsurveys. Analyzing and CommunicatingComparative Education Statistics:Produced several guides"TheGuide to Using Education Indicators From HouseholdSurveys" and "Comparisonof InternationalAssessment Projects". UNESCO Regional Officefor LatinAmerica and the Caribbean (OREALC) Initiative PanArab Projectfor Education DecisionSupport Systems(PAPED):2 workshopsorganizedin Beirutand Damascus. MOUs confirming government commitmentto the objectivesofthe projectsigned by Syria and Egypt.Visits in Mauritaniaand Sudan. 1UNESCO Institutefor Statistics(UIS), European Union, Canadian InternationalDevelopmentAgency (CIDA). Governanceand Management The work of UIS is overseen by a Governing Board, which includesmembersfrom developingcountries.The Board,which reviews work in progress,approves programsand budgets,meetsonce a year. A Policy and Planning Committee meets morefrequently. The UIS also reportsto UNESCO and its governing bodies.The UIS Director oversees the UIS program,reportingdirectlyto the DirectorGeneralof UNESCO. GPP activitiesare selected by the Director,in consultationwith the Senior Management Team, the Board,and memberstates. The programis managedand deliveredby the Senior Program Specialist and monitoredby the Director. IFY05 will be the lastyear of DGF funding for PES. 131 Annex 10 Roma EducationFund Bank Contact: NicholasR. Burnett 1202-473-4757;Dena Ringold1202-473-4681 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ECSHD RecipientAgency: Roma Education Fund(to be establishedas new legalentity) Web Address: http:l/www.worldbank.org1romaconference I Total Budget: 5.03 DGF FundingRequest: 1.oo DGF Percentage: 20% The overall goalof the proposedRoma Education Fundisto improveeducationcompletion, performance, and inclusionof Roma in eight Centraland EasternEuropeancountries, especially at the compulsory level. Romaare Europe's largest, fastest- growing and mostvulnerableminority,and havebeenamong the biggestlosersinthe transitionsince 1989. An estimated nine to eleven million Roma live across Europe. An estimated600,000Roma childrenof primaryschool age livinginthe EU accession countriesdo not attendschoolat all. While, on the surface, the countriesof Centraland EasternEurope those headedfor accession to the EuropeanUnion -appear -particularly on targetto meet their MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs), this is not the casefor Roma. Working with the Open Society Institute(Soros) andthe EuropeanCommission, the ECAregion of theWorld Bank has focusedattentionon Romaissues, especially througha major conferencein BudapestinJune 2003 that ledto: (a) the establishmentof a Decadeof Roma Inclusion2005-14; and (b) a commitmentby the Bankto establisha Roma 1EducationFund (REF) to befunctioningby 2005. The new REF will make grants to governments and civil society organizationsto enablethem to make both demand- and supply-sideinterventionsto improvethe education of Roma, meetinggoalsthat are beingestablishedas part of the Roma Decade. The Decadeobjectiveswill involveachieving education MDGs by 2015 for Roma in eight Centraland Eastern Europeancountries,in particularby ensuringthat all Romachildren, bothgirls and boys, complete compulsory education and that their performanceis at leastequivalentto that of nationalaverages. The Fundwill catalyzeinvestmentsby governments, become a knowledgecenter on all Roma education issues (including throughtransferof experience and expertiseacross countries),and publishan annualreportthat will reporton REF activitiesand reviewthe state of Roma education. MainComponents Outcomes: The REF would support activitiesembracing the whole lifecycleof education,rangingfrom interventionsat the pre- school levelthrough primary, secondary, and highereducation,includingadult education. The Fundwouldsupport three kinds of activities: Implementationof projectsdesignedto improveeducationalperformance(broadlydefinedto includehigherenrollment rates,improvedschoolattendance, higherstudent achievement,higherlevelsof self-esteem, and betterintegration with non-Roma students) and inclusionof the Roma populationinthe target countries,with specialattentionto measuresto help ensure sustainabilityand support for scalingup worthwhilepilot projects. Independentevaluationof the educationaloutcomes of these and other initiativesdesigned to improveeducational performanceand inclusionof the Roma population. Dissemination, consensus-building, and policydevelopment activities aimedat incorporatingthe lessonsof this experiencein the design of nationaleducation policies. This could include,for example, feasibilitystudies and other analyses of evaluationfindingsto examine their broaderapplicabilityfor education policy,seminars for policymakers and stakeholderson the most effectiveand appropriateapproachesfor improvingRoma inclusionand educational performance,an annual reporton the state of Romaeducation,and technical assistanceto supportpolicydevelopmeni actions such as draftinglegislation. 132 Annex 10 KeyOutputs are: Establishmentof the REF awarding competitivegrantsto governments and NGOs for proposals addressing Roma educationalperformance and inclusion. Grants will fund such things as: (a) technicalassistancefor initiativesat local government,community, and school levels; (b) outreach programs betweenschool staffand Roma parents; (c) training on effectiveteaching and learningfor teachersand managementfor school administrators; (d) provisionof textbooks, supplementary materials, and tutoring; (e) promotionof modelschools; and (9demand-side interventionsto ensure school attendance(e.g. scholarships). Establishmentof the REF serving as a clearinghousefor informationand knowledge on issuesof Romaeducation. Publicationof annualreportson the state of Romaeducation. PerformanceIndicators ..:' 4 , v ' ' I -- Roma EducationFundestablishedand fully staffed (2005Q2) 0 Operationsin at leastsix of the eight targetcountries(at leastfour by 2006 Q4and at least six by 2007 Q4) Annual reportson Roma education (2006Q3,2007 Q3) As this is a newprogram, thereis no progressto report. Partners Open Society Institute. Oovemanceand Management An independentRoma Education Fundwould be attachedfor administrativepurposesto an existingorganizationin Europe, ideallyan organizationinvolvedin issuesof social inclusionand education, with the abilityto handlegrant funds. Candidate institutionsincludethe Council of Europe DevelopmentBank and UNESCO's IIEP. The Fundwould have its own governance structureand a very smallsecretariat. Administrativeservices would be provided by the hostorganization. Educational analysisand projectpreparationservices would be contractedwith relevantorganizations. A Boardis envisaged,dominated by donors (includingthe Bank) and includingrepresentativesof target countrygovernments and Roma civil societyorganizations. An agreementhas beenreachedwiththe Open SocietyInstituteto administerDGFfunds inthe firstyear, pendingthe establishmentof a new legalentity, Firstyear funds may also be used, if needed,to helpestablishthe REF, including organizinga pledgingconference. -7%. ..?.. ., .",... . Y ExitStrategy The DGF Councilendorseda onetime seed grant of $1.O millionwhich wouldassistinthe developmentof the program concept. The programhopesthat this would also helpcatalyzedonorsupport, especially from European and other donors. 133 Annex 10 The Asia-Pacific Quality Network Bank Contact: Richard R. Hopper12024734444 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: EAP RecipientAgency: Centerfor Quality Assurance in InternationalEducationwithin the NationalCenter for Higher Education Web Address: http:ll www.cqaie.org Total Budget: 3.52 DGF Funding Request: 0.36 DGF Percentage: 10% The Centerfor Quality Assurancein InternationalEducation(CQAIE), a collaborativeactivityof the highereducation and quality and competency assurance communitiesinthe Unitedstates and betweenthe UnitedStatesand other countriesis located at the Nationalcenter for Highereducation,a DC non-profit organization. CQAIEwill receivea DGF grantto support the quality assurance (QA) agencies inthe Asia-Pacificregionthroughpartnershipwith the Asia-PacificQuality Network (APN), a regional sub-network of the InternationalNetworkfor Quality Assurance Agencies in HigherEducation(INQAAHE) by strengthening the capacityof AFN and its members to: (i) coordinateorganizationalfunctions; (ii)sustainongoing reviewsof participating organizationsto ensure highquality performance; (iii)assistindividualagencies indevelopingtools and strategies to sustainthe value of quality assurance; (iv) advocatefor accreditationof tertiary education to the public,governments, and institutions; (v) provideresearch, policyanatysis, and services to member institutions;and (6) nurturethe core academic values centralto tertiary educationand quality assurance. Regionalassociationsof QA agencies for tertiaryeducation helpimproveacademic quality by poolingintellectualresources for evaluation, and by agreeing uponclear definitionsof quality and a uniformprocessto determine whether qualitystandards are being met. StrongerQA agencies will, inturn, providea framework for the growth and development of quality Higher Education(HE) systems inthe region. This programwill helpto addresskey issuesin HE institutionsand QA agencies such as: (i) definingthe missionsand rolesof HE institutionsand QA agencies, particularlyas they relateto agreed-upon qualitystandards or criteria;(ii)strengtheninggovernance, managementand planningfunctions; (iii) increasingthe quality of academic programs; (iv) improvingteachingskills and credentials; (v) improvingstudentexperiencesand student services; (vi) increasinglearningresources; (vii) improvingphysicalfacilities; (viii) improvingfinancial managementand planning: and (ix) contributingto the disseminationof information. MainComponents Establish a regional poolof external reviewers to augment on-sitereviews, at the requestof nationalQA bodies. This would add experience to teams of experiencedexternalreviewers and providean internationalperspective on quality. 9 Establish regional QA services which can providecritical assistance to: (i)countrieswithout nationalQA processes; (ii) institutionsdoingspecializedacademic programreviews; (iii)countriesthat prefer internationalreviews of foreign institutions; (iv) institutionsdesiringan intemationalquality review; and (v) countriesdesiringinternationalconsultationon the QA process. a Establish a regional information clearinghouse on: (i)accreditedinstitutionsand programsof highereducation;(ii) transnationalhighereducation; (iii) sourcesfor QA resources; and (iv) credittransfer schemes. The clearinghouse would alsotranslatenationalQA policies into Englishfor region-wide useand cany out a regionalQA study. Improve regional staffexchanges. Experiencein anothernationalsetting can benefit bothinexperiencedor experienced QA professionals. A coordinatedregionalfunctionwill encourageboth short-term staff exchanges and longer-term staffsecondments. Create regional trainingand development programs on issuesof common concern,such as: (i) QA for distance education; (ii)QA for transnationaleducation;(iii)implicationsof trade agreementson QA; (iv) regionalmobilityand credit transferschemes; (v) the roleof QA in mutualacademic recognition;(vi) institutionalmanagement as a chronicquality problem;and (vii) QA for research. 134 Annex 10 Strengthenliaisonfunctionswith regionalorganizationsby establishing regionaladministrative offices to assist regionalorganizationsand SEAMEO, AUN, and UNESCOwith QA. A coordinated functionis important because, althougheach of these organizations deals with issues relatedto QA in highereducation, it is not the only priorityfor any of them. -... J ParfomancslIndicators Regional pool of external reviewers: for each year of the DGF grant:three regionalexternalreviewers for each of 13 participatingcountries(totalof 39) participatein externalreviews of institutionsin another country. Regional QA services: for eachyear of the DGF grant: (i)generalconsultationpool: three personsidentifiedto visit three countriesseekingtechnicalassistance for one-week consultations; (ii)sector evaluation specialists: conduct two 10- day sector reviews; (iii)privatehighereducation specialists: conduct two 1O-day sector reviews. 0 Regional information clearinghouse: two staff, computer/officeequipment, and operationalfundsfor eachyear of the DGF grant. Regional staff exchanges: five per year (one to three monthseach) for each year of the DGF grant. 0 Regional training and development: for each year of the DGF grant: (i) nationalQA staff from18 participatingcountries: two 3-day programs; (ii)nationalQA commissionersfrom 18 participatingcountries:two 3-day programs. Liaison functions with regional organizations: establishmentof an Asia Program Office for regionalcoordinationand aWashington, D.C., AdministrativeOffice for programoversightandfinancial management. Progressand Achlrvamanb I As this is a new program, there is no progressto report. I Partners CQAIE throughthe Nationalcenterfor HigherEducationandthirteen country members of APN in the Asia-Pacific region: Australia,China, Hong Kong, India,Indonesia,Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mongolia, NewZealand, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam _I_ Oavemanca,and Management The Secretariatfor the Networkis currently housed in the Australian UniversitiesQualityAgency, where it moved in August 2003. Neitherthe Network nor INQAAHEare currently legalentities; they planto establishthemselves as such inthe nearfuture. The Networkis governedby a Boardof Directors and a GeneralAssembly. The General Assembly, which serves as the senior policy and decision-makingbody, meetsat leastonce every two years. The GeneralAssembly establishes the course of action and contributionlevels, and reviewsand approves reportsand financialstatements. The Board of Directors managesthe general affairsof the Network. The Boardcarriesout mandates from the GeneralAssembly,reviewsand approves auditedaccounts,and preparesan annualreporton Network activitiesandfinances. The Boardappointsa Secretary, who serves as the Networks Chief Executive,with responsibilityfor managementand administrationof the Network. The current Secretary is the HigherEducation and TrainingAwards Councilfrom Ireland. The Treasurer is responsiblefor Network finances, especiallycollectingfees and presentingfinancialstatements to the Board and GeneralAssembly. Because the beneficiaryof this grant,the Network,is notyet fully establishedas a legalentity,the grantwill be madeto CQAIE, which will administerand account for funds on the Networks behalf,CQAIEwill also assume responsibilityfor reportingto the World Bankon the progress of activities. The DGF grant is expectedto catalyzethe activitiesof APN, which has a strong membership and is expected to be self sustaining in the long run. FY07will be the lastyear of DGF funding. I I 135 Annex 10 Early Child DevelopmentCapacity-BuildingInitiative(ECDCI) BankContact: Mary EmingYoung 1202473-3427;Erika Dunkelberg1202473-6733 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD Education - RecipientAgency: Christian's Children Fund Web Address: NA 1FlnancirlArrangements far FYOl(Amount in US$ Million) Total Budget: 3.42 DGF Funding Request: 0.35 DGF Percentage: 10% Objectlvaband Expect& Outcomes Overthe pasttwo decades, early childhooddevelopment (ECD) hascome to be viewed as the naturalstartingpointfor promoting humandevelopment. Inthe developingworld, the needfor good-quality ECD programs outstripsgovernments' efforts.To meet this growing need,early childhood planners,practitioners,and policymakers must enhancetheir capacityto design, implement, and monitorquality ECD programs. ECDeffortscan be strengthenedthrough regionalnetworks that facilitatecapacity-building activities. Trainedlocalprofessionals and policymakerscan advocate for investments in ECD, conductsound research studies, and promoteevidence-based policiesthat adequately address the needsof young childrenand foster collaboration. This proposal specificallytargets ECDeffortsin the MiddleEast, Africa, EastAsia, and LatinAmerica, butthe knowledgegained will be applicableto all regions. The primary beneficiariesof the ECDCI projectare ECD practitioners,professionals,and policymakers in the Bank's client countries. Component 1 Strengthen regional capacity for ECDinitiatives: This componmt will enhance the capacity of ECDtrainers, - practitioners,and professionals to adopt integratedapproaches. Itwill also nurture the capacitiesof non-governmental organizations(NGOs) and civil society organizationsengaged in ECD initiatives. 0 MiddleEastandNorthAfrica: Expandthe knowledgebaseon legislationaddressing youngchildren; enhance the capacityof ECDtrainersand professionalsin the region. Specificactivitieswill include: (i) convening of five technical capacity-buildingworkshops (four nationallone regional); & (ii) production 8, disseminationof ECDresourcesinArabic. 0 EastAsla: Support nationsas they builda "systemof care" in early childhoodand develop nationalECD action plans and policyframeworks. Specific activitieswill include:(i)support of the Asia Think Tank on ECD in Primary Care; (ii) developmentof a network of educationleadersand policy makers, to address the integrationof ECD research, training, service, and advocacy; and (iii)encouragementof the participationof the education sector in this initiativeand facilitation of regionaldialogue on bestpractices. 0 LatinAmerica: Increasethe numberof competentpractitioners;improvethe qualityof existing ECD services; advocate for more extensiveand systematicsupportfor youngchildreninthe region. Specificactivitieswill include: (i) support for regionalexchanges among nationalorganizations;(ii)development of nationalECD policies;and (iii) promotionof private-sectorinvestments in ECD. Component 2 Support development of ECD programs to help meet Education for All (EFA) and Fast Track Initiative - (FTI) goals through the Millennium ECD Fund: A lack of financial,technical, and administrativebackingfor community-based organizationsresultsin programsthat providelow-quality services. This componentwill includespecificactivitiesto support the MillenniumECD Fund, which offerssmallgrants to communities,municipalities,and NGOsto establishand maintainquality ECD servicesthat develop and strengthen service delivery models and leadto increasedcoverage. The fund has been usedto extend coverageof community-based ECD programsfor poorchildren,improveparticipationof families and communities, and strengthen the capacityof ECD providers in Brazil, Honduras, and the Gambia. 136 Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators Component 1, Middle East and North Africa: Good-quality ECD interventionsthat use a child-centered curriculum and promoteactive learninginthe region. (i)Regionaland nationalworkshops held in Lebanon, Palestine,Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Sudan, and possiblyIraq; (ii) papers produced and disseminated on best practices in legislationand modelsof existingserviceprovisioninthe region; (iii) anthology of support materialsand bestpractices on parent education compiledand disseminated; (iv)Arabic ECDmanualdisseminated; (v) annotated bibliographyof ECD resources inArabic producedand disseminated. Component 1, EastAsia: An integratedsystem of carethat combinesearly childhoodeducation and carewith family support. (i)Education-sectorparticipationin regionalECDactivitiespromoted; (ii) regionalECDworkshop convened. Component 1, LatinAmerica: A greater number of good-quality, effectiveECDinterventions.(i) ECDwebsite redesignedin Spanishfor practitionersand policymakers; (ii)ECDbulletinsfor practitionersand policymakers publishedonline; (iii)regionalworkshop convened to encourage exchanges among nationalorganizations. Component 2: Quality ECD services inAfrica and LatinAmerica that develop and strengthenservice delivery models and leadto increasedcoverage. (i)ECD providerstrainedto help communities set up ECDservices; (ii)manuals and media materialsin Portuguese, English, and Spanishdeveloped and distributed; (iii) community-based ECDservices expanded. PmgnasaandAchiwomenta Becausethis programis new, there is no progressto report. ChristianChildren'sFund,BrazilECD MillenniumFund, lntemationalCenterfor Educationand HumanDevelopment(CINDE), Arab ResourceCollective,UNICEF, UNESCQ, Bernardvan Leer Foundation, PueblitoCanada, Savethe Children UK,Johnson and Johnson, EducationAction Intemational,MauricioSorotsky Sobrinho. Govemancoand Management. The proposedECDCIactivitieswill be coordinatedby the ChristianChildren's Fund(CCF), which was selected because of its reputation, experience implementingECD programs, andwell-establishedfinancialadministrativestructure. CCF will disburse funds to the subprograms. CCF's governingbody isthe Board of Directors, which meets quarterlyand reviews strategy and performance. Implementationof strategyis delegated to the CCF Presidentanda seven-person managementteam. CCF's Vice President for International Programs managesthe delivery of programs, which CCF Country Directors and staff implement. Programactivitiesare determinedthrougha three-year countrystrategicplanningprocess, which involvesincountry peer reviews, program reviews at CCF headquarters, and final approval by the Vice Presidentfor InternationalPrograms. CCF has technical assistance advisors for each major programsector,locatedat CCF headquarters, and field-leveltechnical and sectoral specialists who implementprograms incountry. Country staff reportannuallyto the Vice Presidentfor InternationalPrograms, who shares these reportswith the Board. Countryprograms are auditedexternallyevery threeyears for compliancewith CCF's financialmanagementand administrativepoliciesand procedures. This is a new DGF application. It is anticipatedthat proposalswill be submittedfor the second and third years. By the third year, an independent evaluationwill be carriedout andthe programwould exit fromWindow2 funding in FY07. 