Project Appraisal Document - IHDP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Monitoring and evaluation of outcomes/results52. The PPU would monitor impact, outputs, outcomes and finances. Output monitoringwould cover the number of houses constructed, the phased disbursement of the cash grant, thenumber of water schemes completed and the number of latrines built 18 . PPU would have severalmeans to monitor implementation. The PPU would submit quarterly technical and interim financial reports on implementationprogress. A CSIA would monitor project impact and social outcomes using participatory rural appraisalmethods. The CSIA would offer an opportunity to cross verify the PPU reports. A mid-term environmental audit would verify the PHP’s compliance with agreedenvironmental guidelines and safeguards. An independent technical audit would verify compliance with engineering standards. The PPU would submit bi-annual reports detailing implementation progress and achievementof development objectives to IDA.Sustainability53. The Puttalam IDPs were displaced from the North in October 1990. Most continue to livein temporary shelter in under-served refugee camps. The IDPs lack access to safe drinking waterand sanitation. Many refugee camps are situated in environmentally fragile locations. Relationswith the surrounding non-IDP community have not been smooth due to competition over scarceresources in an arid region. The PHP is an effort to provide permanent housing for those IDPswithout it, drinking water and sanitation to both IDPs and non-IDPs, and environmentimprovement. This would help transform refugee camps into sustainable habitat and betterintegrate IDPs and non-IDPs. Regularized land title, strengthened social capital, bettermanagement of water resources and improved IDP-non-IDP relations under the PHP wouldreinforce its long term sustainability. Needless to add, the long term sustainability of any IDPhousing program would be linked to the success of the peace process and access to follow-upfinancing.Critical risks and possible controversial aspects54. Disputes with non-IDPs: Poverty in the Puttalam district is not confined to IDPs. 31% ofthe population in the Puttalam district lived below the poverty line in 2002 in contrast to thenational average in Sri Lanka of 22.7% that year. Support for IDP housing while non-IDPs live ininadequate housing could trigger resentment. The issue is compounded with an overall scarcity ofwater with the extraction of ground water by IDPs. Competition over limited resources sharpensthe resentment. Ethnic differences between the two groups in certain instances do not help either.55. Non-IDPs would need to have a stake in the success of the project. To this effect, thePHP would finance drinking water and sanitation for needy adjoining non-IDPs. IDA prepared amacro-action plan that defined guiding principles to reduce inter-community tensions in Puttalam.The Land Task Force would address both IDPs and non-IDPs in a given village cluster. The PHPwould improve the market for local masons and carpenters. The Ministry of Housing would scaleup its modest home improvement grants to non-IDPs living in adjacent villages. UNICEF would18 Details of the monitoring indicators are provided in Annex 3.15
invest in drinking water, schools and health facilities for both IDP and non-IDPs. While non-IDPsmay not benefit from the cash grants itself, they would gain from other components of the PHP.56. The District Secretary would coordinate all IDA-financed projects in Puttalam to ensurethat IDP and non-IDP needs are reconciled in a seamless manner. The other IDA operations,almost exclusively targeted at non-IDPs, include the North East Irrigated Agriculture Project, theCommunity Water Supply and Sanitation Project, the Health Sector Development Project and theEducation Sector Wide Adjustment Program. A communication campaign would explain therange of projects targeting non-IDPs in Puttalam.57. Further, improved health, education, drinking water infrastructure and environment is toevery one’s benefit, not just IDPs. The upliftment of IDPs would serve the broader economy ofthe Puttalam district through skilled labor, local trade in tiles, cement or timber, support for localentrepreneurship and accelerated spin offs. This would remove a burden on the local economyand benefit non-IDPs in the medium term.58. Reputational Risk: The civil conflict led to a massive dislocation of people belonging toall ethnic groups. Most Muslims in the North were evicted in October 1990 and fled to Puttalamwhere they have been living in refugee camps since. IDA support for permanent housing mightpose a reputational risk in that it could be seen as acquiescing to the forced relocation of IDPsthrough the provision of houses.59. Unfortunately, there does not appear to be any development alternatives in the mediumterm. 