137 Annex 10 Zambezi Forumon Higher Education(ZFHE) Bank Contact: WilliamSaint I 202-473-7578 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: AFR RecipientAgency: The SADCVice Chancellors Association (with transitionalWB support) Web Address: NA FinancialArrangamenta for FYOtr (Amount in US0 Wtllllonf Total Budget: 1.11 DGF FundingRequest: 0.20 DGF Percentage: 18% Objective8and ExperetedQutcsmes The Zambezi Forum on HigherEducation (ZFHE) is a knowledgesharingpartnershipand networked think tank involvingsome 60 universitiesfrom the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). Itstwo-fold purpose is to acceleratethe processes of creativehighereducationre-thinkingand reformthat are beginningto receiveattentionwithin various Africannations,andto build up the capacityof African highereducationinstitutionsin SouthernAfricato initiateand managechanges that will strengthen innovationsystems at the national,regional, and continentallevels. Appliedtrainingactivitieswill be providedto participating institutions,and the granteewill be assistedin movingtoward its goalof servingas a regionaltraining resource. In addition to skills development instrategicleadershipand daily management, activitieswill seek to: (i)catalyzeorganizational,educationaland investigativeinnovationin African highereducation institutions;(ii) increasethe capabilityof highereducationinstitutionsto innovateand to managechange; and (iii)promote a cultureof science and citizenshipwithin highereducationinstitutionsand the societiesthey serve. Developinginstitutionalpoliciesfor managingHIV/AIDSas the singlebiggestthreatto government and family investmentsin the education of universitygraduates and expanding the numberof women managers in highereducation will be specific concerns. Inthe short term,the managementand governance of tertiary institutions -particularlythose targeted for capacitybuildingunderBank-financed projects-are expectedto becomemore effectiveand more efficient. Inthe longerterm, universitiesshould provideincreasedservices to their countries,graduates should be equippedwith skills more relevantto the region'seconomies, more women should emergein highereducation management positions, and bothinstitutionsand their graduatesshould be empowered to managethe risk of HIVIAIDS. MainCompuncants Component I-Training seminars, training courses, and technical assistance for senior- and mid-level university managers: Seminars, trainingcourses, and peer-basedtechnicalassistancewill enable senior managers of highereducation institutionsto develop their skills in leadershipand changemanagementwithin a fast-changing, resourceconstrainedhigher educationenvironment. Seminarson specificthemes, held in the SADC region, will share newknowledgeon higher educationinnovationsand advances underway in Africa or elsewhere in the world. Trainingcourses will impart specificskills in priorityareasidentifiedby participants. Specialtraining for potentialwomen managerswill be provided. Demand- responsive,peer-basedtechnical assistance will enable up to three expertsto make short, trouble-shootingvisitsto institutionsthat requestthis assistance. Eachyear, one seminar (50 participants),threetraining courses(20 participants each), and four technicalassistance visitswill be provided. ExpectedOufpuf~esulfs:Improvedleadership,management and institutionalperformanceat universities in the region. Component 2 -InnovationFund for Institutional Change: The ZFHE will provide, on a competitivebasis, smallgrantsfor participatinguniversitiesto experiment with ideasimpartedthroughZFHE seminars and trainingcourses. Applicationswill be screenedagainstprioritiesdefined by the stakeholdersand assessedfor innovativequalitiesand potentialimpact. Expected OutputdResulfs: At leastten highereducationinstitutionswill havelaunchedinternalinitiativesto improvetheir governance and management structures. Component 3 Program facilitation: This component providesa transitionalprogramfacilitatorwhose rolewill diminishas - the SADC Vice ChancellorsAssociation (to be formallyestablishedin mid-2004) progressively assumes responsibilityfor 138 Annex 10 program coordination. Funds will be usedfor the facilitator's travel, Advisory Committee annual meetings, and short-term consultantsfor specificassignments. ExpectedOutpufs/Resu/ts: Successful establishmentof a sustainable regionalprogram to strengthencapacities in universityleadership and change managementwithina new membership associationof SADC universities. Component 4 Program Evaluation: An evaluationof the programwill be conductedduringYear 3 to assess performance - againstexpectedresults and to determinewhether program continuation is feasible. Fundswill underwrite an independent consultantto undertakethe evaluationand a regionalmeetingof stakeholder representativesto assess and act uponthe evaluationreport. ExpectedOutputs/Resu/fs: An evaluation reportfor initialsubmission to the Advisory Committeeand subsequentlyto a stakeholders meetingduring the second quarter of Year 3. PerformanceIndlcatoon At least75%of seminarkourseparticipantsrate their training experiences as of good quality and relevantto their responsibilities. Number, objectives, and implementationstatus of institutionalreform projectsinitiatedwith support from the Innovation Fund. ZFHE activitiesmanagedby the regionalassociationof SADC highereducation institutionswill reach 10%in Year 1; 60% in Year 2; and 100%by the end of Year 3. Independentevaluationreportcompleted and discussedwith stakeholders; concretedecisions takenwith regardto the future continuationof the pilotprogram. ProgrcgaoandAchievements As this is a newprogram, there is no progressto report. Partnem SADC Vice Chancellors Association, Open Society of Southern Africa (OSISA), BritishCouncil,Norway,Associationof Commonwealth Universities, InternationalFoundationfor Science. OovemancarptdManagement The ZFHE incorporatesstakeholder ownershipfromthe beginning. During FY04, a Transitional Secretariat is based at the Bank and overseenby an InternalAdvisory Committee. Currently, the SADC AssociationSteeringCommittee serves as the goveming boardfor the ZFHE. The Secretariatfor the SADCAssociation is beinghostedby the South African Universities Vice- ChancellorsAssociation on an interimbasis untilthe new SADC Vice-Chancellors Associationbecomes operational. A formal govemingstructurewill be defined priorto ZFHE's formal establishment in mid-2004. Governanceand managementof ZFHE will be progressivelytaken over by the SADC Vice-ChancellorsAssociation. A Steering Committee of five Vice-Chancellorshas alreadybeen establishedto manage programdevelopment. The ZFHE programwill be reviewed annually and approvedby a seven-person external Advisory Committee (AdCom). Quarterlyprogress and financialreportswill be submitted. Exit Strategy The DGF Councilendorsed a one time seed money grantfor FY05. 139 Annex 10 MiddleEastand NorthAfrica Child ProtectionInitiative(CPI) Bank Contact: Arun R. Joshi 1202458-1220;Jean Fares12024734266 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: MNA RecipientAgency: Arab Urban Development Institute(AUDI)) Web Address: http:/l wvyw.menacDi.org FinancialAnangments for FYOS(Amount InUS$ Miillon) Total Budget: 7.38 DGF FundingRequest: I.05 DGF Percentage: 14% The key objectiveof the MiddleEastand NorthAfrica Region (MNA) Child ProtectionInitiative(CPI) isto improvethe well-being of vulnerableand disadvantaged(WD) childrenand youth in MNA countries. The CPi will support:(a) buildinga knowledgebaseon the key issuesconfrontingchildren in the region, drawing on research and analysis,lessonslearned, and good practices; (b) buildingthe capacityof localgovemmentsto effectively address these issues, and supporting cross-fertilizationof experiences througha network of localgovemments;and (c) assisting stakeholders in developingan effectiveapproach to help mobilize resources. Attainingthe MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) requiresthe publicsector,civil society, and the private sector to reachout to V&D children. The program's activitieswill haveseveral importantregionaldimensions,such as: (i) refugees and other childrendisadvantagedby conflictswho cross nationalboundaries; and (ii)generalmigrationand cross border movement of families and childrendueto pushandlorpullfactors. These movementshave risenrapidlyand haveserious consequencesfor childrenin the region. The MNA child and youthpopulation is large; an increasingnumberof childrenare disadvantaged due to politicalviolence,economicinstability,and urbanization. While many MNA countrieshaveestablishedNationalCouncilsfor Children, current responsesfor V&D childrenin the regionare often ineffectiveand inadequate. Data and informationpertainingto V&D childrenare inadequate,and informationthat could have regionalvalue is rarely sharedacross countries, evenwhen it is available. Localgovernmentoffices, Ministries,and other agencies have a limitedcapacity to address relevantissuesinthe broaderpolicycontext. The region'schildrenare profoundly affectedby localevents and small-scale localshocks, the impactof which could be significantlyreducedby more focused, timely localinterventions. This DGF proposalis designedto catalyze partnershipsto respondto these needs. Creating a fund will providefinancialsupport for country-specific initiatives. The Bankwill primarilysupport the regionalcollection,creation,and exchange of information,with a viewtowardenhancing capacity and cross- fertilizingknowledgeinthe region. Main Component8 z * ,"A# Buildthe knowledge base: (i)reviewexistingstudies onthe statusof disadvantagedchildren and undertake new, selectivestudies; (ii)reviewand compareurban policiesand programsfor disadvantagedchildrenin the region,and make them availableto stakeholders; (iii)evaluate selected programs in MNA municipalities;(iv) provide a K-platformto share experiences in relevantareas; (v) assist mayors in evaluatingtheir municipalities'capacityto address issuesfaced by V&D children; (vi) develop a website and helpdesk; (vii) ensure that regionalGDLN and Development Gatewayfacilities are closely linkedand supportthis effort, 0 Build the capacity of municipalities: (i)support capacity enhancement of localgovemments, through knowledge- sharing and peer-learning; (ii)provideworkshops and trainingto analyzeinformationand data, andto plan, monitor,evaluate, and leveragepoliciesand programsfor V&D childrenin MNA countries;(iii) collaboratewith ministries, as well as NGOsand communities, on these issuesto enhance programcoordination;and (iv) increasemanagementand fiduciarycapacity skills. Develop an effective approach for funding mechanisms: (i) reviewexperiences and lessonsfrom bothsuccessfuland less successfulexamples of fundingfor localinitiatives;(ii) explore prospectsfor a partnershipamong donorsto support an effectivefunding mechanism; (iii) producean operations manuallMOU for poolingdonor resources; and (iv) helpestablishan efficientfundingmechanism. 140 Annex 10 Performancelndlcators 1 Measurableoutcomes include: (i) studies and evaluations conductedon lessons learnedand good practices;(ii) partnerships formed and forums organizedto improveknowledgesharing; (iii) website launched and operational; (iv) network establishedfor coordinatingand disseminatinginformationbetween nationalgovernments, internationalorganizations, and localgovernments,to improveknowledgemanagement: (v) localgovernment capacity improvedon budget management,policyissues,and V8D children's issues;(vi) children's concerns mainstreamed in public and donor assisted projects; increased sensitizationand awareness; and (vii) rapid response,flexible funding approach launchedand operational. r- Progressand Achievements An effectiveAUDlMlB tasks managers partnership ledto great stridesinthe successful launchingof the CPI, whichwas well receivedby a number of key partners and other potentialregionaldonors and substantial progress has been made since receiving the DGF funds in 10/2003. Thefollowingactivitieshave beencarriedout since the DGF grant was approved: 0 Localcompanieshavebeen selected to hostthe CPIwebsite, provide e-mail services and provisionof wireless connection;TORSwere prepared for an assessment of the status of childrenin 10 MENA cities; TORSwere preparedfor stock-takingand assessment of regional& internationalfundingmechanismsof similar natureto that envisaged in the CPI in order to learnfrom successfulexperiences. Introductorymeetingswith regionaldonor agencies were initiatedin order to introducethe CPI to them, to exchange views andto solicittheir collaboration. A specialsessionon the CPIwas organized as partof the "Childrenand the Mediterranean"Conference, in Italy,co-organizedby the City of Genoa and the ItalianFoundation, Gaslini, in collaborationwith theWorld Bank and AUDI. TORSwere preparedfor stock-taking and assessment of regionaland internationalfundingmechanisms of similar nature to that envisagedinthe CPI in orderto learnfrom successfulexperiences. Recruitmenteffortsincludehiringof the Directorin 12/2003and is ongoingfor other staff positions. A fully functional office,with the necessary infrastructureis alreadyin placeat AUDl's headquarters in Riyadh as part of its in-kind contributionto the CPI. Arab UrbanDevelopmentInstitute,KuwaitiDevelopment Fund, Arab Fundfor Social and Economic Development, Islamic DevelopmentBank, UNICEF, DubaiMunicipality,SaudiDevelopment Fund, AGFUND, OPEC Fund Oovamanceand Management The CPIwill havea SteeringCommittee(SC), made up of donors, internationalexperts, and senior officialsfrom MNA countries. The Bankwill chairthe SC for the first two years. The keytasks of the SC will include:(a) providingguidanceand strategic directionto the Secretariat; (b) helpingestablishCPI rules and guidelines;(c) reviewing and approving the annualplan and budget; (d) reviewingsemi-annual progress reports; (e) developingguidelinesfor the potentialfundingmechanism, including mobilizingresourcesand raisingawareness; (f) commissioningan independentevaluation of CPI-funded activitiesand assessing their impact;and (9) reviewingthe lessonsof the project implementationevaluations. The key tasks of the Secretariatwill include:(a) commissioningstudies anddevelopinga strategyfor knowledgemanagement; (b) hostinga website; (c) helping establisha network of localgovernments; (d) supportingcapacity-buildingefforts; (e) consolidatingfinancial reportsevery quarter and submittingthem to the SC; (e) identifyingcountry requestslpriorities;and (9) cooperating with the SC to raiseawareness and developthe regionalfundingmechanism. The Secretariatwill be hosted by AUDl in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, butwill function independentlyof AUDl management. AUDl will providein-kind contributionsof facilities,a seconded staff member,and overhead, as well as implementationsupport during the first few years. Forthe first threeyears,the Bank will providetechnicalsupport, guidance,and supervisionto the Secretariat.The CPIwill adhere to standardaccounting and financialmanagement practices. An independentevaluationwill reviewthe progressmade after oneyear. I The Bank is expected to exit after FY06funding,when this partnershipis expected to become sustainable. 141 Annex 10 UnderstandingChildren'sWork Phase II - Bank Contact: Jean Fares1202473-5266 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: HD SocialProtection - RecipientAgency: UNICEF Web Address: http:llwww.ucw-project.org FlnanclalArrangements for FY06(Amount inUS$ Million) Total Budget: 2.33 DGF FundingRequest: 0.10 DGF Percentage: 4% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes 1 Childlaboris one of the mostdevastatingconsequences of persistent poverty. Confrontingthe obstaclesposed by persistent child laboris essentialto achievingthe MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs). The Bank is committedto helping reduce harmfulchild labor. The lntemationalLaborOrganization's (ILO's) InternationalProgramfor the Eliminationof ChildLabour (IPEC) and UNICEFare helpingleadfocused global activitiesto attack the problem. In December2000, the ILO, UNICEF, and the Bank initiatedajoint researchprogram: UnderstandingChildren'sWork and its Impact(the UCW Project). The UCW Project aims to enhance internationalcooperationand to supportbroadereffortsto develop effective, long-term solutionsto childlabor. Financedby the governments of Norway, Finland,and Sweden, the UCW Projectis basedin Florence, Italy. Through data collection,research, and assessment activities,the UCW project aims to increase global and localunderstandingof child labor,its causes and effects,how itcan be measured, and what works in addressing it. The projectalso aims to improvesynergy between the three partneragencies, to increasethe effectivenessof child labor interventions. The Project's specificobjectives are to: (i) improvechild laborresearch, data collection,and data analysis; (ii) enhance capacity for child labor data collectionand research, especiallyat the local and nationallevels; and (iii)improveimpact assessmentsof interventionsagainstchildlabor. This work will enhance the development community's abilityto effectively respondto client countries' needs,poolingthe comparativeexpertiseof each partneragency to avoid duplication, and developinga common knowledgebase. Lessons extractedfrom the UCW Projectwill be shared with countty-levelstakeholders, to helpthem betterunderstandthe causes underlyingchild labor and design appropriateinterventionsto alleviate the problem. The UCW Projectwill helpthe Bank better respondto its clients' needs. Lessonsfrom this projectare expected to feed directlyinto the Bank's countryassistance strategies and dialogue with client countries. MainComponents The first phase of the UCW Project,which endedin July 2003, consistedof knowledgemanagement, countryactivities, and capacity-building exercises. The secondphase(to end in 2006) focuseson extendinginitialprojecteffortsand bringingthem to a sustainable conclusion. This phasewill contributeto meetingthe MDGs by examininghowchild labor affects, and is affectedby, economic and socialissues. WHO and UNESCOwill be considered as potentialnew partnersin Phase II.The second phasehas five components: Addressing measurementchallenges Innovativeresearch andanalysis Impact assessments Countty-levelresearch and capacitybuilding Mainstreamingand dissemination: Perfomrnte Indieatom Measurableoutputs include: Improvedtechnicaltools for measuring, monitoringand analyzingchild labor. Monitoring and evaluationmethodologiesfor child labor interventions. 142 Annex 10 An expandedcollectiveknowledgebase on programmingexperience in the field of child labor. Training exercisesfor nationalcounterparts on data analysis, statistics, and buildingindicators to strengthen the capacityto collect and analyzechild labordata. An expandedcollectiveinformationbase on child labor at the country level. Progrgaaand Achlevemanta The initial part of UCW ProjectPhaseI1(08/2003-12/2003)was financed usingthe remainder funds from Phase I(Le. original donorfundingfromthe Governmentsof Noway, Finlandand Sweden). Initialactivitiesin all the Phase IIproject components have started. A draft list of revisedChild Labor (CL) indicatorshas been developed and tabulations basedon the revised indicatorsfor one country (Senegal) have been,completed. Inthe cross-sectoralareas of CL & Health, three papers havebeen completed,in Social Risk Management two papers, on MDGs and characteristicsof working childrenfour papers, and one paperon childreninvolvedin the unconditionalworst forms of child labor. One paper has beencompleted on programinterventions,in this case the impact of conditionalcash transfer programs on indigenouspeople in LAC. On the basisof the UCW workshop on "Good Practices in Combating Child Labor" held in Geneva in March 2003, which concentratedon reviewingthe good practicesinthe three partner agencies, three UCW working papers have been completedand postedon the website. A regionaloverviewon SSA on HIWAIDS,Orphans and CL has been completed, and on LAC focusing on gender and child labor. Discussionsare undeway for the NationalAction Planfor CL in Yemen and a trainingexercisewas heldfor counterparts from Morocco. Onthe basisof the 'UCW Training Course on Measurementand Analysis of Child Labor' held in May 28-29, 2003 a trainingmodulehas been prepared providingcore background informationthat the agencies or other userscan buildand expandon to suit specifictraining needs. The packageis designedas a broad overview of child labor, aimed at exposingnationalcounterpartsto some of the key legal,theoretical,measurement, policy and programmatic issuesassociatedwith the child labor phenomenon. Partners - ILO (InternationalLaborOrganization),UNICEF, Finland, Noway, Belgium, UnitedKingdom, Germany, U.S. Departmentof Labor. Oovemanceand Management Regularandworking-levelconsultationsfor the partner agencies are done throughappointedAgency Focal Points (inthe Social ProtectionUnitfor the Bank). A Steering Committee, made up of senior managementfrom the agencies, provides strategic directionand approvesthe annualbudget and workplan. The SteeringCommittee meets twice a year and holdsaudio conferencesevery month. Semi-annual meetings provide donors with a chance to participateand give feedback. The agencies also regularlycommunicatethrough email and technicalvisits. Countryactivitiesare coordinated throughregionaVcountryoffices and headquartersstaff. Eachset of project activitiesis subjectto a technicalmeetingduring the early planningstages, after opinionshave been sought from qualifiedexperts. The Project Coordinatorhas the final authority to support these activities. The ProjectCoordinatorand histeam serve as the Secretariat, currentlyhoused inthe lnnocentiResearch Centre in Florence,Italy. The ProjectCoordinatorsupervises and monitors activities,in conjunctionwith Agency FocalPoints. There is regularinteraction between the ProjectCoordinator,Agency FocalPoints, and regionalstaff. Annual progress reports document the project's status and budget. HDNSPwill focus on developinga mechanismto institutionalizethe knowledge sharing, technical assistance, and inter-agency collaborationprovidedby the UCW Project. Furtherfundingfrom DGF or the Bank is not expectedto be sought after FY05. 143 Annex 10 Global Partnershipfor Disabilityand Development Bank Contact: Judith E. HeumannI202-458-9045 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: HD Social Protection - RecipientAgency: UN StatisticsDivision Web Address: disabilitygroup@worldbank.org FlnanelalArrangement8for FYOS(AmountOn US 8 Nlllllon) Total Budget: 3.33 DGF FundingRequest: 0.29 DGF Percentage: 9% The Global Partnershipfor Disabilityand Development(GPDD) will improve life chances for poor disabledpeople in developing countries. Disabledpeople are disproportionatelypoor, and poor people are disproportionatelydisabled. Effortsto alleviate povertyand achieve the MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs) must explicitlyincludedisabledpeople, because usual developmentstrategies may not reachthem due to discriminationand obstacles to access. The DGF grant recipientwill bethe UN StatisticsDivisionwhich, throughtheWashington Group on DisabilityMeasurement (WGDM), an internationalnetwork of statisticsorganizations, will usethe funds to conduct surveys,collect,processand disseminateinternationaldisabilitydata. The UN StatisticsDivisionfounded the WGDM and can tap the statisticaldata available to WGDM members. MainComponents The proposedgrantwould support two complementaryactivities,collectionof disabilitystatistics by nationalstatistical organizations(NSO component) and compilationand disseminationof disabilitystatisticsvia integrationintothe UN Demographic Yearbook (DYB) system (DYB component). Integrationof disabilitymodules intothe censusesof importantdevelopingcountriesin each region; integrationof disability statisticsintothe UN's DemographicYearbook (DYB) system. Progressand Achfevvemenh As this is a new program,there is no progressto report. Over 50 governments are participatingin the work of theWashington Group on DisabilityMeasurement. Other partnersinclude multilateraldevelopment banks, UN agencies, foundations,and NGOs, 144 Annex 10 Governanceand Management The UN StatisticsDivisionwill managethe statistics componentofthe partnership.The advisory boardfor this component of the partnershipwould be the Washington Group. IThis programwill exit from the DGF in FY06,afterthe receiptof a one time seed moneygrant at the requestedlevel. I 145 Annex 10 ConsultativeGroup to Assistthe Poor (CGAP) BankContact: CarlosCuevas1202-458-0145 ResDonsible Networkand Sector: INF RecipientAgency: Web Address: 1FinenclalArrangementsfor FVOS(Amauntin US$ ~ ~ l i ~ ~ n ~ Total Budget: 13.31 DGF FundingRequest: 5.52 DGF Percentage: 42% 0bjtmtlve.sand ExpectedOutcomw The ConsultativeGroup to Assist the Poor (CGAP) is a consortiumof 28 bilateraland multilateraldonor agenciesand private foundationsthat support microfinance. The objectiveof CGAP is to improvethe poor'saccess to financialservices. To achieve this end, CGAP works with three major groups of clients: 1)local-levelmicrofinanceinstitutions(MFls)and otherfinancialinstitutionsand practitioners;2) memberdonor organizations; and 3) support and oversightproviders, includingregulatoryand supervisory authorities, and private-sectorproviderssuch as ratingagencies, auditorsand MIS specialists.CGAPwas establishedin 1995 as a 3-year programwith a missionto increase poorpeople's access to financialservices. In 1998,CGAP was renewed for a second phase. In 2002, basedon the findingsof an independent evaluation, CGAP's member donors and boardof directorsdecidedto extend CGAP's operationsinto a third phase(2003-2008),which took effect on July 1, 2003. The overarching objectiveof Phase Illis to scale up microfinancesignificantlyby: (i) supporting a broaderrangeof financialservice providers; (ii) promotinggreaterdiversityin boththe types of poor clientelebeing reached and the range of financialservices availableto them; (iii) improvinginformationon the performanceof microfinanceproviders; (iv) fosteringa soundIegaUregulatoryframework for pro-poor financial services;and (v) improvingthe quality of donors' support to microfinance. Meh Components Institutional Development and Diversity of Institutions: There is an urgentneedto scale up existingmicrofinanceinstitutionsand developnewdeliverychannels. In particular,there is a needto explore the potentialof institutionswith large-scaleinfrastructurethat can deliverfinancialservicesto the pooron a largescale. CGAP supportsa wide range of microfinanceprovidersand is exploring linkageswith banks and otherformal instiiutionsthat are engagedin, or havethe potentialto engage in, microfinance. Improving Donor Practices: Developmentagenciesremainthe most importantexternal(non-domestic) sourceof fundingfor microfinance.All 28 CGAP memberagencieshaveagreedto joint guidelinesfor good practices.However, they face numerous constraintsin applyingthese guidelines on a consistentbasis. As a result,donorfunding is not always effective. CGAP'swork with member donors is aimed at enhancingthe effectivenessof their microfinanceoperations by improvingdonor good practices, building donorstaff skills, and providingtechnicaland advisory servicestailoredto individualdonors needs. Increasing Poverty Outreach and Diversity of Financial Productsto the Poor: An importantpart of CGAP's work is aimedat better understandingthe financialneeds of the poor, and improvingfinancialservicesto them. The financial needsof the poorvary greatly dependingon their circumstances. CGAP seeks to both broadenand deepen outreach to the poor. Improving Policy Frameworks: As a multi-donorconsortiumhousedwithin the Bank, CGAP has a uniqueroleto play in helping foster a policyenvironmentthat promotesthe developmentof pro-poor financial services. CGAP is developingconsensusguidelines, providingcountry-specificconsultation, and developinga newdatabaseon microfinancepolicyand regulatoryregimes. Building Transparency in Microfinance: Transparency is essentialifthe microfinanceindustryis to reachscale. Investors,donors, and poordepositorswill only place their funds where they can reliably assess risk and return. PerformanceIndicators 1There are two sets of performance indicatorsfor the CGAP system,one for member donors, and one for the OperationalTeam. The 146 Annex 10 proposedkey outputs for 2003 for the OperationalTeam and their results were: (i) Services for Microfinance Providers:Nearlyall planned outputsaccomplishedor on track. (ii) Servicesfor Member Donors:All targets reached or exceeded with one minor exception:developmentof a tool to evaluate apex organizationswas postponedto free stafftime to produce higher prioritywork, Services for EndClients: Neatlyalltargets met. (iii) Improve Legaland RegulatoryFramework: All but one planned output carriedout. (iv) Improve FinancialTransparency: Nearlyall planned outputs achieved. Progressand Achievtemtents I (i) Institutional Developmentand Diversityof Institutions.Industry Stock Taking:Conductedthrough surveys and studies. Scaling up:Worked with a broadrange of financialand non-financialinstitutionsto expiore models showing promise for massive outreach (microfinancenetworks,commercialbanks,privatizedstate banks, ets, self-help groups,etc.). Training:Developed and delivered8 training courseson best practicesinthe areas of MFlfi erationalmanagement. (ii) ImprovingDonor Practices. Initiatedand completedMicrofinanceDonor Peerreviews in agencies; inAfghanistan, createdthe Microfinance Investment and Support Facilitywhich providesa clearinghousethrough which all donors agreed to channel their microfinance programming. (iii) Increasing Poverty Outreach & Diversityof Financial Productsto the Poor. Projectsfocused on deepeningthe depth of outreachof financialservicesto the poor,particularlyin rural areas, through new products such money transfers,micro- insurance,and differentsavings services.Another area of focus isthe developmentof social indicatorsthat can be used to assessthe impactof microfinanceon the poor (ImpactAssessmentCenter). (iv) ImprovingPolicy Frameworks. CGAP published2 seminal Consensus Guidelines,reviewed drafts of microfinancelegislationfor morethan es, and partneredwith the University of Marylandto developa globaldatabase on country regulationand supervision of ce. (v) Building Transparency in Microfinance. In 2003, CGAP consolidatedits transparencyactivitiesinto 3 main services(the MicrofinanceInformation Exchange (MIX), the RatingFund,and the InformationTechnologyInitiative. Partners IBilateraland multilateraldonors (AfDB,ADB, EBRD, IADB,EC,WB) ,UN,and privatefoundations(Ford and Agidius). Governanceand Management CGAP is governedbythe Consultative Group (CG) of member donors, which is responsiblefor setting CGAP's policy and strategic directionsand providing inputto the workplan and budget. It reports to the ExecutiveCommittee (Excom), a subset of CG members, and reportsbackto the full CG. In 2003, the Excomwas restructured and is now composed of both memberdonors and leading microfinancepractitionersreflectingdifferent regionaland institutional perspectivesand experiences. The main responsibilities of the Excomare to provide strategicguidanceto the CGAP OperationalTeam, to share in accountabilityfor carryingout the CGAP Ili Strategy, and to approveannualwork plans and budgetsas delegatedby the CG. The DirectorKEOof CGAP reportsto the Excom. The Secretariat, known as the Operational Team, is responsiblefor implementingthe activities of CGAP. Currently,the team consists of 19full-time staff and isadministrativelyhousedwithin the InfrastructureVice Presidency.A Bank Task Manager periodically reports to the DGF and sponsoringvice presidencieson CGAP's performanceand its alignmentwith the Bank'sdevelopmentobjectives. Fiduciaryoversight is provided by the Investment Committee, staffedby senior Bank experts,which reviewsand approvesall major investmentsundertakenby CGAP. The main reporting mechanismsto the CG are quarterlyand annual report,the Annual CG Meeting,and interimExcom meetings. Exit Strategy CGAP has an explicit disengagementstrategy from DGF funding of reducing the amountof DGF funding by $400,000everyyear, while seeking increasedcontributionsfrom other memberdonors as well as new memberdonors. Moreover, CGAPvoluntarily reduced its DGF funding requestby $800,000for FY05. At the end of Phase 111 (end FY08), based onthe findingsof an evaluation,CGAP will either continuein its current form, terminate, or spin off as an independentorganization. 147 Annex 10 Informationfor DevelopmentProgram(infoDev) Bank Contact: MostafaTerrab I202-473-8042 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: INF RecipientAgency: Sub-grants to external recipients Web Address: http:ll www.infodev.org Total Budget: 42.22 DGF FundingRequest: 2.50 DGF Percentage: 6% The Informationfor Development Program(infoDev) is a globalprogram focusedon promoting the use of informationand communication technologies(ICT) to combat poverty and promotedevelopment. infoDevseeks to: (i) promotethe use of ICTas tools of povertyreductionand economic development; (ii)promote informed policydialogueon promoting pro-poor ICT applications in developingcountries: (iii)raiseawarenessand understandingof the potentialof ICTas tools in combating poverty; and (iv) help mainstreamICTas effectivetools in development and the fight against poverty. Inthe pastfew years, interesthas grown in ICTas tools of development and poverty-reduction. There is a growing recognitionthat ICTcan serve as effective tools across all development sectors, although"getting ICTright"involvesa complex mix of policy,regulatory,humancapacity, and infrastructure challenges. While the development community has experimented broadlywith ICT,there is still littlerigorous knowledge about what works and why. There is an urgentneedfor rigorous knowledge, basedon evidence from the field, of the impactof ICTon povertyand the enablingconditionsfor the effectivespread and use of ICT in developingcountries. Buildingon a new knowledge-intensive strategy endorsedby its donors, infoDev has now movedpastpilot projectsand broad-ranging experimentation to a more focused, strategicapproach emphasizingrigorousknowledge, operationalrelevance,and priorityattentionto sustainability and scalabilityin ICT- for-development projects. This has alreadyresultedin a series of new knowledgeproductsand the launchingof an IncubatorInitiative. Through DGF funding, the Bank can helpjump-startthis new strategy by providingresourcesfor launching or expanding severalof infoDev'skey strategicinitiatives. This will allow the Bankto demonstrateleadershipin mainstreamingICT as targetedand effective -toolsto combat povertyand achievethe Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Main Componentds To focus its efforts more intensivelyon some of the key challenges facing developingcountriesin harnessing ICTfor development and poverty reduction, infoDevwill concentrateon a limitednumberof prioritythemes. Eachthematic initiativewill combine field-based experimentationand pilot projects,impactevaluationand relatedapplied research, technicalsupport for capacity-building,and a concerted effortto capture, adapt, andwidely share the knowledgeacquiredfrom the initiative'sactivities. The Impactof ICT on Poverty and the MDGs: This initiativewill assistdevelopingcountriesin more effectivelyintegrating ICT intotheir PovertyReductionStrategy Papers and nationaldevelopment strategies,by providingevidence of the concrete impactof ICTon povertyand tools for integratingICTstrategies,infrastructure,and applications into nationalstrategies. The incubator Initiative: ICTas a tool of privatesector efficiency and global competitiveness: This initiativewill suppori the growthof businessincubatorsin developing countries, to help smalland mediumenterprises (SME) harnessthe powerof ICT. ICT, Education Sector Reform, and the Global Knowledge Economy: This initiativewill helpdevelopingcountries integrateICTas a strategic element in education sector reform. Regulation for the InformationSociety: This initiativesupportsthe creationof appropriateregulatoryand policy frameworks to encourage the growth of broad-based, pro-poor ICTaccess and applications in developingcountries. ICT, Poverty and Development inAfrica: infoDevis participatingin a Bank-wide effortto provideintensivesupportto African countriesin their effortsto harness ICTfor povertyreductionand sustainabledevelopment. Strategic Focus on Knowledge Sharing: Complementing and linkingall of infoDev'sthematic initiativesis a newstrategic focus on generatingand sharingrigorous knowledgeand global best practicesin using ICTfor povertyreductionand development. 148 Annex 10 0 Capacity-Building: Closely tied to the focus on knowledgesharing and globalbestpracticesis an increasing emphasis within infoDevon support for capacity-building, particularlyfor policymakers and other key stakeholders in developing countries. Performance tirdlcnton 0 Number, aggregate amount, and geographic distributionof grants approved and disbursed. 0 Increasein number, geographic diversity, and short-list quality of proposalsfor infoDevgrant programs. 0 Increasein demandfor infoDev knowledgeproducts and services and for infoDevcapacity-buildinginitiatives. 0 Numberof participantsin sponsored conferences, workshops, and seminars. 0 Increasein numberand short-list qualityof proposalsfor Incubator initiative. 0 Numberof pilotprojectsthat generate expertiseinemerginge-areas and become mainstreamedin the Bank's operational work. A 2002 evaluationrecommendedthat MoDev phaseout its Core program and reorganizearounda small number of flagshipinitiatives. As recommended,the Coreprogramhas been phasedout and no longeraccepts proposals.Mostlegacyprojectswill be completed in FY05. A numberof flagshipinitiativeshavebeenimplemented: Incubators(17 projectsfunded); Sub-Saharan Africa Connectivity an ICTfor Africa (toolkit published, potentialexpansionof the Africa 1nitiative);someof these initiativewere not active dueto lackof funding. KnowledgeDissemination received the highestpriorityin FY04: 4 major conferences, includingthe annuallnfoDev Symposium, 6 workshops, 8 major publications, 34 projectsfinal reports, as well as ongoing updateof the web site. Bilateraldonors: Brazil, Canada, Denmark, El Salvador, treland,Japan, Luxembourg, Italy,Finland,France,Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, UK. Corporations: Cisco, IBMCorporation,Motorola, Telecom Italia. Academic: Colciencias(Colombia). Gowemmx and Management A Donors` Committeeacts as the governing board,decidingon broadorientationsand strategicpriorities. An independentTechnical Advisory Panel of outsideexperts serves as an advisoryboard. The stafffrom the Secretariat,which is organizedas a unitof the Global ICTDepartment,is underthe direct supervisionof the ProgramManager. infoDevis undergoinga major restructuring:new staffing reflectsan increasedemphasis on organizationalcoherence, procedural clarity, and fiduciary responsibility. There is an Annual Meetingof the Donors Committee to review the previousyear`s operations and decideon future objectives and strategy. Fundingdecisionsare usuallyleftto the ProgramManager. The usualBankfinancial reportingon trustfunds applies to donors contributingthroughtrustfunds. Project informationis communicatedthroughquarterly and annualreports. Donors haveaccess to a web sitewith informationon projectsand to confidentialpaperson strategicissuesto be includedinthe work program. )Dev's sponsors would like support from the DGF at leastthrough FY2010. The DGF Councilrequestedthat INFconsidera near-term exit strategyfor infoDevfrom DGF assistance,taking into account the increasedsupport for ICTactivities in Bank lendingoperations. An independentextemalreview is plannedfor FY05,whichwouldfacilitate a betterunderstandingof an appropriateexit strategy. 149 Annex 10 GuarantCo Bank Contact: Suman Babbar1202-473-2029 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: INF RecipientAgency: Public PrivateInfrastructureDevelopment Group (PIDG) Web Address: catriona.cameron@crownagents.co.uk Total Budget: 53.65 DGF FundingRequest: 3.00 DGF Percentage: 6% Decentralizationand increasingurbanizationhave placedthe onus for providingbasic infrastructure(water and sanitation, drainage,urban transport, electricity,streetsand roads) on localgovemments. Nationalgovemments no longer consider ittheir responsibilityto underwrite investmentsin infrastructureat the local leveland localgovernments too often lack the experience and track recordthat wouldenable them to access localcapital. To facilitatethe provisionof infrastructureservices through publicand privatefinancing withoutthe necessityof sovereignguarantee, a partnershipwas formedamongthe Governmentsof the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerlandcalled PlDG (PublicPrivateInfrastructureInvestmentGroup). PlDGwas createdto provide guarantees and loans to help raise localcapitalfor infrastructureinvestment. The PlDGcreated a Trust Fund, and provides funds through three operatingcompanies: GuarantCo, EAIF, and DevCo. A fourth, ASPIFF, is being created. GuarantCowas initiallyconceivedby the Swedish InternationalDevelopment CooperationAgency (SIDA), but is now being developed under the auspices of PIDG. GuarantCo offerspartialguarantees on issuesof paperby private-sector infrastructure serviceprovidersand possiblymunicipalitiesand/orpublicsector authoritiesin lower-incomedevelopingcountries. Itsprimary aim is to tap institutionalfunds within these markets, which cannot at the momentbe accessedby infrastructureprojects. Properly structuredproducts, togetherwith a market-making role, enables GuarantCo to address the immediateshortage of localfunds while at the same time contributeto the developmentof localinstitutions'abilityto evaluateprojectrisks. Lastyear theWorld Bank Groupjoined PlDGwith the purposeof assistingPIDG clientsto evaluate, develop, and/orimplementrisk mitigation,financialand regulatorymechanisms,standards, systems,and procedures essentialto raisingfunds inthe capitalmarkets. With a DGF grant, PlDGcreatedthe TechnicalAssistanceFund(TAF) to enhance clients' abilityto attract private capitalfor financing of infrastructure and services. Specific objectivesof TAF include:(a) buildcapacity in boththe publicand privatesector in order to facilitatethe aims of PIDG; (b) mobilizeadditionalresourcestowardsthe implementation of initiativessponsored by the PIDG; and (c) promote bettercoordinationinthe delivery of technicalassistanceassociatedwith projectsand programssponsoredby the PIDG. DGF funds are used only for TAF, supportingstudies,technical assistance, consultancyservices,andtrainingto facilitatein- country development andlor implementationof projectsto befinancedor guaranteedby PlDGcompanies, including: (1)Infrastructure Development Strategies: Studiesto guide govemments on optionsfor infrastructurefinancing, including mechanismsto promote private-sectorinvolvementand localcurrencyfinancing. (2) Policy, Regulatory, and Institutional Reforms: Advice and trainingon the designand implementation of specificreformsaimedat facilitatinginfrastructurefinancing by the private sector. (3) Pioneering or Pilot Transactions: Support for the designand implementationof particularprojectsor transactions that will befinancedandlor guaranteedby a PlDG investmentvehicle. Such projectmust be pioneeringinsome importantrespect, reflectsome measure of innovation,and/or offer potentialdemonstrationeffects. (4) Capacity Building: Activitiesto buildthe capacity of governments, localcapitalmarkets, financialinstitutions,and quasi-publicenterprises,or to design arrangementsfor mitigatingrisk or raisingfunds for privatesector infrastructureinvestment. 150 Annex 10 PerformanceIndlcston, (1) Increasedproportionof domesticallyfinanced investmentsininfrastructure,interms ofoverallinvestmentininfrastructure. (2) Increasedlevelof privateinvestmentand participation inthe provisionof infrastructureand basicservices; and reductionin disproportionatetransactioncosts. (3) Pioneering projects. (4) Greaterawareness of and capacity to access localfunding sources in both publicand private sectors. t Progressand Achievements Progresswas delayeddue to fundingnot beingavailable to PlDG untillateJanuary 2004. As of May Ist, three applicationsfor . TAF funds totaling $450,000 have beenapproved for projectsin Ugandaand Madagascar. Fourothers totaling$1,275,000 are in the final stagesof review, and approval. The pipelineis robust, and a minimum of sevennewapplicationsis expectedover the nextthree months.The value of TAF has been clearly demonstrated through revisionof project design and substance to include trainingof localofficials,greaterinvolvement of localstakeholders, and emphasis on improving the conditionsof the poor in additionto the financialviability soughtby the privatesector partners. One projectcurrently underreviewwill bringtogethera potentialBank project,and severalbi-laterals, as well as the privatesector and localNGOsto address comprehensively urban developmentissueswhereas the originalproposalto government hadbeenvery limited,was contrary to Bank policy, and would not have been sustainable. TAF funding, advice,and facilitationamong the possibleinterestedpartiesis helpingto develop a strategicand comprehensive approach and attractingmany otherfundingsources in additionto the original PlDGlprivatesector proposal. IUnitedKingdom,Sweden, Netherlands, Switzerland, PPIAF, IFC PlDGwas createdthru a Memorandumof Understanding (MOU) duly executedby the U.K., Switzerland, Sweden, and the Netherlands on March142003 and is governed and administeredindependentlyof theWorld Bank. The governancestructure, operatingpolicies, and proceduresof PlDGare set out in the 'PIDG Constitution"which is an integralpart of and incorporatedinto this MOU. The Bank subsequently became a signatory to this MOU with the creationof the TechnicalAssistanceFund in late 2003. A special purposetrust in Mauritius(thePlDGTrust) was establishedas a vehicle for coordinatingthe applicationof PlDG members' funds. PlDGis managedby a Boardof Directorsof which the Bank is one of five members, and the Trust is managed by an independentBoardof Trusteesled by SG HambrosTrust Company Limited-UK. Dayto day operationsof PlDGare managedby a qualifiedProgramManagerwith the support of a small Secretariat. Legaland Secretariatsupport are providedby CrownAgents in London.All projectsto befinancedand/or executedwith financingfrom the PlDGTrust must be approved by the PlDGBoardof Directors. Individualprojectsare identified,prepared,and supervisedby one of the Companies establishedby PlDGeach of which hasqualifiedtechnicalmanagementas well as its own Boardof Directorsto guide and approve its financial interventionspriorto beingsent to the PlDG Board. The TechnicalAssistanceFund(TAF) is guidedby the "Statementof Policies and Proceduresof PlDGTechnicalAssistance Facility" adoptedby the PIDGBoardof Directorswhich sets out the objectivesof TAF and the terms upon which itwill operate, the powers and duties of the PIDG Secretariatand ProgramManager, the Technical Adviser, the PlDGTrust and the PlDG Boardof Directorswith respectto TAF. TAF reportsto the PlDG Boardof Directorsthrough the ProgramManagerand is managedon a day to day basis by a qualifiedTechnicalAdviser with experiencein developmentand infrastructurefinance. Approvalfor use of TAF funds is made by the PlDG Boardof Directors exceptfor applicationsfor lessthan $75,000 which may be approvedby the ProgramManager when recommendedby the TechnicalAdviser and are reviewedex- post by the Board. EnltStrategy DGF funds are sought to help developan entitythat, afterthree years, will be independentof Bank support and self-sustaining. Bank programsponsors have informed partnersthat DGF supportwill concludeat the end of FYO6. 