96% of IDPs in Puttalam are keen to transform their sixteen years of temporary stay insqualid refugee camps to permanent and upgraded habitat there itself. The 2002, 2004 and 2006surveys of IDPs demonstrated that most in Puttalam were not keen to return to their originalvillages any time soon. 74.2% of IDPs had in fact bought land in Puttalam reinforcing thispreference to reside there permanently. The escalation of hostilities in the North East in 2006meant that an estimated 1,000 out of the 2,500 IDP families who had returned to their originalvillages moved back to Puttalam. The PHP is predicated on this ground reality.60. Those IDPs who do return North would still be considered for NEHRP assistance. PHPbeneficiaries however would not be entitled to housing grants in the North. The communicationscampaign financed under the PHP would educate IDPs on options available to them under thePHP and NEHRP. This would include a module on the right to return. It would explain theimplications of the receipt of the cash grant. UNHCR would monitor this initiative to help IDPsmake an informed decision whether to accept the PHP cash grant or not.61. It is important to reiterate that the PHP in itself would not impact on the legal (i) right toreturn at a future date; (ii) right to property that IDPs might have left behind in the North; (iii) theright to compensation that might be provided to victims of the conflict at a future date; and (iv)right to participate in any referendum that addresses the long term political resolution of theethnic conflict. IDA legal opinion was obtained to ensure that the PHP will not impact on therights of IDPs. The Government is committed to protect the right to return of all IDPs includingthose in Puttalam, if they so choose to at a later date. UNHCR would monitor and report anyviolation of these rights.62. Residency Rights: The IDPs were displaced to Puttalam in 1990 and the vast majorityremain in refugee camps. They lack access to services that residents in Puttalam are entitled tosince they are not registered as permanent residents and remain on the roster of the conflict-16
Page 1 and 2: Document ofThe World BankFOR OFFICI
Page 3 and 4: Annex 6: Implementation Arrangement
Page 5 and 6: Have these been approved by Bank ma
Page 7 and 8: Rationale for Bank Involvement4. Th
Page 9 and 10: 12. IDP communities living in envir
Page 11 and 12: connections would be able to do so
Page 13 and 14: 36. IDA had approved the US$ 75 mil
Page 15: Commission, UNHCR and central line
Page 19 and 20: APPRAISAL SUMMARY71. Economic and F
Page 21 and 22: ensure compliance with local govern
Page 23 and 24: Drainage and Road Access: At presen
Page 25 and 26: allotment letters, land grant certi
Page 27 and 28: partly-damaged units) has been hind
Page 29 and 30: Component Three:Adequate capacity a
Page 31 and 32: Time taken for grievance procedureR
Page 33 and 34: Sri Lanka: Puttalam Housing Project
Page 35 and 36: each camp. The report provided impo
Page 37 and 38: the government. The settlement plan
Page 39 and 40: information. The field investigatio
Page 41 and 42: One source serves multiple communit
Page 43 and 44: displacement and local residency/vo
Page 45 and 46: Costs by Expenditure Categories (In
Page 47 and 48: Manage and Monitor the Selection Pr
Page 49 and 50: meeting at the refugee camp with th
Page 51 and 52: INHERENT RISKCountry LevelQuality o
Page 53 and 54: For large payments, PPU has the opt
Page 55 and 56: Supervision planThe PHP has a modes
Page 57 and 58: cost, the requirements for prior re
Page 59 and 60: Method of Procurement for Works and
Page 61 and 62: Annex 9: Economic and Financial Ana
Page 63 and 64: calculation is based on a conservat
Page 65 and 66: service charge on the outstanding a
Page 67 and 68:
The felling of trees in forest rese
Page 69 and 70:
The Right to Compensation: The pote
Page 71 and 72:
Camp Social Profile (CSP): The Soci
Page 73 and 74:
Annex 11: Project Preparation and S
Page 75:
Annex 12: Documents in the Project
show all

Project Appraisal Document - IHDP

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?