151 Annex 10 Global Gas Flaring ReductionPublic-PrivatePartnership BankContact: Bent R. Svensson1202473-6976 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: INF RecipientAgency: The GlobalGas Flaring Reduction Public-PrivatePartnership Web Address: http:// www.ifc.org/ogc/global_gas.htm 1FinancialArrangement$ for FY05 (Amountin US $ Milllon) Total Budget: 2.15 DGF FundingRequest: 0.30 DGF Percentage: 14% The GlobalGas Flaring Reduction(GGFR) Public-Private Partnershipsupportsthe petroleum industryand nationalgovernments in their effortsto reducethe flaringof gas. Itaims to supplement and strengthen effortsalready underway, by mobilizingthe industry, governments, and development agencies injoint actions. The mainfocus of the Partnershipis to identifyand find ways to overcome barriersthat currently inhibitflaring reductioninvestments. As the causes and barriersare known, the challengeis to find practical solutionsthatwill generate investments. The overalloutcome of the partnership is intended to be a significantreductionof globalgas flaring, in particularin the period2005-2010. An importantobjectiveis settinga standardfor flaring and venting, accepted for implementationby the GGFR Partnership. The intentof the standardisto significantlyreduce flaring and venting before2010. Some 7040% of globalflaring is occurringin 10-15countries, and participationof all those governments and their nationaloil companies in GGFR, in combinationwith participationof the major internationaloil companiesactiveinthose countries, would significantlyfacilitateglobalflare reduction. The preparationof Action Plans is contemplatedfor the 10-15 majorgas flaring countries. MaIn Components - Components/Activities GlobalActivities: (a) developingcommoninternationalflaringand ventingstandards,and a possiblevoluntary flaring "certification"scheme basedon these standards; (b) investigatingpossibleneedsfor subsidiesfor flaring reductionprojectsat remotefields; and (c) developingbaseline methodologies for gas flaring projectsto obtaincarboncredits. Country-Specific Activities: (a) implementinggas sector strategies and legislationin Nigeria;(b) implementingtechnical assistanceprograms; (Algeria: Associatedgas study and selection of CDM projects,Angola: Proposedlegalframework for gas utilization,Angola: Investigatewhetherthe LNGexportprojectwould be eligiblefor carboncredittrading; Chad: Evaluationof employmentcreationas a resultof Small Scale Gas use basedon associatedgas); (c) preparingprojectsfor carboncreditfinancingthrough the designof financingmechanisms (Algeria);(d) developingpowerand LPG based on flared gas (Cameroon);and (e) carryingout the following: Indonesia -associatedgas study; Russia associatedgas study and - analyses of macro-economicbenefitsto the government; EquatorialGuinea Venezuela -work -associatedgas study; Brazil, Mexicoand programs. Dissemination Activities: publishing reports; holdingregionalworkshopson carbon credits and regulation(Cameroon, Indonesia);holdingtwo internationalconferences. The next is plannedfor May 10-11,2004 in Algiers. Expected Outputs Global: standards, design financing mechanismsfor gas flaring reductionprojects,and improvedlegaland regulatory framework for investments inflaring reductions. 152 Annex 10 Country Specific: (a) projectspreparedand implementedon strategiesfor gas flaring reductionin 10-15 countries;(b) local small-scale use of gas (including LPG schemes) in areas where gas is nowflared; and (c) carboncreditfinancing projects prepared. Dissemination: knowledgeon gas flaringenhancedand best practicesdisseminated. Performancelndlcatom Key Performance Indicators for GGFR Partnership (Governments and Companies): Numberof target countriesand companiesthat have become GGFR partnersand are committedto implementingthe globalflaring and venting standard. Implementationplans in countries. Outcomellmpact Indicators for Work ProgramActivities: Reduced flaringthroughgas usedfor other purposes. Reduced povertythroughthe increasedlocaluse of gas and through accessto modemenergy. 0 Output indicators: (a) Increased investmentsin flare reductionprojects;(b) Implementationof commonstandardsby oil- companiesand governments intarget countries; (c) Feasibilitystudies and suggestionsto the industryfor implementationof demonstrationprojects;and (d) Demonstrationprojectsand increasedLPG marketpenetration. Progrsorend Achievements ".- The report on Best Practicesof Gas Flaring Regulationfinalized. Developmentof standards: Considerableprogresswas made on a commonglobalstandardfor gas flaring and venting. A workshopwas held in October 2003 in Londonto discuss the principlesof the globalstandard. The standard is expectedto be approved at the next Steering Groupmeetingin March2004. Designfinancing mechanismfor gasflaring reductionproject,in progress. Held workshops on Carboncredits inAngola, Algeria and Nigeria, on Gas flaring atWorld Gas conferencein June 2003, and on Gas FlaringManagement - RegulatoryPracticesin Calgary in October 2003. Implementationof Gas Sector Strategiesin Nigeria. The implementationofthe gas sector strategywork and the developmentof a legalframework for the gas sector is underway. In addition,the work on formulatinga plan to develop the gas markets in Ghana, Togo and Benin for the West Africa Gas Pipeline beyond itsfoundationcustomershas started. TechnicalAssistance ProgramsinAlgeria, Angola and Chad. Norway, BP, Shell,Sonatrach, Angola, Nigeria,United States,Total,ChevronTexaco,ENI,Exxon Mobil,EquatorialGuinea, Indonesia, Norsk Hydro,Statoil, Halliburton,Cameroon Governance and Illlensgemcant The Partnershipis governed by a Steering Group,which includesrepresentativesfrom governments,oil companies,and the civil society inthe selected countries. The Steering Committeemeets once or twice a year to discussand clear the work programfor the Partnership. The terms of reference clearly spell out the work to be carriedout by the Partnershipunderthe directionof the Steering Committee. A Core Task Team (CTT) has beenformed to implementactivities, supervise consultants,disseminatebest practices,and liaisewith stakeholders. It will be locatedinthe Bank's Oil, Gas, Mining and Chemicals Department inWashington D.C. Itwill consist of six professionals(of which four are seconded) andtwo to threeassistantsworking full time on the Partnership,butwill also draw on the time and resourcesof Bank and other participants'staffworking inthe selected gasflaring countries. The CTT will be linkedto the Bank'sprogramsin the selected countries. As has beenthe case duringthe first year of the Partnership,extensiveuse of consultants for specializedtasks is envisaged. Exitsmtegy The Partnershipis envisagedto run for three years only. In that regard, the disengagement strategy is inherentin the program,and the recipientcountriesshould be ready to continuetheir gas flaring eliminationprograms on their own at the end of FY06. Annex 10 Public-Private InfrastructureAdvisory Facility(PPIAF) Bank Contact: HosseinRazaviI202-458-5300 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: INF RecipientAgency: PPIAF Web Address: http:lhww.miaf.orq t Total Budget: 16.79 DGF FundingRequest: 2.00 DGF Percentage: 12% Objectivegiand ExpectedQutcomm The Public-PrivateInfrastructureAdvisory Facility(PPIAF) is a globaltechnicalassistance facility designedto help eliminate povertyand achieve sustainable development in developingcountriesby supporting privatesector involvementin infrastructure. Launchedin mid-I999, PPIAF pursuesthis objectivethroughtwo main mechanisms: (i) channelingtechnicalassistanceto developingcountrygovemments,and (ii)identifying, disseminating, and promoting bestpractices. The principalbeneficiariesof PPIAF's activitiesare citizensof developingcountries, particularlythe poorest, who benefitfrom improvedaccess to more reliable infrastructureservices. The poverty focus of PPIAF's missionhas resultedin a portfolioinwhich about one-thirdof all activitiesare insub-Saharan Africa. Because PPIAF funds are not directly linkedto the lendingprogramsof any particulardonor, many of PPIAF's activitiesare multicountry, allowingfor projects with regionalbenefits. Another focus of PPIAF'sfunds is post-crisiscountries. Participatingdonorsbenefitfrom PPIAFthrough coordinationof their programsand activities. Donors also gain accessto globalbestpracticesand are able to leverage their contributionsto an untiedfund which utilizesthe Bank procurementprocedures. The privatesectoralso benefdsthrough expanded businessopportunities.The Bank benefitsin severalways: (i) donor resources in support of key businessstrategiesare more effectivelymobilized,managed, and targeted; (ii) PPIAF knowledge, experience, and activitieshelp improvethe quality of Bank operations; and (iii) the PPIAF institutionalstructureprovidesa valuable vehicle for consultingand coordinatingwith publicand privatestakeholdersinthe private infrastructurearena. MainComponents PPIAF was designedto advance innovationin the area of privateparticipationin infrastructure(PPI). "Frontier"topics (such as improvingthe investmentclimate and independentregulationof infrastructure)and cutting-edgethemes have been supported by PPIAF. These frontier topics have now been"mainstreamed" by the Bank and other PPIAFdonors and have become central elementsin the infrastructuredevelopment agenda. PPIAFcontinuesto respondto the demands of a rapidlychangingand complex market by adjustingits Indicativework programon a yearly basis. The pursuitof new high prioritytopics requiresdistilling and disseminatinga fresh set of lessonsand innovationsin PPI. PPIAF'sactivitiesand achievementscan be summarized under two headings: Technical Assistance: Channelingtechnicalassistanceto govemmentsindevelopingcountrieson measuresto tap the full potentialof privatesector involvement in infrastructure. Activities includeadvice on the framingof pro-poor infrastructure development strategies;the design and implementationof specificreforms; buildingconsensusfor the adoptionof reforms; and buildingcapacity in designing and regulatingprivateinfrastructurearrangements. Since its launchin July 1999, PPIAF has supported291 activities in these areas in 84 countriesinall developingregionsand coveringall infrastructuresectors. Mostof these projectsremainunder execution. Emerging Best Practices: Identifying,disseminatingand promotingbest practices on mattersrelatedto privatesector involvementin infrastructureindevelopingcountries. Activities includethe preparationof case studies,toolkitsand other publications,as well as supportto conferences,workshops,and similar events. Since its launch, PPIAFhas supportedover40 activitiesin these areas. I 154 Annex 10 Performancelndlcrrtors B Output 1 Indicator: Improvedenvironmentfor PPI legaland regulatoryprogress. B Output 2 Indicator: Improvedenvironmentfor PPI institutionalstrengthening. D Output 3 Indicator: Improvedenvironmentfor PPI capacitybuilding progress and dissemination of best practices. D Output 4 Indicator: Numberof transactionsthat lead to sustainable,affordableservices. FacilitatingTransactions Since its creation in 1999,PPIAF has facilitatedthe designof 30 PPI transactions, 11 of which have - alreadybeen awardedwith a further 19 currently being developedor pending award. Regulatory Institutions - PPIAF hasfunded the creationor strengthening of 20 institutions dedicated to the sustainable growth of private participationin infrastructure. PPI Legislationand Regulation - PPIAF hasfundedthe drafting of 25 sets of laws and regulationsrelatedto reformstrategies and regulationfor the infrastructuresector as a whole or for ports, power,telecommunications,or water and sanitation. To date, 7 3f these laws have been passedwhile 18 sets of laws, decrees or regulationsare beingdebatedor are pendinglegislativeaction. PPISector Reform Strategies -As a resultof PPIAF-funded strategy recommendations,11 countrieshave adopted or are now implementing 14 differentsector reformsinthe area of water, power,gas, telecommunicationsand transport. Trainingand Workshops - PPIAF has also funded 22 training courses,primarily inthe field of regulation,that have benefited over 1,500attendees. On topics of sector reformand privatesector participation,PPIAF has conductedover 30 intemational workshops and 150 national-levelworkshops that have beenattended by nearly7,000stakeholdersin PPI. Partners MultilateralDevelopmentBank, United Nations Development Program,officialbilateraldonors,World Bank Govamanceand Management PPIAF is govemed by ProgramCouncil made up of representativesof PPIAF donors. The Program Council,chairedby a Bank representative,meets once a year to reviewthe PPIAF'sstrategicdirection,achievements,and financing requirements. The ProgramCouncil approvesall activitiesover $75,000. To ensurethe qualityand relevance of PPIAF-financedactivities,the ProgramCouncil is supported by an independentTechnical Advisory Panel, whose members are selected based on their expertise in mattersrelatingto private involvementin infrastructure in developingcountries. A small Program ManagementUnit (PMU), headedby a ProgramManager,is responsiblefor day-to-day management. PPIAF hasestablishedthree regional coordination offices as partof the PMU -in Nairobi, Kenya;Pretoria,South Africa;and Singapore. These officesassist in executingthe PPIAFwork program. Regionalcoordinatorsreport to the ProgramManager. The PMU also includes a budget analystand program and team assistants based inWashington, D.C. The PMU sends out quarterlyreportwith informationon all activitiesapproved for that quarter,as well as an annual report on all PPIAF activitiesand summary financial statements.The PMU presentsa progress report to donors at the annual meeting. Exit Strategy 1 PPIAF is a well-performing programthat meritscontinued Bank support. While PPIAF appliedto migrateto Window One, the DGF Councilendorsed funding for a one year extension inWindowTwo to smooth the transitionto reliancein FY06 on budget resourcesfor the Bank'scontribution. 155 Annex 10 Cities Alliance Bank Contact: Mark Hildebrand/ 202473-0575 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: INF -UrbanandWater RecipientAgency: Sub-grantsto extemal recipients Web Address: http://www.citiesalliance.org FlnanclalAmngements for FYOS (Amount In US$ Balllion) Total Budget: 19.26 DGF FundingRequest: 1.70 DGF Percentage: 9% The CitiesAlliance (CA) is catalyzingactionand improving the efficiency of urban developmentcooperation. The CA seeks to achieve MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs) for the urban poor,in particularthe goalof improvingthe lives of 100 millionslum dwellers by 2020, while preventingthe growth of new slums (as adoptedby the UN from the Alliance'sCitiesWWhout SlumsAction Plan). CA membershavecommittedto workingwith newcoherenceto achieve this goal. The Alliance is marshallingthe resources, experience, and knowledgeof its cities and their development partnersto delivertwo primaryoutcomes:(i) scaling up slum-upgrading programsto citywide and nationwidescales of action,to improvethe livesof the urban poor;and (ii) implementingCity Development Strategies (CDS) to makecities more productive,more efficient,and capableof providingthe poorwith economicopportunities. Scaling Up Slum Upgrading:Throughits members,the CA is providingsupport to the increasingnumberof national/local governments committedto providingsecuretenure and basic infrastructureservicesto the urban poor. The CA scales up these actions by adoptingcitywideand nationwideprogramsof action, including:(i) promoting reforms& removing urban land marketconstraintsto preventthe growth of new slums; and (ii) identifyingsustainablefinancingmechanisms.To achieve this, the CA catalyzes local, national, & intemationalaction, identifies& fills key knowledgegaps, & providestechnicalassistance. City Development Strategies: Rapidly increasingurban populationsand growing urban povertyrequiresrethinking poverty reductionefforts. Most donororganizationsstill focus their actions primarilyon the rural poor. CDSs build on linkages betweenrural and urban; balance economic,social, and environmentalgoals and actionswith the needfor economic growth; and mobilizesignificantlocaland intemationalcontributionsto fight poverty. CDSs also serve as local PRSPs with the levelo governmentwhich is directly responsiblefor service delivery.The 15-20 year time frame of a CDS, enables local governments,the privatesector and civilsocietyto developa sharedvision for the city's future, includinginvestment opportunities,employmentand inclusion strategies. Sustainable Financing Strategies: The CA is also marshallingsupport from its membersto helpcities mobilize resources for infrastructureinvestments including domesticcapitalto implementCDSs and citywide upgradingstrategies. The CA has establisheda working group of these partners,including representativesof local authorities, intemationalratingagencies,and private-sectorfinancial institutions,to: a) identifyand analyzeinnovations,major constraints,good practicesand normative standards for linkingcity financing needswith domesticcapital markets;and b) assist cities in developingsustainable financing strategies, linkingcity financingneedswith domesticcapital and accessingsubnationalfinancingfacilities. Scaling Up Slum Upgrading: (a) Numberof cities and/or countrieswith clear, long-term slum upgradingprograms, incorporatingboth targets and financing;(b) Numberof countries introducingmeasuresto removeurbanland market constraints;(c) Number of cites and/or countries introducinginclusivestrategiesto preventthe emergenceof new slums; (d) Numberof cities and/or countriesrequestingassistancefrom CA members;(e) Amount of investmentin slum upgrading leveragedthrough CA activities. City Development Strategies: (a) Numberof CA membersintroducing/ modifyingtheir approach to urban development, 156 Annex 10 includingthe use of CDSs; (b) Numberof citiesintroducingCDSs as a strategicplanning tool 8, planningfor growth outside of their administrativeboundaries: (c) Numberof localgovernment associations promoting CDSs as a guidingtool for urban development; (d) Numberof CDSs incorporatingsustainable financing strategies;(e)Amount of investments leveraged. Sustainable Financing Strategies: (a) Workinggroup of publicand privatesector institutionshelpingcitiesmobilize domesticcapitalestablishedandfunctioning; (b) Innovationsidentifiedin each region of sustainablefinancing structuresthat are competitiveandthat linkcity infrastructureneedswith domestic capitalmarkets; (c) Methodology,criteria,and normative standardsfor cities to access domestic suppliesof capitalfor infrastructureinvestments; (e) Cities accessing guarantee mechanismssupported by CA members: (9Countries matchingthe needto finance infrastructureinvestmentsto improve livingconditionsof the urbanpoorwith domesticinvestors'needsto diversify their investmentportfolios. Progressand Achievements Improving efficiency. CA has createda globalpartnershipof cities and their development partnersin support of localauthorities scaling up successfulapproaches to urbanpovertyreduction. Replicationis leveragedthrough nationalassociationsof cities (e.g., BurkinaFaso,China,Ghana,Latvia, Philippines, South Africa) andthe world's major regionaland global organizations of citiesand local governments . Achieving MDGs. Policyframeworks and politicalcommitments to scale upslum upgrading to citywideand nationwide scales of action in cities of all sizes to achieve MDG Target I 1 (e.g. SBo Paulo and Salvador, Bahia, Brazil; Tetouan, Morocco; Iran; Vietnam; Mauritania;SouthAfrica). Lessons learnedfrom nine countriescommitted to nationwide slum upgradinganalyzedand disseminated in 2003Annual Report. Implementing CDSs. Morethan 100 CDSscompletedor underway in25 countries. Mainstreamingthe tool of CDS as local PRSPs characterizedby strong ownership by mayors and other civic leadersin citiesof all sizes in all regions. Alliance grant-funded technical assistancelinkedto more than $4 billionin urbaninfrastructureinvestments. Improving coherence. Two of the main"buildingblocks" of Bank's Urban and LocalGovernment Strategy CDS and scaling up slum upgrading -are - beingmainstreamed byAlliance members throughtheir own bilateraland multilateralprograms, resuitingin harmonizationof urbandevelopment cooperation, with activeengagement by CA members including,Brazil, AFD (France), BMUGTZ (Germany), Italy, Japan, Norway, Sida, USAID, Asian DevelopmentBank, UN-Habitat,and all Bank regionalVPUs. the UnitedKingdom, the UnitedStates oca1Authorities,World Federationof UnitedCities, A Consultative Group (CG), consistingof financial contributorsto the CA and the four majorinternationalorganizationsof local authorities,selves as the executive boardof the partnership,with approvalauthority over use of resources. A full-timeSecretariat managesday-to-day operations. A Policy Advisory Boardwith membersfrom each regionprovidesinputto boththe CG and the Secretariat. The CG has establisheda Steering Committee to monitorand providepolicyguidance. The annualbudget andwork programare approvedat the annualmeetingof the CG. Allwork programactivitiesare administeredthroughthis process. The processfor decidingon activitiesis establishedin the CA Charter. Fundingapplicationsare submittedto the secretariat,and must be sponsored by at leastone CA member. An initialscreeningdetermineseligibilityfor funding. Technicalassessmentsand donor coordinationensurethat proposed activitiesare not in conflictwith existingactivities. Basedon the results of this process, the Secretariatmakes fundingrecommendations,although activitiesover $250,000 are approveddirecttyby the CG. Activitiesare implementedby grant recipientsor, in some cases,the Bank or a UN organizationon behalfof the beneficiary.Activitiesare monitored by the Secretariatand by the CA member@)sponsoringthe proposal. The primary reportingmechanismsare annualreports, CG annualmeetings, quarterly financialreportingto donors, periodicreportingto the SteeringCommitteeetc. i ExitStrategy - CitiesAlliance is a well-performing programthat meritscontinued Bank support. The CA Secretariatpreviouslydisengaged from DGF funding. While CitiesAlliance appliedto migrateto Window One, the DGF Councilendorsed fundingfor CA in FY05as a one year extensioninWindow Two, taking into account overallDGF budgetconstraints. The extensionwill providethe projectsponsors with a year to arrangealternatefunding sources, includinggreater relianceon trust funds and Bank budget. 157 Annex 10 ExtractiveIndustryTransparency Initiative Bank Contact: Charles P. McPherson1473-2854;Michael Levitsky 1473-6657 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: INF RecipientAgency: Sub-grants to external recipients Web Address: N/A FinancialArrangements for FYOS(Amountin US $ Million) Total Budget: 2.90 DGF Funding Request: 0.50 DGF Percentage: 17% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcamw 1 - 1 4 The Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative(EITI) aims to increasethe transparencyof paymentsmade by industry and of revenue receivedby host governmentsfrom oil, gas, and mining production (El). The EITi addressesthe challenges of implementing transparencyfor El revenues. The focus will be on voluntary cooperationfrom governments. Increasedtransparencyis a key element of good governancein El producing countries. The Bank'sparticipationin ElTl has beenagreed by Bank management,and is supported by IFC. The initialtwo-year implementationwill involve pilotprograms on transparency in at leastfive volunteering countries. The overalloutcome is expected to be a significant improvementin El revenuetransparency,especiallyincriticalcountries. The developmentobjectiveoutcomesare: Successful implementationof pilot reportingof El revenues in key countries: Problemsoftransparencyof El revenues are widespread among developingcountrieswith large El sectors,but are particularlycriticalinfiveto ten countries. Success with transparencyin one or moredifficult countries will create incentivesfor others to change policies. Global best practice disseminationfor Eltransparency: There is a needto achieve a broaderconsensus about the practicalaspects,policy implications,and priorities of Eltransparency. Promotingthis issuehigherinthe global development agendawill influencepolicy inhostcountriesand among donors. The ElTl will aim to establish best practicesin this area for use by all major El producing countriesand by investors.Itwill benefitfrom the Bank'sstrength inglobalknowledge managementand dissemination. Improved revenue management and reducedcorruption: Revenue transparencywill empower civil society to hold governmentsto account, and make mismanagementor diversion of funds more difficult. It should improve the business environment,especiallyfor foreign investmentand financing. In addition,itwill helpcountriesconfrontthe challenge of macro-economicmanagementof large El revenueflows. Expansionof transparencyto additional countries: The Initiativewill help make Eltransparency a mainstreamissueand practicefor countries with significant El revenues,as well as for private companiesand for multilateraland bilateraldonors. Componentactivities: Implementationof reporting of revenues in pilot countries: Preparationand implementationof El revenue reporting proceduresin at leastfive volunteer PilotCountries(expectedto include:Nigeria,Ghana,Timor Leste,Azerbaijan, Kyrgyz Republicand one or two others). Publicationof policy recommendations for El transparency: Research into key issuesand consultation with stakeholders. Productionof practical guidelines and templatesfor reporting: Consultwith stakeholdersto developpracticalguidelines, templates, procedures,and instructions on howto implementrevenuetransparency in El invarious contexts. Internationalconference on EITI: Organize (with partners)a majorintemationalconference to follow on from the ElTl "launch"conferenceheld in June, 2003, in London. Expansionof ElTlto additional countries (next phase): Through analysis and consultation,select a largergroup of countries to implementtransparency under ElTl principles,as part of the global mainstreamingof transparency. 158 Annex 10 PerformanceIndlcatom Successful implementationin pilot countries: Completionof reporting systems and regulationsin the volunteer countries; productionand publicationof the initialreportson revenues receivedby the govemments. 0 Publication of policy recommendationsfor Eltransparency: Publicationof at leastone major document that provides a discussion of key policy and implementationissues. 0 Production of practical guidelinesand templates for reporting: Publicationof relevantdocuments. lntemational Conference on EITI: At leastone majorconferenceof stakeholders. Expansion of ElTl work to additionalcountrieb: By the end of the first phase, have agreement from at leastfive further significantEl countriesto implement revenuetransparency. -- ProgpEBssand Achlevenrenta As this is a new program,there is no progressto report. United Kingdomand Norway(expected) It is expected that ElTlwill be governed by a Steering Group, representingthe main donors, the Bank,the IFC, the IMF, the private sector, host governments,and independentexperts. The SteeringGroup will act asthe governing and advisory board, meetingonce or twice per year to discuss and approvethe work programand budget. There will be a Secretariathoused in Bank headquarters, staffed by senior Bank specialistsassignedon a part time basis. These specialistswill have already beenworking on projectsclosely relatedto or linkedwith EITI, andwill have extensive commercialexperiencein the oil, gas,and miningindustries. The Secretariatwill prepareand monitorthe work program,after extensive consultationswith hostgovemments, industry,and other stakeholders. Close coordinationwill be maintainedwith othergroupsworking on El transparency in the IMF,the UK Govemment and other major agencies. Short-term consultants with relevantcountry,industry,and financialskills will provide additionaladvice and capacity. Operationaland financial reportsto donors and the Steering Groupwill be preparedquarterly. ExitStrate!gy The initialphase of the ElTlwill involvea two-year pilot program,following which the programwill disengage from DGFfunding. INF's commitment is limitedto this pilot program. The purpose of the work is to ensure that Eltransparencycan be part of mainstreamwork by the Bank and otherdonors and agencies in key countries,once the pilot program hasdemonstratedhowto do this andwhat benefitscan be achieved. Some type of ElTl structure may continueafterthe pilot program,but it would be a new, distinct structure, probably with a lower level of direct Bank engagement. 159 Annex 10 Communitiesand SmallScale Mining Bank Contact: Jeffrey DavidsonI202-458-8388 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: INF RecipientAgency: Sub-grants to externalrecipients Web Address: http:llwww.casmsite.org 1FlnanclalArrangements for FYOS{Amountin US$ Mlillon) Total Budget: 0.58 DGF FundingRequest: 0.28 DGF Percentage: 48% ObJwtlvesand ExpactadOutcomes Artisanaland small-scale mining(ASM) has becomea principalmeans of livelihoodand a criticalsupplementary sourceof incomefor millionsof rural householdsaroundthe world, despitethe fact that mostofthose involvedhavefew or ill-defined legalrights,use rudimentarymethodsand tools, work in harshor hazardousconditions,and rarely realizea fair value for the mineralsthey produce. Countryconcerns have escalated inthe face of persistentand deepeningpovertyand a dramaticgrowthinthe numbersof people drawn to this activity. The internationaldevelopmentcommunityhas repeatedlyconcludedthat a coordinated approach is needed to effectivelyaddressthe complexissues,problems,and opportunitiesassociatedwith ASM. The ExtractiveIndustries Reviewconcluded that helpingto formalizeASM activity, improve retumsto miners,and buildtheir capacityto operatein more environmentallyand sociallyways is a legitimate area for increased Bank involvement. Communitiesand Small-Scale Mining (CASM) was launchedin March2002 by the Bank and other developmentorganizationsto promotea more coordinatedand informedglobalapproachto ASM assistance. The overarching goal of CASM is to reduce poverty and to developsustainable communitiesand economieswhere ASM is practiced. To achieve this goal,CASM: (i) collectsand collates past experienceand currentknowledge;(ii) stimulates new approachesand knowledge;and (iii) makesthis knowledge accessibleto governments,developmentagencies, miningcommunities,and other stakeholders,to support and strengthentheir effortsto dealwith boththe complex social and environmentalchallenges and the economicdevelopmentopportunitiespresented by ASM. CASM provides a networkingand learningforum for a broadarray of stakeholders,includingnationalgovernmentand localauthorities, bilateraland multilateralagencies, technicalassistance practitionersand researchers,internationaland local NGOs,mining companies, mineralbuyersand fabricators,minersand their associations, and mining-affectedcommunities. MainComponents Catalyst for constructive change: CASMs work programis tied directlyto relevant MillenniumDevelopmentGoals (MDGs). Emphasisis placedon working through partnerships,extendingsupport to other new initiatives,and assuming a larger advocacyrole. CASM seeks to notonly to deepenthe discussion on ASMs mostdifficult issues,butalso to promotenew policyand programinitiativesto address these issues. CASMwill initiate an advisory service to assist stakeholders in applying,testing, and implementingnew policies,tools, and approaches. Knowledge sharing and capacity building: Through itswebsite, e-letter, and learningevents,CASM makes information and knowledge availableworldwide. CASM organizes and sponsors learningevents,to facilitatethe assimilationof new knowledgeand skills and to develop the capacityto apply this knowledgeeffectively. Knowledge development: CASM supports research,field activities, and projectswhich contributeto the understandingof ASM dynamicsand the identiicationof good practices. This componentaims to: (a) distilllessons learnedfrom past experience; (b) identifyor develop good policies;and (c) developguidelines and tools that are keyed to MDGs and targeted toward differentinterestgroups. These guidelines and tools are intendedto improve governance and transparency,natural resourcemanagement,environmentaland communityhealth, and livelihoodstability, as well as contributeto ruraleconomic developmentin general. Network and community building: This componentstrengthensthe frameworkfor sharing and developingknowledgeand 160 Annex 10 effectingpositivechange. CASMconstantly improvesthe instrumentsusedfor community building(website,conferences, and learningevents) and seeks ways to extend its reachto a widening circle of stakeholders. CASM meetingsinclude a broad array of stakeholdersand provide supportive fora for engaging indifficultdiscussions and bridginggaps. Performaneelnrdteatora I CASM's impacton developmentoutcomes will becomeclearer over time; for start-up purposes, performance indicatorsfocus on quantity ratherthan quality outcomes. Policyadvice and assistance providedto govemments and other stakeholders: changes in practiceintroducedthrough CASM-promoted policies,programs, and activities; newpartnersengagedin research, advocacy, and implementation efforts. Participationin annualconferences and learningevents by stakeholdercategory and gender: value and relevance as identifiedby participants;user hits on website by country of originand downloads of documents. Good practiceguidelinesand policiesproducedfor differentstakeholdergroups. Numberof organizations,governments, interestgroups, and individualsreached, engaged, and benefitingfrom involvement in the CASM network;CASMcommunity membershipby stakeholder groupand countriesof residence. Progrsssand Achievements Implementationand disbursementhasbeenslowerthan anticipatedpartiallydue to the part-time natureof the Secretariat.TheAnnual GeneralMeetingwas usedas a toolfor sharingexperience and buildingnetworks. Limitedprogresshastakenplaceon implementationof one smallgrant. The CASMWebsiteand Knowledge Centerwas established. Two studieswere commissioned and completedon artisanaland small-scale mining in the LatinAmerican region;CASM partiallyfunded a third study in the Congo. AfDS, ILO, UN-DESA, UnitedKingdom, NaturalResourcesCanada-CANMET, ConservationlntemationalGlobalMiningResearch Alliance, small-scale miningcooperatives,entrepreneurialand socialwelfare associations, Institutefor Geo-Resources and Environment(Japan), internationalCouncilon Miningand Metals Qovemsnceand Management A Strategic Management and Advisory Group (SMAG), which serves as the governingbody of CASM, meetsformally at leastonce a year. It providesbroadstrategicguidanceand reviewsthe overall performanceof CASM. An ExpertAdvisory Group, comprisedof an internationalpanelof recognizedASM experts, provides technicaladviceto the Secretariatand acts as a qualityassuranceboard. A small Secretariat is now housedin the Bank's Washington, D.C., offices. Seniorspecialistsfrom the Bank have been assignedon a part-timebasisto coordinateand overseeCASMs activities,supported by a programassistant. The Secretariatrunsan internship program, whichtrains graduatestudentswho aTe interestedand committedto working on ASM. The Secretariatreportsto the SMAG throughthe Chair (currentlyDFID) at least once quarterly. The Secretariatpreparesthe work planand specificprojectsin consultation with the ExpertAdvisory Board, other stakeholders, and potentialpartnerorganizations. The work plan is approvedby the SMAG and other participatingstakeholdersat the CASMAnnualGeneralMeeting Unauditedfinancialstatements and progressreportson all approved activitiesare submittedto all donorsquarterly. Ifdonors providenon-core fundsfor specificactivities,separatereports are issued. An annualreport andsummary financialstatement are issuedas public documents availableto all interestedparties. ExltStrategy The goal of the projectsponsorsis for CASMs value to be recognizedand supportedsufficientlyby other donors so that it can continue to operateindependentof Bank assistancefollowingdisengagementfrom DGF at the end of FY07. This year, the Chairwill initiatea campaignto generatematchingdonor support from other agenciesand foundations. 161 Annex 10 StrengtheningGrassrootsBusinessOrganizations Initiative(SGBI) Bank Contact: HaroldRosenI202-473-8841; Marjorie PaviaI202-473-5344 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: PSD RecipientAgency: Sub-grants to grassroots business organizations Web Address: NIA FlnanclalArrangements for FYO6(Amount in US$ Mlllion) Total Budget: 4.00 DGF FundingRequest: 1.50 DGF Percentage: 38% Objwtivelsand ExpectedOutcomrers Althoughmarket-basedsystems have importantadvantages in allocatingresources and organizingeconomic activity, they often encountermarketfailures, such as exclusion of many of the poor and marginalized. Private companies strugglein difficultmarkets and segments, and progresshas been limitedwith "tricklingdown" economic benefitsto the poor and disadvantaged. A backlash has resultedin many developingcountries, questioningmarket-based economics, globalization, and privatization,and even endangering pro-marketgovernments. A new class of organization socially-drivenbusinesses has developed, partly in responseto market failuresto reach the poor. - - These "grassrootsbusinessorganizations" (GBOs) do businesswith a socialmission -helpingthe poorand disadvantagedparticipate in sustainablebusinessopportunities. But most GBOs fail to live up to their potential, due to their smallsize, high coststructure,limited businesscapabilities,and rootsin an entrepreneurialculturethat lacksthe professionalsystems and structuresrequiredfor greater scale and impact. GBOs alsooftenlackaccess to privatefinancing,markets,and outside technicalassistance. Publicsector assistanceis often unavailableand does not provideneededbusinesssupport. So despite their importantsocial role, most GBOs tend to remain small, inefficient,donor-dependent, and far too limited in reachingthe poorand disadvantaged. The StrengtheningGrassrootsBusiness Organizations Initiative(SGBI) would buildon recentpilotwork, strengtheningand scalingup models that createsustainableeconomic opportunitiesfor the poor. The SGBlwould combine the strengthsof the Bank,the IFC, and other stakeholdersto providea group of GBOswithwell-designedand carefullydeliveredprogramsof technicalassistance(TA),and in some cases "patient"investment, to support business improvement and scalingup. A strong effortwould be madeto disseminate - - learning,createsynergies,and broadenthe Initiative'simpact. The SGBl would be initiallyfunded equally by the IFC and the Bank (via DGF). DGFfunds would be channeled directlyto GBOs as grants,to be managed by the GBOs themselves. Inthe start-up phase, the Initiativewould be operated"in-house"as a mainstream Bank activity. Later, itwould evolve intoa new structurethat would eventuallyaccommodate additionalparticipants. The Initiative wouldwork closelywith the Bank on strategy,operationalsupport, learning,and communications. The initiativewould start by working with a pilotgroup of six GBOs, each headedby a respected, successfulsocial entrepreneurwith whom the WBG has already worked. These GBOs are independent,self-governed, and have a strongtrack record. Other important criteriaincludereplicabilitylscalability,a mix of businessorientationand strong social perspective,and outreachto the poorest. The pilotgroup of GBOs has already been selected. Itincludescompaniesin Bolivia,Cambodia, Kenya and Tanzania, South Africa, Nigeria,and India. These companieswould be strengthenedand in some casesscaled up. A few successfulcasesof scaling-up GBOs could contributeto the SBGl's demonstrationeffectand provethe soundness of its concept. At the same time, the SGBl would start to preparea pipelineof afew "new" GBOs to be assisted, usingthe same criteria mentionedabove. In most cases, the IFC's ProjectDevelopment Facilitiesin the regionwould managethe project,with helpfrom other partnerswith strong localcapabilities. 162 Annex 10 Performancelndlcators Some indicativeoutputs might be as follows: Major "deals"booked(cumulative numberin portfolio): FY05 six; FY06 15. TA provided(staffmonths): FY05 150; FY06 250. - - - - Numberof leaning/communicationevents: FY05-two; FY06 -three. Money spenton grants at the GBO level: FY05-$2 million; FY06 "Patient"investments at the GBO level: FY05 -$0.75 million; FY06 $1.5 million. Administrativeexpenditures (Initiativelevel): FY05 -0.75 million; FY06 $1.5 million. --$4- million. Other expenditures (tools, development, learning,communications) at the GBO level: FY05 -$0.5 million; FY06 $1 million. - Morespecific measurable outputswill be developed as the Initiativephases up. Prqrcassand Achievements As this is a new program, there is no progressto report. Partnersinclude official bilateraldonors,foundations, other internationaland regionalorganizations(EC, etc.), civil society/NGOs, Bank GroupAssociated Funds (including GEF),and others (universities, etc.)The SGBIwill developnew partnershipsand strengthenexisting oneswith a group of best-practiceTA providerswho could preparetoolsand approaches to help GBOs. Severalsuch partners are alreadyworking with the IFC and the Bank inthis field, includingconsultingfirms, specializedfirms that promoteor investin GBOs, web-based retailers, NGOsfrom developedcountries, and localorganizations. Inadditionto technicaland strategicpartners,donors will also be involved. Afterthe hrst phase (during whichfunding will be providedsolely by the IFC and The Bank), additional donorlinvestorsupport will be mobilized,both at the Initiativeleveland the GBO level. At the GBO level,these strategicand funding partnershipsalreadyexist: inall six pilotGBOs, the IFC has provided grants throughits Capacity BuildingFacilityandlorquasi-equity. Thesefunds have been andwill continueto be leveragedwith donor funds. t3Jovemrnceand Mena[Jemant The Initiative'sgoverning bodywould representthe financialcontributors (Le. IFC and the World Bank in the firstyear). Itwould revieweachyear`s end resultsand decidewhether the mainobjectives of each sub-phase have beenmet sufficientlyto warrant progressingto next phase. As the work on the initialsix pilotprojectsproceeds, additionalfunds would be mobilized; these donor institutionswould be encouragedto participateand be involvedin SGBl's governanceand decision-making. The SGBlwould also have an advisory group, includinga few leadingsocial entrepreneurs, thatwould contributeideas,experience,networking, and underpinsubsequent phases of activity. Itmay also prove useful to form local stakeholder groups in countriesor regionsof concentration, to mentorand advise GBOs andto provideadvice at the Initiative-widelevel. The Initiativewould be headed by a Director, with six to eight staffat headquarters. This managementteam would selectand preparethe GBOs; coordinate and oversee capacitybuildingprograms, includingTA and patientcapitalinvestments: stay in regulartouch with the GBOs andthe variouspartners; track resultsof the investeeGBOs and makeadjustmentswhere needed; act as mentors/advisorsto the GBOs; develop a pipeline; liaisewith stakeholders; and engage in communicationsand relationship-buildingfunctions. The DGF Council endorsedfunding as a one-year "seed money"grantto prove out the concept. The programsponsors expect that withinthreeyears, the SGBl modelwill be replicablewith reducedWBG leadershipand funding, allowingadditionalexternal participantsto be involved. 163 Annex 10 FinancialSector Reformand Strengthening(FIRST) Initiative Bank Contact: Dafha Tapiero 1202-458-5499 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: FSE FinancialSector - RecipientAgency: Emerging MarketsEconomicsLimited Web Address: http://www.firstinitiative.org Total Budget: 20.6 DGF FundingRequest: 0.60 DGF Percentage: 5% The expectedoutcomesof the FinancialSector Refonnand Strengthening(FIRST) Initiative's activitiesare: (i) broader,deeper, and more robust financial systems in low and middle-income countries; (ii)strongerfinancialsystemswhichwill resultin more stable investmentflows, improved useof domestic resources, and a strongand positivecontributionto growth and poverty reduction; (iii) increasedcompliancewith internationallyaccepted standardsand codesinthe financialsector; (iv) more systematicfollow-up of FSAPand ROSC recommendations in responseto countryneeds; (v) bettercoordinationin the delivery of technicalassistanceand capacity building; (vi) increasedlevelof resourcesfrom the internationalcommunity directedtowards developingfinancialsystems; and (vii) broader baseof providers(consultants)supportingcountries'effortsto implement standards and codes. MainComponents (i) Technical assistance and capacity building, includingfollow-up of FSAP and ROSC recommendations, assistancein implementingstandards and codes, and support for policyimplementationand dialoguein the areas of financialsector regulation,supervision, and development. The expected outcome of such technical assistance and capacity-buildingis to help countriesredressweaknesses andtake advantage of developmentopportunitiesintheir financialsystems. (ii) InformationExchange, servingas an informationexchange for developingcountriesand donors on the availabilityof financialand human resourcesfor financialsector projects.The expectedoutcome of the informationexchange andthe AskFlRST"help desk" serviceis to help countries learnfrom others' experienceand to dramatically reducethe redundancy and duplicationthat occurs inthe delivery of financialsectorassistance.It is also expectedto providea meansfor breaking down the communicationbarriersthat exist between and among developingcountriesand donors. (iii) Improved coordinationamong donors inthe delivery of technicalassistance, leadingto improvedallocationof donor resources, maximizationof leveragingopportunitiesto finance a project,and a better quality outcome from technical assistance (TA). Throughthe due diligenceprocessconducted for every project, FIRST disseminates informationabout potentialtechnical assistanceprojectsto other bilateraland multilateraldonors. Reviewsand suggestionsare then providedto ensurethat projectssupplement otherfunded activities, buildon existingwork fundedby others,and gain a levelof confidencethat the outcomes envisaged are doable and likely. In some cases, FIRST will pass off projectsto other donors if bilateralfunds are available. (iv) Best practices and usefultools support researchand disseminateinformationon best practices and usefultools on financialsectorreformand developmentin low- and middle-income countries.The expected outcome of this effort is for recipientcountriesto benefitfrom lessons leamedinthe delivery of FIRSTTA, to sharecross-country and cross-regional experience that might be relevantin othercontexts, and to help improveknowledgein the donorcommunity aboutwell designed TA projects. 164 Annex 10 (i) Technicalassistance & capacity-building: Numberof TA projectsdelivered, linkageto FSAPIROSC,numberof repeat customers. (ii)Informationexchange: Levelof partner contributionsto site, numberof websitehits,number of inquiries made to AskFIRST. (iii)Improvedcoordination: feedback from otherdonors on FIRST-funded projects,numberof projectsstoppedas a resultof due ditiigenceor handedoff to otherdonorsfor funding. (iv) Best practices& tools: demand for reportsand toolsfrom recipientcountriesand donors, extent to which important lessons are learned. ProgressandAchievements (i) FIRST reachedits targetof $8 millionof projectcommitments inthe first (calendar)year of operation. As ofApril30,2004, FIRSTcommittedover $11.9millionto 77 projectscoveringevery region. (ii) Ofthe 77 approved projects,6 are completed, 63 are undetway,4 are recently approved, and4 are suspended. Evaluationof completed projectsis underway. (iii) FIRST allocated48% of projectexpenditures from the low incomefund ,49%from the middleincomefund, and 3% for DGF funds. (iv) FIRSTwebsite and intranet systemare launched.On-line reportinghas been madeavailablereal-timethrough FIRST Reporting.(v) Continuedto buildpartnershipswith multilateraldevelopment banks - IADB, ADB, EBRD intemationalstandard- - settingbodies,and bilateralagencies (USAID etc.) for due diligence, inform n sharing, and referrals. (vi) Foursensitiveor confidentialType 3 projectsapproved for executionby theWorld Bankor IMF. (vii) 7. Launcheddue diligencesystem, an importanttool for trackingrequestsfor feedback from partneragenciesand maintainingthe mapof financial sector expectsin multilateraland bilateralagencies. Partners IMF,CIDA, Netherlands(MFA), (SECO, DFID, Sida) Governanceand Management There is a Governing Council, consistingof appointedsenior representativesfrom each of the donors. Decision-makingon project selectionis by consensus. There is a Steering Committee that represents the members of the GoverningCouncil, with each member of the Governing Councilappointingone memberof the Steering Committee. It meetsthreetimes peryear and performsfunctionsdelegated by the GovemingCouncil. The GovemingCouncilrecentlyapproveddelegatingmany activitiesto the SteeringCommittee, includingapproval ects. The SteeringCommittee will be advised by a Consultative Group comprisedof donors, recipients, intemationalfinancialregulatorybodies, and consultants.This groupwill providefeedback to the SteeringCommittee on how FIRST is workingand on improvementsto ensure that FIRST meetsits objectives. The Chairmanof the GoverningCouncil(andthereforethe SteeringCommittee) for the first year of FIRSTwas the World Bank. The Vice Chairfor the first year was UK DFID. The GoverningCouncil,which is responsiblefor the annualelectionof a chairperson,voted to keeptheWorld Bankand DFID as Chairand Co-Chair inthe secondyear, as full operationof FIRST commencedin late 2002 & donor fundswere only receivedin December2002.The chairmanshipis expectedto rotate next Fall. There are two executivearms: a Management Unit (MU) in London, and a Coordination Unit (CU) inWashington, D.C. Both reportto the GoverningCouncil once per year andto the SteeringCommittee threetimes per year. The MU is responsiblefor processingall projectsand administeringprojectsdeliveredby the privatesector. The CUworks with Bankand Fundstaffto developprojectslinkedto FSAPs,conductsdue diligence,leadsthe informationexchange and AskFlRST effort, and administerssensitiveor confidentialprojectsrequiringBank, IMF & officialagency expertise. The Steering Committee has the authorityto agreeon work programssubmitted by the MU and CU on an annualbasis. FIRST will disengage from DGF support at the end of FY06, The funding of the CoordinationUnitwas set upto ensurethat the Bank could pullout at any time withoutharmingthe sustainabilityof FIRST, as 90% of the Unitcosts are bome by the other donors. Duringthe third year of operation(early FY05), therewill be an independentevaluationof FIRST, whichwill contribute to the development of the Bank's exit strategy. 165 Annex 10 SupportingInsuranceSupervision Developmentof a Core Curriculumin Support - of Capacity-Buildingfor InsuranceSupervisors Bank Contact: Michael Pomerleano/ 202-473-3868, CraigW. Thorburn / 2024734932 Responsible Networkand Sector: FSE RecipientAgency: InternationalAssociation of InsuranceSupervisors Web Address: http:// iaisweb.org 1FlnancialArrangcemantsfor N O S (AmountInUS$ Mllllon) Total Budget: 1.10 DGF FundingRequest: 0.20 DGF Percentage: 18% Objectives and IExgactedOutcomws The program contributesto financial sector work in clientcduntries inthe followingways: 1) institution-and capacity-building of insurancesupervisory agencies; 2) knowledgeand advisory services to clients; 3) engagement of multinationalpartners InternationalAssociation of InsuranceSupervisors (IAIS) andthe FinancialStabilityInstitute(FSI) -and -the localpartners to make the projectsustainable. The proposedprogramis closelyaligned with the Banks obligationto help strengthenthe InternationalFinancial Architectureto promotefinancial sector stabilityand encouragethe sustainable, healthydevelopment of financialsectors in client countries. Developingand implementing internationalstandardsis an importantpartof effortsto make domesticfinancialsystems lesscrisis- prone. Insurancesupervisory agencies in client countrieshave asked for support from the Bank and its partnersto develop and build supervisory capacity, especially to train staff. Insurancesupervisors, however, come from a variety of backgrounds. While there is currentlyno generalagreement on the basicskill set neededby insurancesupervisors, there is a needfor them to havea common foundation. Insuranceregulatorsand professionalsin the internationalcommunity have repeatedlyexpressed a needto assemblea systematic foundationfor training supervisors,butthe funding has been scarce. The initiative fills this void. Itaims to develop a comprehensive learningcurriculumfor insurancesupervisors in developingcountries,bothjunior insurancesupervisors who come from differentbackgrounds and senior insurancesupervisors who needto update and advancetheir knowledge set. MatnComponents The Core Curriculumwill be developedover three years inclosecollaborationwith the IAIS, the FSI, and other regionalpartners,and internallythrough the joint effortsof FSEand WBI. (i) Strategy Development The Advisory Group (composed of IAIS, FSI,senior emerging marketsregulators, and the Bank) definedthe scopeof the curriculum, identifiedkey contentsand materials,set standards for materialsdevelopment,definedthe managementand governancestructure,developedan implementationstrategy, and worked out financial andfundraisingplans.A Business Plan was submittedto the sector boardfor approvalwith the FYO4-FYO6budget. (ii) Program Development Guided by a Task Forcewhich is a formalcommitteeof the IAlS ,the management unit identifiesqualifyinginstitutionsand individuals and commissions researchand development of materials.Selectedmodulesare tested, if possible, among a pilot group. Oncethe materialshave beendevelopedand reviewed, trainingmanualswill be developedfor each module. This process started in FY04 and will continue untilmid FY06. (iii) Implementationand Delivery Pilotcourses at the globaland regionallevelare being arranged as the materialsand training manualsare finished.Trainingof Trainers is being conducted with identifiedregionalinstitutionsor with insurancesupervisoryagenciesin clientcountries.Materials and modules may be customizedat the country level. 166 Annex 10 Performancelndlcatam (i) Developmentofacomprehensivecorecurriculumfor insurancesupervisorsinclientcountrieswhichcanbeeasilycustomizedand adaptedto countrysettingswith the introductionof localregulations, (ii) Developmentof case studiesthat can be added at the country level. (iii) Establishmentofanetworkofqualifiedtrainersandinstitutionstodeliverthetrainingprogramatthelocallevel. (iv) Creationof a learningportaVlibraryof e-learning for insurancesupervisors and formation of a learningcommunity throughvarious channels, includingdistancelearning, enails, seminars, and newsletters. Actual Deliverablesplannedfor FY04include: 1. papersfor deliveryas at the end of Feb04: ICP2 Supervisory objectivesand ICP 3 SupervisoryAuthority; ICP9 Corporate governance; ICP 10 Internalcontrol: 5 HIHCase Studies 2. Papersfor deliveryby June 04 (fundedby Bank budgets hencethe due date): ICP 6 Licensing; ICP7 Suitabilityof Persons; ICP 12 Reportingto supervisorsand off-sitemonitoring- RatioAnalysis for Non Life Companies: ICP 13 On-siteinspection; ICP 14 Preventive and Correctivemeasures; ICP 19 Insuranceactivity- Primer on introductionto and assessment of Reinsurance; ICP21 Investments ICP 22 Derivativesand similarcommitments; ICP23 Capitaladequacy and solvency- Principlesof Solvency Supervisionand Structuresfor a solvency regime; ICP24 Intermediaries; ICP28 Anti-money laundering, combatingthe financingof terrorism. Partnrns The InternationalAssociationof InsuranceSupervisors (IAIS) and the FinancialStabilityInstitute(FSI). Regionalassociationsof insurancesupervisors. Oovemanceand Management The projectis governed by the Task Force of insurance Core Curriculum underthe ExecutiveCommittee of IAIS. The Task Forceis responsiblefor: (i)developingworkplans for the project;(ii)reviewingand approving,in consultationwith the Bank, a matrixand syllabus for the Core Curriculumand appropriateguidelinesfor its preparation;(iii) proposing expertsto preparematerialsfor, provide inputon, and reviewthe Core Curriculum; (iv) monitoringand reportingon progresson the Core Curriculum; (v) approvinga disseminationstrategy for the Core Curriculum and relatedmaterials; and (vi) identifyingsources and securingfundingfor the Core CurriculumInitiative.The IAlSTask Forceisthe formalgoverningbody. The Bank hasone representativeon the Task Force. The functions of the Secretarfat will be dischargedinitially by the Bank staffidentifiedbelow. Duringthe first ninemonths, organizationsthat could support a permanent Secretariatin IAIS itselfhavebeen identified.The permanentSecretariatincludestwo senior insurancespecialistshonsultantsand one assistantto managethe program. The Bank team is led by MichaelPomerleano, Lead FinancialSectorSpecialistand program manager of the FinancialSector Learning program. Heis accountable for quality delivery of the client learningprogram. CraigThorburn, a SeniorInsuranceSpecialistin FSE, is the Bank's major contactpointwith IAIS. Wei Zhang, a learninganalystinWBI, providesmanagerialsupportand serves as the interfacewith the partners. The Bankwill graduallydisengage once the Core Curriculumis developedand pilotprogramsare delivered.The training materialswill be handedto FSIfor subsequent face-to-face and web-based deliveries. By the end of FY06, when the programwill disengagefrom DGFfunding, the Bank's role will be confined to "in kind" participationand perhapsmembershipon the SteeringCommittee. Annex 10 InternationalOrganizationof Pensionsupervisors (IOPS) Bank Contact: Gregorio lmpavido1202458-7578; Roberto R. RochaI202-473-0689; RichardPaulHinz1202-458-2604 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: OPD RecipientAgency: InternationalOrganizationof Pension Supervisors Web Address: N/A FinanclalArrangementsfor FYOS (AmountinUS$ Mlllion) Total Budget: 0.34 DGF FundingRequest: 0.07 DGF Percentage: 18% Objectlvssand ExpectedQutcomoa, FSE intendsto establish a new partnershipwith the InternationalOrganization of Pension Supervisors(IOPS), to focus on collaboration on issuesand standards, but also to deliverdirect benefitsthroughthe development of supervisionstandards. By July 2004, IOPSwill be establishedby membersof the InternationalNetworkof PensionSupervisors (INPRS). The Bank has workedwiththe INPRSto develop: 1) FSAPpension supervision standardsand relativeassessment guidelines; 2) a distancelearningcourse for privatepension supervisors; 3) statisticaldatabaseof privatepensions. The Bank also organizedwith the INPRS itsfirst contractualsavings conference(held inWashington, D.C., in 2002). In parallel, the Bank has been activelypromotingthe establishmentof an independent and formal organizationthat will serve as an internationalstandardaettingbody inthe area of pensionsupervisionand regulation. The work programof the INPRSwill be inheritedby the IOPS. The programcontributesto financialsector work in clientcountries through: 1)institutionaland capacity buildingof pensionsupervisory agencies; 2) knowledge and advisory services to clients: 3) engagement of multinationalpartnersand localpartners. The expectedoutcomes of the GPP includethe development of standards and guidelineson pensionsupervision. MainComponena ~~ ~~ The maincomponent of the projectis the developmentof standardsand guidelinesfor pensionsupervision. Thesewould buildon the FSAPtemplate previously developedby the INPRS, andwouldfocus on privatesector pensionfunds' supervisorymethods and practices. Performancelndlcators Establishmentand managementof an IOPSworking groupto develop guidelines on pensionsupervision, The groupshould meet at least once a year. Morefrequent interactionscouldtake placethrough an electronicdiscussiongroup via the IOPS'website. ProgramandAchievcamcsnts As this is a newprogram, there is no progressto report. 168 Annex 10 Partners The main partnersin the initiativewill be the membersof the IOPS,which will includethe membersof the INPRS from national pensionregulatoryinstitutionsand internationalorganisationssuch as the OECD, the InternationalSocial SecurityAssociation,the EuropeanCommission,and the LatinAmerican Association of Pension Fund Supervisors. Governance:and Management The govemance structureof IOPS is comprisedof the GoverningMembership,the Governing MembershipAnnual Meeting and Conference;an ExecutiveCommittee;a Technical Committee;Regionaland ResearchCommittees;and a Secretariat. The Executive Committee appoints the Chairpersons and Vice-Chairpersonsofthe Technical, Regional,and Research Committees; establishes and dissolvesworking groups upon advicefrom the TechnicalCommittee;establisheswork programsupon advicefrom the TechnicalCommittee;and establishesbudgets,expense reports,and the organization'sannual report. The Technical Committee (TC) has bothan advisoryrole to the ExecutiveCommitteeand an internalauditfunction. The TC participatesinthe developmentof principles,standards,and good practicesfor pensionsupervisoryissuesand regulatoryissues relatedto pensionsupervision. It developsthe work program,which it recommendsto the ExecutiveCommittee.The TC also serves as a forum to discuss,develop,and analyzematters relatedto pensionsupervisionthat are of interestto the membership;develops standard-setting activities; receives reportsfrom the RegionalCommittees;and recommendsthe establishmentor dissolutionof working groups to the Executive Committee. The Bank,which is representedon the TC, intendsto participateinelementsof the IOPS work program. The current Secretariat of the INPRS consistsof four staff members, both OECD staff and consultants. They includeeconomists, lawyers,and statisticians. The detailsofthe IOPS Secretariat are notdefinedyet. The GPP is intendedto support the establishment of this Secretariat, by co-sponsoringa consultantto organizeand conduct work on supervisionprinciples. The programwill disengagefrom DGF fundingat the end of FY07. 169 Annex 10 InstitutionalDevelopmentFund Bank Contact: MananaTodorova I202-473-0085 ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: OPCS RecipientAgency: Various govemment institutions that are Bank clients Web Address: http:llopcslos/idf/index.html Flnancirt Armngemsntsfor FYOI(Amount In US$ Milllon) Total Budget: 19.80 DGF FundingRequest: 19.00 DGF Percentage: 96% The InstitutionalDevelopmentFund (IDF) was establishedin FY93to provide"quick response"fundingfor small, action-oriented capacity-buildingprogramsidentifiedinthe Bank's countryassistance strategy and policydialogue. IDFgrantsare usedto strengtheninstitutionswhen specificBank-financed projectsare not anticipatedand other donorresources(especiallythose of the United NationsDevelopmentProgram) are not available. In FY02,the IDFwas reorientedto focus on good governance by supporting(a) publicexpenditures and financialaccountabili to helpgovemments bettermanagetheir resources,including improvementsto publicexpenditure, procurement, financial managementsystems,and results-driven monitoringand evaluation; and (b) systemic IegaVjudicialreformto support the ruleof law. In FY03, programmanagementfor HlVlAIDSand strategicreformfor LlCUSwere addedas focus areas. - Ma3nComponents _. - The mostcommon sub-grantobjectives have been: upgradingaccountingand auditing& procurementsystems to meet international standards,strengtheningor creatingnew institutions, facilitating policydialogue, and establishinglegal& regulatoryframeworks. Parformaracelndlcatom Each individualsub-grant has its own set of performanceindicatorsand outcomes. Progreaaand Achievements The IDF programapproved73 grants in FY03totaling $26,095,000, brokendown as follows: HIVlAlDS 2 grantstotaling$999,000 Legaland Judicial Reform 9 grants totaling$3,047,000 Monitoringand Evaluation 13grants totaling $5,017,000 Procurement 10grantstotaling $3,459,000 Public ExpenditurelFM 29 grantstotalingto $10,181,000 Other 10grantstotalingto $3,392,000 The IDF Secretariatfinalized a reviewof closedgrantsin the focus areasandfinetunedpolicies, processesand proceduresfor better managementof the program. Not applicable. 170 Annex 10 Oovemanceand Management The governance structureof the IDFcomprisesthe Bank-wide IDF SteeringCommittee and IDF Secretariat, the six RegionalIDF Committees,and the IDF LearningTeam. The IDFSteering Committee'sfunctions includeliaisingwiththe DGF Council, reviewingand approving changes to IDFguidelines, ensuring Bank-wide consistencyof policiesand procedures, providingoversightof the RegionalIDFCommittees, approving annual Regionalallocations, commissioningand vetting annual reviews, reviewing policyissues,and approving any extraordinary IDF proposals. The RegionalIDFCommittees (RICs) are the main decision-making bodiesfor individualgrants underthe IDF program. They (a) prioritizeallocationsof IDFresourcesamong the various country departmentsheams; (b) consider and, when justified, approve individualgrant applicationswithinthe guidelinesof the IDF program (including inputsfrom the IDFLearningTeam); (c) make decisions on amendments in the work programsor budgets of ongoing grants: (d) follow up on implementationof grants,including signings,disbursements, supervisionand completionreports, and closings; (e) reviewthe use of approvedresources and consider the needfor reductionsor cancellationsin the amounts approved: and (9 review annually the performanceand achievementsof the IDF programin the Region. The IDF LeamingTeam is responsiblefor establishingand maintaininga leamingmechanismfor the IDFprogram.The Team works closelywith the IDFSecretariatand liaiseswith the RegionalCommitteesthroughthe RegionalCoordinators. The Team includesrepresentativesof Legal,PREM, the GlobalHIVIAIDS Program,the LlCUSteam and OPCS Networkanchors. The IDF Secretariat coordinatesthe administrativeand operationalaspects of the IDFprograminclose cooperation with the Bank- wide and RegionalIDFCommittees, as well aswith the relevant administrative unitsof the Bank (DGF, LOA,ACT, and LEG). It also servesas a contactpointbetweenRegionalstaffand committeesandthe IDFLearningTeam, The day-to-day operations of the IDF programthat fall to the IDFAdministratorincludemonitoringand reporting on the portfolio. The reformof the IDF program has requiredthat the IDF Secretariatalso review,propose,and implement simplifiedpoliciesand procedures.Italso coordinates reviews of past IDFoperations inthe four focus areasto establishcriteriafor good practice. Task managers are requiredto submit ImplementationSummary Reportstwice a year, and an ImplementationCompletion Memorandum at the close of the project. These are reviewedby the IDFSecretariatandthe IDF LearningTeam and lessons learnedare includedinthe annual reportto the IDFSteeringCommittee. Each IDFsub-grant is auditedat leastonce at completion. Annual and Semiannualreportson the IDF portfolio'sperformanceare preparedand submittedto the SteeringCommittee, Regional Vice-presidentsand SeniorManagement. Everytwo years, an IDF Performance Review is presentedto the Board. External evaluationsof the IDFprogramare carriedout approximatelyevery threeyears. The next is slatedto begin in FY05,to reviewthose projectsthatwere approved since the reform. Housedin OPCS, the IDFSecretariatpresentlyhas one advisor and two consultants. IDF is a Window 1programaddressing the long-termcapacitybuildingneedsin the Banks' client countries. 171 Annex 10 Global FinancialManagementPartnerships BankContact: Simon Bradbury I202-473-6882;Ronald PointsI202-473-6882; PamOConnellI202-458-2440;John HegartyI 202-473-2408 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: OPCFM RecipientAgency: InternationalAccounting Standards Board and InternationalFederationof Accountants Web Address: www.ifac.ora, www.iasc.orn.uk, www.ifac.oralPublicSector t 1Financial Arrangementsfor FY05 (Amount In US$ Million) Total Budget: 22.12 DGF FundingRequest: 0.55 DGF Percentage: 2% Objaetlvesand Expected6utQomes The Bank is a leadingproponentof stronger internationalaccountingand auditingstandards,and a voice for bettermonitoring and enforcementof those standardsby regulators and practitioners. Partnershipswith globalaccountingand auditing organizationsare an increasinglyvisible and important partof the Bank'swork. Inthe private sector, high-qualityaccounting and auditingare a central contributorto "market integrity," an essentialunderpinningof investmentand growth. Inthe public sector, accountingand auditingare pillarsof the nationalpublicfinancialaccountabilityinfrastructureof Bank borrowers. The internationalstandardsettersprovidebenchmarksand guidanceto individualcountries,especially inthe developing world. Through the development of highquality accounting standards, and the adoptionof these standards by preparersof financial statements,they providean importantunderpinning to the Bank's fiduciary work andto its development objectiveof helping borrowers effectivelymanageall publicfinances. In FYO2-04,the GlobalFinancialManagement Partnerships (GFMP) comprisedthree distinct programs: (i) the private sector accountingstandards-settingactivityof the InternationalAccounting StandardsBoard (IASB) ($100,000); (ii)the publicsector accountingstandardsactivityof the InternationalFederationof Accountants -Public Sector Committee (IFAC-PSC) ($250,000); and (iii)thecapacity-buildingactivitiesof the InternationalOrganizationof SupremeAudit Institutions'InternationalDevelopment Institute (INTOSAI IDI) ($300,000). The following changes are proposedfor FY05 onwards: (i) discontinueDGF supportfor the INTOSAI ID1;(ii) transfer of the IASBand IFAC-PSC programsto Window 1(withno changeinthe amount of financialsupport for each program); (iii)supply fundingfor two newprogramsthroughWindow 2: (the Public InterestOversight Board of the IFAC ($100,000)and (b) the harmonizationof publicand privatesector auditingstandardsunderthe auspicesof the INTOSAI AccountingStandards Committee (ASC) ($100,000). MainCsmpanenta The IASB is the mostrespectedand recognizedglobal standards-setter inthe accountingfield. Preparers, users, investors, and auditorsof financial informationlookto the IASBto continue setting and updatinghighquality internationalaccounting standards for the privatesector. The Bank's Presidentsewed on the NominatingCommittee to selectthe IASBs most recentTrustees. Inthe past,the IFAC PSC'swork has focused on adaptinga privatesector reportingframework (developedby the IASB) to a government setting. Buildingon this base,the PSC has workedto expandintothe development of standards for a number of specific publicsector financial reportingissues. Tthe PSC has madesignificantprogressin preparingan accountingstandardon development assistance,which has been identifiedas a key financialmanagement harmonization initiative. The PSC's achievements include the publicationof a set of InternationalPublicSectorAccountingStandards. The IFAC Public InterestOversightBoard (PIOB) will oversee IFAC standard-settingactivitiesinthe areas of audit performance standards, independence, and other ethicalstandardsfor auditors;audit qualitycontrol;and assurance standards. Itwill also oversee IFAC's proposedComplianceProgram. 172 Annex 10 0 DuringFY03,the Bankwas active in brokeringa partnershipbetweenthe IFAC InternationalAuditingandAssurance StandardsBoard (IAASB) and INTOSAl'sASC to harmonize the sets of internationalauditingstandards promulgated by these two bodies. In the past, the IFAC-IAASBissuedstandards for the internationalprivate sector independently of the standard-settingprocessfollowedby INTOSAI-ASC for the publicsector. At the encouragement of the Bank,these two bodies haveagreedto adopta newstandard-setting processfor financialauditing that combinesthe publicand private sector perspectives, DGFfundingwould support the establishment of a newfunctionwithinthe INTOSAI-ASCto participatein the IFAC-IAASBstandards-setting process. Performancelndlcstofs IASB The issuance of highquality InternationalFinancialReporting Standards (IFRSs) througha widely consultative - process,as well as the issuanceof exposuredrafts,interpretations, and guidance. 0 IFAC-PSC -The issuanceof high-qualityIPSASsbasedon outstanding IASsand newstandardsaddressingpublic sector-specificissues, as well as the continueddevelopment of a conceptualframework for publicsector financial reportingand substantive progresson an accountingstandard for development assistance. IFAC PlOB -To be determined once operatingprocedures and a reporting framework for the PlOB havebeen established. INTOSAI-ASC-Full participationin the standards-settingprocessfor internationalauditingstandardpublishedby IFAC-IAASB. This participationwould includeprovidingpublicsector perspectivesto each new standard8 to selected existingones, as well as developingguidelinesfor their implementation inthe publicsector. In addition, the ASC will submitproposalsto INTOSAl's GoverningBoard. Boththe IASBand IFAC-PSC haveestablishedtrack recordsas the leadinginternationalaccountingstandardsetters in the privateand publicsector respectively. Eachorganizationhas a body of well-accepted standardsthat are ableto be implemented. The INTOSAI-ASC and the IFAC PlOBare new activities. Paenera Asian DevelopmentBank (ADB), IMF, UNDP, Inter-AmericanDevelopmentBank, OECD. I The three recipientsare allwellestablished internationalbodieswith their own governance structuresand oversightboards. GFMP objectivesand allocations are establishedat regularlyscheduledmeetingsthroughglobalconsultation. IASB is govemedby the Trustees of the IASC Foundation. It has a secretariatwith approximately25 technicalstaffand 25 commercialand administrativestaff. IASBhas monthly newsletters;the Bankis a participantin its collaborativestandard-setting process. IFAC-PSCreportson its activities to the IFAC governingboard. Ithas a secretariatwith four to five technicalstaff. The Bank has a representativeon the IFAC-PSC; one other Bank staff member representsthe professionalaccountingbody in his home country. INTOSAI-ASCreportson allof its activitiesto its governingboard, the Congress of INTOSAI. ExitStrategy The IASBand IFAC-PSC components have been endorsedfor Window 1Funding. The Bank's strategyis to encouragethe two organizationsto work moreclosely on specific projects,with a viewto the PSC's becoming part of the IASBduringthe medium term. Untilthis appears probable,there is no explicit disengagementstrategyfor these partnerships. With regardto the auditing standards harmonizationproject,and the support for the PlOBof IFAC, a three-year time horizonis envisaged. 173 Annex 10 Global DevelopmentNetwork Bank Contact: lnes Garcia-ThoumiI202-473-0098 Responsible Network and Sector: DEC RecipientAgency: Global DevelopmentNetwork Web Address: http:llwww.gdnet.org Total Budget: 57.60 DGF Funding Request: 4.00 DGF Percentage: 7% Objecthrwand Exgeet%dOutcomes The Global Development Network (GDN) is a worldwide associationof researchand policy instituteswhose goal isto create, share, and apply to policy multidisciplinary knowledgefor the purpose of development. In linewith this overallgoal,the objectives of the program are threefold: (i) to generate knowledgeand build researchcapacitythrough researchcompetitions and commissioned research;(ii) to share knowledgeand strengthen networking electronicallythrough GDNet and inface-to-face contacts;and (iii) to learn moreabout the applicationof knowledgeto policythrough a speciallydesigned program of researchand training. The immediatebeneficiariesare the individualresearchersand researchinstitutesreceivingGDN support. The ultimate beneficiariesare the local policymakerswho will be able to draw on an increasingvolume of highquality,policy-relevantresearch. The specific objectivesof GDN for FY04 are to: (i) explorethe possibilityoftwo new Global Research Projects;(ii) expand the donor support base by bringing in more privatefunding; (iii) openthe new GDNet office in Cairo and finalize plans for relocating the GDN Secretariat to Delhi;and (iv) possiblychange GDN'slegalstatusto that of an internationalorganization. MalnComponenb GDN's five core activitiesare: e Regional ResearchCompetitions: These are one of the cornerstonesof the GDN programand were the original basis of requests for DGF funding. Since 1999,GDN has supported almost 490 projectsin 70 differentcountries. e The Global Research Project (GRP): The first phase of the GRP is complete. Forthe second phase, surveys of researchersand policymakershave been undertakenand 50 summary case studies collected. Over 300 researchteams responded to a callfor proposals issued in the late spring. e The Global DevelopmentAwards: The first four rounds of this annual programhave attracted more than 2,000 submissionsfrom over 100countries. e The FifthAnnual Global DevelopmentConference: Hosted by the Governmentof India,this conferencewas universally praisedas the bestyet. The five conferenceshave attracted participantsfrom over 100countries. e GDNet: GDN'sintemet initiative, GDNet, boasts over 12,000subscribers in almost 140countries, and containsover 3,000 researcherprofilesand morethan 7,000 working papersand publications. The mainadministrativeachievements of FY03include: i) The budgetnow exceeds $10 million with more than 18 active donors; ii) The second independentexternalaudit was successfully completed;iii) GDN's second Annual Reportwill be printedand made available at the Delhiconference;iv) The Governing Body decidedto move GDN's Secretariat to New Delhi in 2005106; v) Nine countries and the Bank met to discuss the transformationof GDN into an internationalorganization;vi) Agreement was reachedto second a GDN staff memberto the Bank;vii) An independentevaluationwas undertaken;and viii) The eighth regionalnetwork, embracingAustralia, NewZealand and the South Pacific,was formally launched. Performance Indicators For the five core activities,measurableoutputs are shown below. e Measurableoutputsfor the Regional Research Competitions are the number of submissions,the numberof approvals, and the number of completed projects. Quality will bejudged by peer review. 174 Annex 10 The number of country studiesand participating researcherswill measurethe extent of capacitybuilding and networking due to the Global Research Projects. Published books,papers and other refereedwork will measurethe quantity and quality of the output. Linksto policymakers and involvementof policymakers in researchprojects will be an increasingly importantmeasure. The number of submissions and the quality of the final papers and projectswill be the measurable indicators for the Global DevelopmentAwards Competition. Measurableindicatorsfor the Annual Global DevelopmentConferenceswill includethe number and geographical distributionof participantsand the rangeof donor support for the conference. Quality will bejudged through evaluations by participants. The main indicatorsfor GDNet willbe the number and geographicaldistributionof subscribers and the number of entries into the institute,researcher, and document directories. -... " . . ProgressirndAchievements All goals for 2003 were met: (1) The Regional ResearchCompetitionssupported morethan 100small grants;(ii) the first Global Research Project ExplainingGrowthhas produced24 thematic papersand 80country studies. A summary volume has been publishedand 4 to 6 regionalvolumes may be published. The 2"dand 31dprojectsare underway; (iii) the fourth round of the Global DevelopmentAwards attracted470 submissionsfrom 78 countries;(iv) the FourthAnnual DevelopmentConference,held in Egyptwas a recognizedsuccess;(v) GDN'sinternet initiativehas over 12,000subscribers in almost 140 countriesand contains 7,400 summariesof recent research, more than 2,500 profilesof researchorganizationsand over 3,000 researchersprofiles. As regardsto administration,(i) GDN has increasedits number of active donorsfrom 2 to 18 and hasa total budgetof $12 million. GDN has already held one meetingof potentialsignatoriesof the charter establishingGDN as an InternationalOrganization. Nine countries have expressed interestin signingthe charter. Official bilateraldonors,the IMF, Agence Universitairede la Francophonie,Merck,RegionalResearchInstiutions. - Oovsmanceand Management There is an 18-member Governing Body,representingtheworldwide researchcommunity. The overall programis determined by the Governing Body following consultations with the Regional Networks, the researchcommunitymore broadty,and the Donor Support Group. The work programis prepared by the Secretariat after consultationwith numerous parties and formally approved by the Governing Body. Overall management of the programrestswith the Secretariat,althoughmany of the activities are implementedby the RegionalNetworks. All activitiesare monitoredwith respectto use of funds and actual outputs. The RegionalNetworksreportto the Secretariatand in turn the Secretariatreportsto the Governing Body and the donor community. The Secretariat iscomprisedof a Director,a principaleconomist,a senior politicalscientist,and administrativeand research support. The manager of GDNet and one assistantare locatedin Cairo. GDN's work program is presentedat the GDN'sAnnual Conferenceand made available on GDNetand in publishedform. GDN also producesan Annual Reportwith an externally auditedstatement of accounts. The GDN Secretariat meets bilaterallywith the members of the Donor SupportGroup. GDN reportsperiodicallyto the Bank'sBoard. GDN It became an independent,not-for-profit organization in 2001. GDN plansto move itssecretariatto New Delhiin 2005/6. Future DGF support will take into account GDN's progressin addressing issues (governance, cofunding sustainability)identified in the recentindependentevaluation. 175 Annex 10 InternationalComparisonProgram Bank Contact: MishaV. Belkindas1202473-761I ResponsibleNetwork and Sector: DECDG RecipientAgency: AfricanDevelopmentBankfor the DGF grant Web Address: http:ll www.worldbank.orgldata/icpl financialArrangements for FYOd(AmountinUS$ Million) Total Budget: 18.73 DGF FundingRequest: 1.oo DGF Percentage: 5% Objectivesand ExpectedOutcomes I * I The lntemationalComparisonProgram(ICP) is an ongoing partnership. Approved in FY02, the ICP's objectiveis to support poverty reductionby providinga crucialcomponent of the data neededto monitorincome povertyinternationallyand to analyze changes in comparativewelfare. Itspurposeis to providesounddata on povertyand economic progressto supportevidence-based decision makingat all levels.Itdoesthis by collectingand disseminatingpurchasingpower parity(PPP) data to compare economic and social conditionsamongcountries withoutthe distortionsof short-run fluctuations in foreign exchange marketsor differencesin pricelevels. A further objectiveof the ICP is to promotecapacitybuildinginthe collectionand analysisof economic and pricedata, Participating nationalstatisticalsystemswill be strengthenedthrough training and the provisionof equipmentand software. There have beenserious quality problemswith the existingPPP data sets, as a resultof severe under-fundingof the ICP in the past. The Bank has beenmandated by the UN StatisticalCommission (UNSC) to organize a new roundof the ICP between 2002 and 2006. Duringthis new round, ICPwill collectand disseminatePPP in at least 120 least-developedand middle-incomecountries. By combining these data with PPP datafor developedcountries(already being collectedregularly),itwill be possibleto disseminate PPP datato monitorpovertyand assesscomparativeeconomic development for all countriesof the world. In particular,PPP data are neededto estimatethe internationalpovertyline of $1 per day includedinthe MillenniumDevelopmentGoals(MDGs). The overall outcome of the ICPwill be to developa better understandingof globaleconomicgrowthand povertyreduction,by providing the data for comparingpoverty and aggregating other measures of welfare,The immediate beneficiarieswill be the agencies that use PPP data. MainComponents As an intemationaiprogramgeneratingglobal publicgoods (the PPP data), effectiveglobal coordinalon and management is essential. An efficientmanagement and coordinationprocess has beenestablished. An ExecutiveBoardand InternationalSecretariat havebeenestablishedand mechanismsfor coordinatingregionalactivities set up. At the regional level, regionalimplementingagenciesfor all five regionshave been identified.They have all prepared detailedwork programsand been active in fundraising. The African DevelopmentBank (AfDB), the implementing agency for the ICP inAfrica, has establisheda regionalgoverningbody and a regionalICP govemanceand management structure. By the end of the current roundof the program,all regionalimplementing agencieswill havedevelopedcapacityand expertise in the organization and management of the ICP. Data collectionwill take placein participatingcountries. By participatingin the ICP, countrieswill receivetraining,technical advice,and supportthrougha detailedICPtool-pack. The mainoutcome from this componentwill be an increase in participatingcountries' capacity to collect, analyze, and disseminatedata on poverty, economicactivity, and prices. 0 At the globallevel,a numberof research studies have been completedto determinethe survey framework, compilation of expenditure weights, and regionallinking procedures. The mainoutcomes from this componentwill be: (i)a firm theoretical basisfor internationalpricecomparisons,and practicalsolutionsto a numberof key problemsin this area; (ii)a much better understanding of the intemationaldimensions of poverty, and robust mechanismsfor comparingrealwelfare between countries; (iii) a good PPP data set to supportintemationaleconomic research; and (iv) muchbetter measures of PPP data for those componentsof GDP that have proveddifficultin the past,especiallyservicesand investmentgoods. 176 Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators 0 A global management and coordinationstructure established. By December2006, proposalsto establishthe ICP as a permanentprogram, with reducedcostsfrom improvedefficiencyand Increasedcapacity,preparedand agreed upon. 0 Regionalgovernanceand managementstructures established in all regions. Regionalimplementing agencies' capacity to managethe ICPenhanced. RegionalPPP databases prepared and disseminated by December2006. 0 PPP data collectedfor about 120participatingcountries. Databasefor cross-country povertymeasurementand monitoring, as well as for other economicvariablesfor the reference year (2004), publishedfor all countriesby 2006. Databasefor researchand analysisdevelopedand madeaccessible through websiteby December2006. Statisticalcapacity in participatingcountries,particularlyinAfrica, improved,especiallyin such areas as povertymeasurementand pricemonitoring. Cost-effectiveprocessfor estimatingPPPs in differentcountries and regionsidentified,and knowledge basefor intemational comparisonssubstantiallyincreasedthrough dissemination of researchresults. Comprehensiveproductclassificationand price measurementprocessestablishedby Oecember2005. ICP tool-pack developed, tested, and revisedby December 2004. 0 The programin Africa is progressingwell. TheAfrican Development Bank has createda strong ICP unit, hasdeveloped a work planto addressboththe shortterm objective of datacollectionand longterm goals of statisticalcapacity building.51 countieshaveindicatedinterestand haveselected nationalcoordinatorsand preparednationalimplementation plans. A list of specificationshas been developed using introducedStructuredProgramDescription(SPD) approach, Two regional meetingswere conducted. InAddis Ababa, in 05/2003, Headsof NationalStatisticalOfficesand NationalAccounts and CPI managers discussedand agreed on the implementation planfor ICP-Africa. In South Africa, in 182003, they discussed financial disbursements and procurementissues, reviewfirst set of SPDs coveringfood, clothingand footwear, and, discuss and agree on a planof actionfor the compilationof expenditure weight. Statisticalassessmentshavebeenundertaken in over47countries. The first meetingof the GoverningBoardof ICP-Africawas held inAddis Ababa in 0712003. IMF, UNDP,WHO, 110,FAQ, UN StatisticalCommission, DFID, AusAid, Canada, OECD, EC, AfDB, ADB, UNECA, UNESCAP, UNECLAC,UNESCWA,Arab DevelopmentFund, CIS statisticalCommittee. Governanceand Management The DGF grant is being implementedby the AfDB. Regionalgovernanceand management structureshavebeen establishedin all five regions. Within participatingcountries,ICP activitiesare beingcarriedout by appropriatenationalimplementing agencies. An ICP Executive Board is responsiblefor implementationof the programandfor coordinationwith the regionalagencies. An lntemational Secretariat (within the Bank) managesthe ICP on a day-to-day basis. A Technical Advisory Group is providingguidanceon technicalissuesand monitorthe useof appropriatemethodology. InAfrica, annualwork programsare beingpreparedand will be presentedto the regionalfCP committee. Globalannual work programshave been prepared. At all levels,accountswill be audited and progress reports providedto the ExecutiveBoard and all stakeholders. t Exlt strategy The programwill exit afterthe receiptof FY05GF grant. Followingan independentevaluationin FYO6, proposalsto establishthe ICP as a permanent internationalprogramwill be discussed and agreeduponwith the partners. While the Bank will continueto be supportive of the ICP, it is anticipatedthat this would involvestafftime funded underthe administratbebudget. 177 Annex 10 Global Governanceand DevelopingCountryVoice Bank Contact: Amar BhattacharyaI202458-0554 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: PREM RecipientAgency: www.oecd.org;www.itdweb.org G-24 Secretariat; OECD Web Address: FInanelalAmngmenk, for R O B (Amount inUS0 Million) Total Budget: 7.61 DGF FundingRequest: 0.60 DGF Percentage: 8% Objwtivea and ExpectedOutcomes The grant's three components support severalexpected outcomes: that the G-24will participatemoreeffectivelyin the work of the BrettonWoods Institutions;the creationof a moresystematicand globalBank-OECDpartnershipestablishedaround developing country issues;and an upgradeinthe intemationaldialoguebetweengovernments on taxation. MalnComponenai This programoffersthree distinctsets of activities: G24: With the overridingaim of strengthening the functioningandcapacityof the G-24 Secretariat,DGF is supportingtwo main activities: (i) Strengtheningthe Office of the Directorof the G24,to bolsterG24's capacity to engage inongoingdiscussionswiththe Banks and the Fund's Boards, andto providesupport to developingcountry chairs. (ii)Supporting the G24's researchprogram, which is aimed at developingand implementing a researchand policyanalysisagenda. This agenda is aimedat development policyissues of immediatefocus to the Board, the Development Committee, and IMFC. GlobalForums: Launchedin 2001, the eight OECD GlobalForumsrepresenta major program of the OECD Centerfor Co-operation with Nonmembers. DGFwill support effortsto put forwardthe developingcountryagenda in these for a and deepenand extend the policydialogue between industrialand developingcountriesthe eight areas -Agriculture,Competition, Investment,Knowledge Economy, Sustainable Development, Taxation, and Trade - on which OECD has specialexperienceand Govemance,International which defy solutionin individualcountries or regions. Developingcountrieswill be able to usethe experienceand resultsof the two- way dialogue in their PRSP and CAS processes. lntemationalTax Dialogue: A partnershipbetweenthe Bank, IMF, and OECD, with the UN participatingas observer, the objectivesof DGF supportare (i) to developand maintainan interactive,real-timeworldwidecommunicationsnetwork on tax policyand tax administrationreformissues,with free access for tax authoiities.(ii)to collect and shareinformationon bilateraland multilateral technicalassistanceprogramsin the tax area, and (iii) to arrangeperiodicinternationalmeetings of tax policy and administration experts from developingand developed countriesto discussissuesand activitiesof common interest. PerformanceIndicators G24: Implementationof the agreed-upon researchprogram,includingsignificantlyincreasedparticipationby developingcountry representativesinthe researchand subsequent dialogue; strengthenedcontributionsfrom developingcountryresearchersand institutionsto G24 Secretariatbackground papers; deliveryof a number of researchand policypapers. GlobalForums: The identificationand raisingof key developmentissuesin the GlobalForums and the numberof developingcountry participantsin GlobalForums. InternationalTax Dialogue: Interactive, real-timeworldwidecommunicationsnetworkdevelopedand operational;intemational experience-sharing meetingsorganized on a regularbasis; and databaseon bilateraland multilateraltechnical assistancein the tax area available. 178 Annex 10 G24: The research programof the G24 has been strengthened; seminar on financialcontagionheldat DubaiAnnual Meetings, publicationof G24 book "Challengesto theWorld Bankand the IMF,"and preparationof briefingpapers; and progresstowards getting an Advisory Group establishedto assistthe G24 Secretariat on key politicaland resourcerelatedquestions. lntemationalTax Dialogue: internationalmeetings of tax policyand administration expertsand plans underwayfor an international conferenceon Value Added Tax in developingand transitioncountries; working group to develop guidelinesfor the taxation of technicalassistance programsset up; database on bilateral.and multilateraltechnicalassistanceprograms launched; interactive real- Limeworldwide communications with free access for tax authorities, establishedat www.lTDweb.org. Active participationof countries in the network and use of the ITDwebis rapidlyincreasing. Partner$ G24 Secretariat; OECD, IMF, UN,and regionalorganizations. Oovrrnrancaand Management G24: the DGF grant will be spent by the G24Secretariat, whose Director reportsto the G24 Ministersand Deputies,through a bureau comprisedof executive directorsrepresentingthe President(currently the FinanceMinisterof Lebanon) & the Vice President. (currently the FinanceMinister of Trinidad & Tobacco). TheVice President is responsiblefor the G24researchprogram. There is a standing bureauwhich provides guidance on day-to-daymatters. DGFfunds will be placedin an independentspecialaccount inthe Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago. The G24 Directorformulates the research program. The researchprogramis then discussed at the technicalworking groupmeetingand approvedby the deputies and ministersat their semiannual meetings. Consistent with the researchprogram,the Directorof the G24 Secretariatwill commission individualresearchpaper projects. PREMs involvement with the partnershipwill be reportedto the Bank managementand Board as partof PREMs annualactivity reporting. GlobalForums: The activitiesunderthis DGF grantare an integratedpart of the existing partnershipframework betweenthe OECD and the Bank (The Joint Statement of Prioritiesfor OECD-World Bank Co-operationsignedon May 30, 2000 by PresidentWolfensohn and OECD Secretary-General Johnston). The Bank and OECD CCNMagreeon thejoint activitiesundereach GlobalForumfor the comingyear. The Bank is able to invitecountriesthat are not OECD membersto each Global Forumonthe basis of their relevanceto the substantive areas covered. InternationalTax Dialogue: A Memorandumof Understandingstipulates that the ITD is managedby a SteeringGroup composed of one representativeeach of the Bank, IMF, and OECD. The Steering Groupdeterminesthe objectives,and activitiesare either deliveredelectronically through ITDwebor inthe form of conferences and workshops. An annual report on the activitiesof the ITDwill be preparedby the SteeringGroup and sentto the headsof the Bank, IMF, and OECD, as well as publishedon ITDweb. Exit Strategy G24: The partnershipwill remain strategicallyimportantas longas G24 retainsits criticalrole in shapingand furtheringthe views and interestsof developing countries. An evaluationis plannedin FY05. Bank sponsors would like to considerthe possibilityof future Window 1 support. GlobalForums: Although DGF is expectedto exit from supportafter FY06, the Bank intendsto remainengaged with the Global Forumson a longterm basis. lntemationalTax Dialogue: The ITD is expectedto becomea permanentnetworkof multilateraland bilateralinstitutionsworking in the tax area. The current Memorandumof Understandingbetweenthe Bank,the IMFand the OECD has beenconcludedfor threeyears and expireson July 1,2005. FY05will be the lastyear of DGF support for this component. An evaluationof the ITD is plannedin FY 05. 179 Annex 10 Gender Research and Training Network for Arab and FarsiSpeaking Countries Bank Contact: Nadereh Chamloul202-458-0473;Carmen Niethammer/ 202-458-4685 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: MNSEDIChiefEconomistMNA RecipientAgency: 1)Centerof ArabWomenfor Trainingand Research (CAWTAR) 2) Centerfor Women's Studies (CWS) Web Address: http:lhYww.cawtar.org.tn;http:/lweb.ut.ac.ir/cws/ FlnanclalArrangements for FY06(Amaunt in US$ Ylllion) Total Budget: 1.74 DGF FundingRequest: 0.36 DGF Percentage: 21% Genderinequalityremainsone of the mostpersistentdevelopment challengesin the MiddleEastand NorthAfrica (MENA) region. Momentumfor changehas pickedup in the lastyear and needssupport to be scaledup and maintained. Addressing gender inequality in MENA, however, remainsa long-termexercise, as it is ingrainedin social normsand traditionswhich cannot be addressed within a three-yeartime frame. Two types of researchare neededto advance the policyagenda on gender; (i)analyticaland academic; and (ii) practicaland operational. Trainingneedsto focus on informingpolicymakers aboutgender issues, and on developingthe organizationaland leadershipcapabilitiesof women's advocacy groups. This proposalcombinesthese activities, to be deliveredthrough two regional hubs. The Farsi-speakinghub is the Center forWomen's Studies (CWS) at the Universityof Tehran and mainly serves Iran, Afghanistan,and Tajikistan. The Arab hub is the Tunis-based Centerfor Arab Women's Researchand Training(CAWTAR), which serves all Arab countries. Both CAWTAR and CWS haveestablishedreputationsfor excellence. They are financiallyand operationallysustainableat their currentoperationallevels,but need additionalsupportto scale up their activities. The two hubs have complementary strengths.CWS has a much stronger academic and analytical base; its researchapproaches and studiescould be replicatedor adoptedby membersof the CAWTAR network. CAWTAR has more experiencein policyresearchand in buildingand using networks; CWS can benefitfrom CAWTAR's networkingcapabilitiesas it expands intoAfghanistanand Tajikistan. The goalsfor FY05are: (1) strengthenthe foundationof the @NGED network and of CAWTARs research andtrainingcapabilities;(2) successfully transfer and broaden the reachof CWS's researchand policywork to Afghanistanand Tajikistan; and (3) continueto developthe links betweenthe 2 centers. MalnComponents DGF-supported activitieswill focus on research, training, and networkingand are as follows: Scaling up CAWTAR's programto serve as the hub of a networkfor gender researchandtraining inArab countriesand to implement the Network'sAction Plan. Thiswill be done through: (i)researchand publications,(ii)a communicationsand media strategy;and (iii)supportfor the gender training program. 0 Transferringbest practicesto CWS and implementingits Action Plan. The establishmentof this second Networkhub has already providedother donorsand partners with accessto women's organizations,research centers, and academicson gender issuesin Farsi-speakingcountries. CWS's leamingexperiencewill be accelerated, while the organizationcontinuesto benefitfrom its partnershipwith CAWTAR. Specificactionswill include: (i) developingCWS's governance structure; (ii) establishingthe networkwithin Iran, Afghanistan, andTajikistan; (iii)developinga work program; and (iv) carryingout a select number of events. Performancelndlcatarr, Reports and Publications: (i)publishmentof agreed-upon major reports; (ii)launchof reportsthroughsymposia and press 180 Annex 10 conferences;(iii) dissemination of reportsto govemments, NGOs,and intemationalorganizations; (iv) production of two to three occasionalpapers per year; and (v) stock-taking of gender-sensitive monitoringand evaluationindicatorsin developmentplanning. lnfomation Exchange andDissemination: (i) establishment of interactive websites; (ii) establishmentof fully equipped sustainableresource centers; (iii)numberof usersof boththe website and the centers; (iv) number of active and passive Networkmembers. Training: (i) trainingfor researchers in researchmethodology and analysis of gender disaggregatedmonitoringand evaluation data; (ii)trainingfor researchers and development practitionersin evaluation methodologyto integratethe gender dimension intodevelopmentplanning, implementation, monitoringand evaluation. Symposia and Workshops: (i)workshops convenedand number of participants attending; (ii) productionof a set of recommendationsand policieson gender for decision-makers; (iii)production of reportsbasedon workshops and symposia. ResourceMobilization: (i) numberof prestigiousfunding partnershipsconcluded; (ii)amount of financialresources secured. _cI Progressand Achtevemetlds In October2003,at the annualNetwork Meeting,CAWTAR launchedits2"dArab Women's DevelopmentReport "TheArab AdolescentGirl: Realityand Prospect"which addressedthe overdue topic inthe region. The reportshavereceivedmuch praise in the media and development partners. The meetingalso formally initiatedthe work on CAWTARs 3d ArabWomen's DevelopmentReporton "Gender and DecisionMakingn Experts from 22 Arab countriescontributedto paneldiscussions and . brainstormingsessions which identifiedresearchtopics for CAWTARs 3'' regionalresearchreport. Network members represented the Gender and DevelopmentNetwork in numerous regionalevents. CAWTAR was alsoan active participantinthe 2003 Arab Conferenceon Social DevelopmentIndicators. In Iran,the CenterforWomen's Studieshas successfullyput in place the logisticalframework for the Farsi-speaking women and has identifiedpotentialpartnerswithin Iran,Afghanistan, Tajikistanand India. Donorssuch as the Japan and the ILOhaveexpressedinterestin supporting the Network'sactivitiesin the future. CAWTAR, AGFUND, UN Development Program(UNDP), EU, UN PopulationFund (UNFPA), UNIFEM, IPPF, Governmentof Tunisia, HaririFoundation, CWS of Iran, Arab League,HRH PrinceTala1IbnAbdulAziz Al-Saoud, UNESCO, Rockdale, OxFam, Japan, India Governanceand Management Both CAWTAR and CWS havewell-established governancestructures. CAWTAR reportsto its Board of Trustees. Yearly objectives are determinedat annualBoard meetings A Technical Committee meetsonce ayear. It supportsCAWTARs Directorin implementingand monitoringwork plans. CAWTAR is run by a Director with the support of a small groupof core staff. CWS develops its businessplanwithin the framework of the Universityof Tehran, and benefitsfrom the partnershipwith CAWTAR. It has a Director supportedby a small group of core staff. CWS also benefitsfrom graduatestudents' researchprojects. DGF-supported Network activitiesare selected by CAWTARand CWS in partnershipwith the Bank. A Network Advisory Council, establishedto provideguidance on substantiveissues, providesfeedback on proposedactivitiesto keep DGF-supportedactivities unique,relevant, participatory, innovative, and visionary. CAWTAR regularlysubmits reportsto the Bank on the status of activities,as will CWS under this new partnership. Bank supervisionmissionshavealso been carriedout periodically. Progresshas been reported to the Bank's Gender Anchor, the Gender and DevelopmentBoard, the internalMNAAdvisory Group on Gender, and MENAs extemal ConsultativeCouncilon Gender. CAWTARsnewsletters,annualreport,and websitealso report regularlyon the Network's activities. Although Bank sponsors requestedlongertermfunding support underWindow 1, the DGF Council endorseda one-year extensionin Window Two in view of overallDGF budgetconstraints. 181 Annex 10 Good Governance:CommunityMobilizationTo CombatCorruption Bank Contact: Jose EdgardoL. Campos/202-458-4083; Randi Susan Ryterman/202-473-7037 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: PREM -PublicSector RecipientAgency: Partnershipfor Transparency Fund, Inc Web Address: http:// www.partnershipfortransparency.info/ Total Budget: 2.38 DGF FundingRequest: 0.23 DGF Percentage: 10% The Partnershipfor Transparency Fund (PTF) is a uniqueinternationalorganizationwhich makes smalkgrantsto civil society organizations(CSOs) in developingcountriesto fight corruption. The PTFsupports CSO involvementin six broadareas: (i) transparencyin publicprocurement; (ii)monitoringof governmentactivities(e,g., privatization,publicauctionof licenses, delivery of agreedservices, anti-corruptionprograms); (iii) media campaigns; (iv) trackingof publicexpenditures; (v) analyses of corruptionin specificcountry situations;and (vi) knowledgesharingthrough participationin workshops and conferences. There are four basicobjectivesfor the proposedBank grant: (i)to promotebroadcivilsociety involvementin good governance activities; (ii) to support specificprojectsto enhance transparency and integrityin publicservice, includingprocurement, privatization, publicauctions,licensing, publicfinance management, etc.; (iii)to generateand share lessonsof experienceof CSO engagement in anti-corruptionactivities;and (iv) to buildthe capacity of CSOs to engage in the fight againstcorruption. As a resultof the funding fromthe GPP and other donors, the PTFexpectsits interventionsto havethe followingeffects: (i) less corruption (and consequently significantcostsavingsto the public) from moretransparentpublictransactions,includingprivatization, issuingof licenses and concessions, publicauctionsand publicprocurement. (ii)increasedcivil societyinvolvement in and demand for less corrupt, and hencebetterquality, public services; (iii)heightened awareness by the generalpublic about the consequences of corruption;and (iv) better understandingof the causes of corruptionand the effectivenessof differentinterventions,and consequently strongercivilsociety engagement and capacityto fight corruption. MainComponent8 The GPP will support the PTF'sinnovativegrant program, which funds CSOs engagedin specific,direct, time-bound anti-corruption activities. Micro-grants (typically$10,000-$30,000) supportthe independentengagement of NGOs in anti-corruptionprograms, often sponsoredby government. NGO involvementmay includemonitoringof publicprocurementactivities,government servicedelivery, promotionof publicawareness aboutcorruption,or analysesof specific departmentsor activitiesproneto corruption. By servingas an intermediaryorganization, the PTF providesa vehiclefor channeling resourcesand experiencedadviceto qualified, effective grassrootsorganizations that itwould not be economicallyfeasible for the Bankto reach directly. The expected outcomes interms of reducedcorruptionare difficultto quantify. However,past experiencesuggeststhat transparency in public procurement pioneeredby the PTF through"IntegrityPacts" has already savedseveralmilliondollars in a majorwater supply and sanitation award. The broaderexpectedoutcomes include: Civil society organizations in morethan 40 countrieswill beengaged in specificanticorruption programs. The results of their effortswill be sharedthrougha global knowledge basefacilitated by an enhanced PTFwebsite and through the 12th InternationalAnti-CorruptionConference, the largestNGOICSO-focused internationalconferenceon governance and anticorruption (heldevery two years since 1983). $1.5 to $2 millionwill be mobilizedto stimulatecommunity-levelengagement and action in promotinggood governance. Retiredspecialistsfrom the principalinternationaland regionaldevelopment institutionswill be mobilizedto leveragetheir experience and commitment to supportthe internationalanticorruption and good govemanceagenda. Annex 10 PerformanceIndicators, Number of grants made to CSOs: 50 Amount of grants: $1.7 million Estimatedvolume of grants mobilizeddue to Bank involvement: $1.2 million Estimatedcost savingson publicprocurementfrom IntegrityPacts: $100 million Numberof countrieswith PTF projectsFY05-07: 40 Numberof IF1volunteersengaged in PTFwork: 20 Value of time devotedby volunteersannually: $175,000 Numberof peoplereachedwith mediacampaigns: 100million Numberof policyfiegislationchanges resultingfrom PTF projects: 10 Numberof hits on PTFwebsiteper month: 2,000 Progressand Achievemmts I Asthis is a new program, there is no progressto report. 1 Civil Society/NGOs. Govamancaand Mrnagement The PTF is governedby a Board of Trustees,with 12members representingthe Bank, the privatesector,bilateralaid agencies,the UN, and others. The PTF is managed by a team of three retired Bank staffwho serve on a volunteerbasis. They are assistedby a growing numberof volunteerpartners, who vet proposals, assist CSOs in refiningtheir projects,and carry out ex-post evaluations. These volunteerpartnerscurrentlyincluderetireesfrom the Bank,the IDB, and the ADB. Dueto its growing size, the PTF has engaged paidprofessionalservices to help overseefinancialand office management, includingauditingand accounting, bank accounts, regularreportingand reconciliation,and informationmanagement. CSOs submitprojectproposalsto the PTF management,which vets them and helpsrefinethem. PTF management also evaluates the beneficiaryorganizationsthemselves, assessingtheir demonstrated capacityto carry out the work and their financial records. BeneficiaryCSOs enter intoa grant agreementwhich specifiesthe work to be done, the budget, the projectand financialreporting requirements, and the expectedoutputs/outcomes. Independentevaluationsare carriedout on a selectednumberof completed projects. The PTF reportsannually to its principaldonors and semi-annually to its Boardof Trusteeson projectsbeingproposed, projectscompleted, and results. Projectevaluationreportsare circulatedas they are carried out. The PTFaccountsare audited annually by a Washington-basedaccountingfirm. r One year of DGFfunding has beenendorsed. It is anticipatedthat additionalfundingwill emergeduringthe nextthreeyears, having been attractedin part by the Bankfunding. 183 Annex 10 DevelopmentGateway Foundation BankContact: Sudhakar G. KaveeshwarI 202-473-0557 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: ISGIF RecipientAgency: Development Gateway Foundation,Inc. Web Address: http:l/www.developmentgateway.org Total Budget: 24.64 DGF FundingRequest: 1.oo DGF Percentage: 4% Developmentis most effectivewhen criticalinformationis available in a timely way closest to the peoplewhose lives it most - affects.The DevelopmentGateway builds informationsystems that provide accessto this knowledgefor development. Injust three years, the DevelopmentGateway has built a network of morethan 100,000development practitioners registered - memberswho rely on its globalweb portalto share information,collaborate, and build enterprise.With the World Bank`s support, which is being leveragedto attract a growing base of donors and partners,the DevelopmentGateway has proventhe value of its informationsystems in helping the internationalcommunity scale developmentefforts. The organizationhas built momentumand is now poisedto capitalizeon it.With additionalsupport,the DevelopmentGateway can take its provensystemswhere they will havetheir greatest impact -to individuals and institutions in developingcountries,to increasetheir effectiveness,transparency, and capacityto playa central role in development.Going forward, 70 percentof resourceswill be devotedto incountrywork. The morethan 50 localportalslaunchedwith the DevelopmentGateway'spartners (CountryGateways) are key to this local strategy,which is the focus of this grant proposal. m MainComponents Country Gateways can supportWorld Bank goals and the internationalcommunity'sefforts to scale development in four ways: Local ownership of the developmentagenda: Knowledgesharing and inclusionare key to building localownership. CountryGateway portalsprovide developmentknowledgeotherwiseunavailablein developingcountries.A growing number of Country Gateways are facilitatingmultisectoralstakeholderengagementin PRSPsand other development strategies. Implementation and monitoring: The DevelopmentGateway portalhostsAiDA, the largestonline database of developmeni projects,which enables greater coordination and sharingof lessons learned.Also hostedis an e-tenderingsystemcalled dgMarket, which bringstransparencyto public procurementto increaseefficiency and reducecorruption.Togetherwith the Bank,the DevelopmentGateway is building a global data platformto monitor progress in achievingthe Millennium DevelopmentGoals. Country Gateways and other partnersare expandingthese global systems locally. Capacity building: Country Gateways build institutionalcapacity by bringingtogether stakeholdersfrom all sectors into collaborativedevelopmentinitiativesand nationalpolicymaking.DevelopmentGateway Researchand Training Centers support the Country Gateways as they advance the capacityto use of information and communicationtechnologies(ICT) for development. Small and medium enterprisedevelopment: CountryGateways, which themselves are informationservices enterprises, also provide an increasingarray of enterprise support services. Local dgMarket services provideenterpriseswith new businessopportunities.An SME initiativeusing CountryGateways is beingdevelopedwith the IFC. 184 Annex 10 PerformanceIndlcatom Country Gateways: numberof operationalCountry Gateways; number of partnerships;numberof services;usageof their portaland services;revenue;etc. Harvestedby a monitoringand evaluationreportingsystemrecently put into place. dgMarket: number of localdgMarketimplementations;levelof competition on tenders; related usage;revenue. Ultimately, governmentsavings. AiDA and MDGs: numberof localprojectmanagementplatforms modeledafterthe AiDA global projectdatabase and the MDG data monitoring platform;related usageand partnerships. Researchand Training Networks: numberof new applications developedand peopletrained. Ptogtessand Achlevements (i) 100,000membersof the global web portal (up from 35,000 in December2002)' ofwhich 1,450are World Bank staff (up from 740 in May 2003), and 400,000visitors per month (up from 110,000in October2002); (ii) A half-million recordson the largestonline database of developmentprojects and activities; (iii) 30,000 current tenders on any given day on the global publictendering service (now generating revenue); (iv) Country Gateway statistics include China (90,000visitors per month) and Poland (21,000); (v) 184 developingnation participantshavecompleted 12 courses (IO face-to-face, 2 distance learning) at the Koreatraining center alone; (vi) over 300 partnersfrom around theworld; (vii) an independentevaluation concludedthat the Development Gateway accomplishedmost of itsinitialbusiness plan objectiveswith about 50% of budgetedresources. Partnen Twenty co-funders, includingofficialbilateraldonors,individuals (M. Bloomberg),corporations(MphasiS, Mac Holdings,Deutsche Telekom), UN DevelopmentProgramme.Country Gateway partnerships in morethan 50 countries. Forty-fivedonor agencies partneringin AiDA. Over 250 partners managingcontenton the globalportal.PartnersimplementingdgMarket in 12 countries. World Bank partnersincludeWBI; infoDev;Country Offices;others.The DevelopmentGateway's partnershipsand systems extend the World Bank'sreachto more stakeholders in a multisectoralcontext. For its part, the World Bank catalyzespartnersand donors to engage. Many donors have signaled that theirongoing participationwill be contingentonthe Bank'swillingness to demonstrate continued support. Govemanceand Management The DevelopmentGateway Foundation,Inc.,a nonprofdorganizationincorporatedinWashington, D.C.,was establishedin 2001 to implementthis program.The Foundationis governed by a Board of Directors (with an Executive Committee and Nominating Committee) representingthepublicand private sector. The World Bank holds three board seats, and World Bank executives hold the positionsof Presidentand Treasurer. Allocationsfor specific activitiesofthe DevelopmentGateway are determinedbythe Boardor by committees delegatedby the Board.An Advisory Committee of businessleaders advises management.An Editorial Committee providesguidanceon portalcontent. CountryGateway grant proposalsare subjectto an External Selection Committee. Exlt Strategy The DevelopmentGateway Foundationapplied for Window One funding,butthe DGF Councildid notconsiderthis inthe absence of completion of an independentevaluation. For FY05 an amount of US $1.O millionwas endorsedfor the program as a one-year extension inWindow Two. 185 Annex 10 Partnershipfor Capacity Buildingin Africa (PACT) I Bank Contact: Armand E. Atomate1202-473-3350 1 ResponsibleNetworkand Sector: AFR RecipientAgency: African Capacity Building Foundation Web Address: http:lhnrww.acbf-pact.org I FinancialAmngemenk for WQCI(AmountIn US$ Million) Total Budget: 26.5 DGF FundingRequest: 26.0 DGF Percentage: 98% The main objectiveof the Partnershipfor Capacity Building inAfrica (PACT) is to build and strengthensustainablehumanand institutionalcapacity inthe core public sector,inthe sector's interfaceareaswith the privatesector and civilsociety, in training and researchinstitutions,and within regionalorganizations,in order to spur economicgrowth,poverty reduction,good governance,and effectiveparticipationby Africa in the globaleconomy. MatnComponent6 0 Economic policy analysls and developmentmanagement: improvedeconomicpolicyanalysis and development management. Financial management and accountability:enhancedtransparency and accountabilityin financial management. Strengthening and monitoring of nationalstatistics: informed policyformulationand decision-makingprocesses. Public administration management: bettergovernance in publicadministrationmanagement. Strengthening of policy analysis capacity of national parliaments: strengthenedcapacityof parliamentaryagencies. Interface between public and private sectors: consolidatedpublicand private partnerships. PerformanceIndiatom 0 Mobilizationlevel of internaland external resources 0 Quality of publicspending e Numberof statistics-based policiesand decisions e Reductionof corruption and embezzlements 0 Qualityof budgetarydiscussions in parliament 0 Conducive legalframework for privatesectordevelopment Progressm d Achlevamants 186 Annex 10 PACT supportscapacity buildingin clientcountries,in many instances linkedto institutionsthat are also supported undercountry programs. The Bank is one of many donors,but is particularlywell-placedto supportcapacity building in the publicsector. PACT supportsinstitutionsand initiativesthat are key to developmentbut often are not eligiblefor Bank financing. T__1_X.( 2* _1_1 ~ . . . . 4 - * Partners 27 officialbilateraldonors, UNDP, and AfDB Govemanceand Management PACT is administeredby the African Capacity BuildingFoundation(ACBF). Disbursementsfor PACT are co-mingledby ACBF. Thus, from an operationalperspective, it is not only impossibleto differentiatePACT activitiesfrom almost all otherACBF activities,it is also impossibleto differentiatePACTfinancingfrom other financingfor specificACBF activities. Ultimately,authorityfor ACBF residesin its Board of Governors. The Boardconsistsof representativesof all donorcountriesto the ACBF, including 13African countries, as well as the Bank, UNDP,AfDB, and IMF. The Boardis the highestpolicy-makingbody and is responsiblefor the ACBF's broadpolicyframework and overall performance. A Secretariat basedinZimbabwe, staffedby approximately20 African professionals,handlesall day-to-day activities. An Executive Board, composed of independentmembersand representativesof multilateralinstitutions,approvesPACT projects and the budget. FY05 is the final year of DGFfunding for PACT under the originalplanfor the Bankto provideUS$150 millionover 5 years. PACT is makinggood progressin following throughon the recommendationsmade lastyear by the independentevaluationand of the DGFto improvefocus and strengthenthe projectpipeline. The crucialchallengefor the future is ensuringfinancial sustainabilityand continuity beyond2006. On this issue,the programis nowactivelyengagedin consultationswith donorsand African govemments. 187